Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

Almost Human
2,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I gave it a week and not one post on this very important subject...

It looks as if the National Park Service finally got around to approving
mountain biking in National Parks, at least on dirt or gravel roads in National
Parks. No trails for you! So, if your idea of mountain biking is country club
trails, and as long as you do not ride 2 abreast, ride through tunnels, or
have a beer in your hand while operating a bicycle, then this is your lucky

Revised Bicycle Plan Allows Greater Access to National Parks

The new NPS bicycle regulation:
§ 4.30 Bicycles.
(a) The use of a bicycle is prohibited

except on park roads, in parking areas

VerDate Mar<15>2010 10:37 Sep 02, 2011 Jkt 223137 PO
00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Q:\36\36V1.TXT ofr150
PsN: PC150

§ 4.31 36 CFR Ch. I (7–1–11 Edition)
and on routes designated for bicycle
use; provided, however, the superintendent

may close any park road or
parking area to bicycle use pursuant to
the criteria and procedures of §§ 1.5 and
1.7 of this chapter. Routes may only be
designated for bicycle use based on a
written determination that such use is
consistent with the protection of a
park area’s natural, scenic and aesthetic
values, safety considerations
and management objectives and will
not disturb wildlife or park resources.

(b) Except for routes designated in

developed areas and special use zones,
routes designated for bicycle use shall
be promulgated as special regulations.

(c) A person operating a bicycle is

subject to all sections of this part that
apply to an operator of a motor vehicle,
except §§ 4.4, 4.10, 4.11 and 4.14.

(d) The following are prohibited:
(1) Possessing a bicycle in a wilderness
area established by Federal statute.

(2) Operating a bicycle during periods

of low visibility, or while traveling
through a tunnel, or between sunset
and sunrise, without exhibiting on the
operator or bicycle a white light or reflector
that is visible from a distance
of at least 500 feet to the front and with
a red light or reflector visible from at
least 200 feet to the rear.

(3) Operating a bicycle abreast of another

bicycle except where authorized
by the superintendent.

(4) Operating a bicycle while consuming

an alcoholic beverage or carrying
in hand an open container of an
alcoholic beverage.

Yes, I’m being a little harsh on the NPS. There are trails in some National
Parks open to bikes. And the new regulation gives Park Superintendents
more flexibility to open trails, let's hope they do, but really...
why can't I ride my bike and drink a beer at the same time?

Pin it to win it
13 Posts
This is great news. I've been following this for a little while now and I'm glad it went through.

Oh, and Peaty, don't even go there.
You pilot bikes better than you swing clubs.

Almost Human
2,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Thanks for sharing that one.

I got a kick out of this.

Environmental groups and NPS advocacy organizations
howled in opposition, saying the agency "slithered" the new policy in
on Independence Day, insinuating mountain biking in National Parks
is somehow unpatriotic.

The Center for Biological Diversity joined the National Parks Conservation
Association and the Association of National Park Rangers expressing grave
concerns the rule would circumvent public involvement and environmental

In reality, the new rule will open nothing. It simply eliminates a blanket
prohibition on bikes and adds possible bike use to the list of topics local
officials are empowered to address through local planning. The new rule
requires rigorous environmental compliance requirements and mandatory
public comment on proposals to open existing or new trails to bikes. In
addition, new trails outside of developed areas will continue to require a
park-specific special regulation, and the NPS will continue to prohibit
bicycle use in eligible, study, proposed, recommended and designated
Wilderness areas.

Greg Mumm, BRC's Executive Director was not surprised these groups
oppose the new rule.
"That is why we call them anti-recreation groups," he said.
Mumm stressed
the National Park System was never meant to be managed as
Wilderness. "Through lawsuits and high-dollar political lobbying
environmentalists are tilting the balance.
This new rule is entirely
appropriate. The National Park System needs to be willing to provide
Americans with recreational access," he added.
At least the BRC get's it.

1,255 Posts
Operating any vehicle with an alcoholic beverage is against the law. That is why you can't ride your bike with a beer in your hand in a National Park or on a city street.

Also, riding is allowed through tunnels, but only with front (white) and rear (red) lights. Which is pretty much the law for riding through any tunnel. You know, since cars are supposed to turn on their lights in a tunnel, it makes sense that bikes are required to have lights to ride through the tunnel.

5,274 Posts
Yeah, I kinda quit paying attention to it. Last time I bothered to check, they were trying to make all of RMNP Wilderness as well. They definitely do not want bikes anywhere up there that you can't drive a car.

I have a customer that has lost use of his legs and has a badass full suspension handcycle. He rides it in RMNP because it's "wheelchair." Says he gets lots of condemning looks but they can't do anything about it!

1,255 Posts
You'd rather all those bike miles be replaced with car miles?

Just because it doesn't fit your narrow perception of mountain biking doesn't make it wrong.

Alaskan in exile.
439 Posts
Mtbing in AK NPs

I think this could be kind of cool for a lot of people. It might be fun to do some dirt road rides in some of the AK National Parks. I wonder if you already could?
Should be okay in Denail NP, according to the NPS website. I know I rode in the park several times when I was growing up, so they have allowed it since at least the early '90s.

There is mtbing in Wrangell-St. Elias NP as well. During the summer of 1991, we met some mtbers on the Nugget Creek Trail on the way to the public use cabin. They were coming out as we were headed in. They were the only two people we saw during the entire Fourth of July, 4-day weekend.

310 Posts
This is news to me. I've been riding my bike on trails in many NPs for more than a decade. I've even talked to rangers on those trails. Never had a problem as long as you aren't making it hell for the other users. So, that rules out most of the knobhead cable haulers on this forum.

Almost Human
2,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
As a follow-up.
Below are several million reasons why we will never ride in Wilderness Areas
or National Parks. Mr. Gardner's research is quite informative.

This goes along well with what Greg Mumm, BRC's Executive Director said in
the article Thump provided. "Through lawsuits and high-dollar political
lobbying environmentalists are tilting the balance"

Public Records Reveal Web of Connections Between Local Green Groups | Media Trackers Colorado

16th Jul 2012 at 09:36 | By Aaron Gardner
"A search of publicly available records reveals a web of connections between
environmental groups in and out of Colorado. National and out-of-state
environmental organizations have poured money into the coffers of various green
organizations within the state of Colorado, money which then can be traced to
lobbyists, activist efforts, get-out-the-vote (GOTV) operations, and candidates
running for local, state, and federal offices

"Each election cycle many of these front groups fail to file financial disclosures
required by law, resulting in the groups being dissolved, and effectively hiding their
flow of money at first glance."

"Coloradans for Responsible Growth received contributions totaling in the hundreds of thousands:"

  • National Wildlife Federation – $100,000
  • Colorado Public Interest Research Group (COPirg) – $135,000
  • Motra LLC, California – $200,000
  • Sierra Club of Colorado – $44,500
  • Colorado Environmental Coalition – $35,000
  • East West Partners – $100,000
  • League of Conservation Voters – $100,000

"Coloradans for Clean Energy was created for the 2004 election cycle to facilitate the flow of money into Colorado."
Out-of-State Contributions to Coloradans for Clean Energy

  • The Partnership Project – $90,000
  • American Wind Energy Association – $40,000
  • USPIRG – $30,000
  • Union of Concerned Scientist – $95,000
  • MoveOn – $25,000
  • Natural Resources Defense Council – $50,000
  • The Environmental Defense Fund – $25,000
  • Powerlight – $30,000
  • Solar Industries Association – $35,000
In-State Contributions to Coloradans for Clean Energy

  • Environment Colorado* – $250,000
  • Sierra Club of Colorado – $30,000
  • Colorado Environmental Coalition – $20,000

"In the 2008 election cycle A Smarter Colorado was formed. In a key election year for Democrats, A Smarter Colorado brought in nearly $3 million in contributions from outside the state."
Out-of-State Contributions to A Smarter Colorado ($2,900,000)

  • The Nature Conservancy – $1,500,000
  • Conservation Campaign – $25,000
  • The Conservation Fund – $50,000
  • The Environmental Defense Fund – $110,000
  • The national Sierra Club – $295,000
  • Big Hen Corp – $100,000
  • Partnership Project – $26,000
  • The American Alliance for Economic Development – $50,000
  • The National Education Association – $110,000
  • The Sonora Institue – $210,000
  • Arabella Legacy – $174,000
  • Tudor Jones Investments – $250,000
  • Iberdrola Renewables – $35,000
In-State Contributions to A Smarter Colorado ($750,000)

  • Progressive Future – $215,000
  • SEIU Colorado – $100,000
  • Colorado Environmental Coalition – $105,000
  • Colorado Conservation Voters – $250,000
  • Environment Colorado – $20,000
  • Vestar – $25,000

"Colorado Conservation Victory Fund was created for the 2010 election cycle, with contributions from the following organizations:"

  • Colorado Conservation Voters – $186,000
  • Colorado Freedom Fund – $30,000
  • LCV Political Engagement Fund – $70,000
  • Moore Capital Management – $35,000

"Tying so many of these state environmental organizations together are the
registered agent name and the building housing these organizations. Julie
Wells is listed as the registered agent for a majority of the groups in
Colorado. Additionally, in recent years, these groups have been housed at
1536 Wynkoop Street in Denver, which is also listed as the address for a
large number of liberal organizations within the state."

Almost Human
2,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Rogbie said:
You'd rather all those bike miles be replaced with car miles?

Just because it doesn't fit your narrow perception of mountain biking doesn't make it wrong.
uncoolFAIL will forever remain clueless
moar inane psychobabble to avoid the topic. ^^^

You imply I'm narrow minded in my views of mountain biking but my
work history, writings and advocacy prove otherwise.

Putting public pressure on the NPS to take further steps in addressing
recreational access to public land is not narrow minded. It's called

Advocacy for INCLUSION is not narrow minded.
Advocacy for exclusion (environmental activism) is narrow minded.

The fact that I do not allow others to tell me what to think scares you.
"How dare you want more!"
"How dare you challenge the system with high expectations!"
"How dare you think outside the box!"
"How dare you question authority!"
"Shhhh! the government TELLS US what to believe UT."

You two.... sitting on your ass saying "well at least we got something
so stop *****ing"... that's the worst. Complacency makes me vomit.

Complacency plagues the bike community in the US. You're weenies.

You're too scared to get mad. You're chicken ****. You won't fight. You
just stand on the sidelines mocking those of us who do. It's pathetic
to watch. You don't help us move forward, you just drag us down.

Face it.
You're just another Mike Vandeman who happens to ride a bike.
1 - 20 of 39 Posts