Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
mtb'er
Joined
·
4,295 Posts
100% need to find a brave Democrat Senator who isn't afraid of the $ierra Club or The Wilderne$$ $ociety donor$.

Politics are disgusting... but this is the world we live in. Need a Democrat or 3, but let's start with 1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
100% need to find a brave Democrat Senator who isn't afraid of the $ierra Club or The Wilderne$$ $ociety donor$.

Politics are disgusting... but this is the world we live in. Need a Democrat or 3, but let's start with 1.
Apparently the New Hampshire Democrat is open to the Bill but her staff is blocking the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
I am skeptical of mountain biking in the wilderness after a long conversation with other mountain bikers on this forum, but that article is just ridiculous. Horses and mountain bikers don't mix? Total BS. -Poorly trained- horses and mountain bikes don't mix. I once rode my bike through a herd of cattle to find a horseback rider on the other side; I apologized to her but she said it wasn't me; her horse was afraid of cattle. Seeing me get through untrampled actually emboldened the horse to ride through. I don't think that I've ever seen a horse that was afraid of a mountain bike but I have seen a horse that was afraid of my backpack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,802 Posts
Why brave Democrat? Independent or Republican votes won't do?
It's presumed that any bill to weaken Wilderness protections will automatically attract broad Republican/Ind support. In contrast, Dem support is presumed to be, ahem, weak. Thus their votes are needed to pass the thing.

I support the concept, but haven't read this bill closely. Mike Lee of UT typically opposes environmental protection of any kind and would like to gut the NPS. He's an extremist imo.

Looks like the bill provides federal land managers with the discretion to restrict certain sensitive areas to mtb access, but forces them to make such determinations by deadline. That makes sense to me. Personally, I support mtb use in most, but not all wilderness areas. And I support letting land mangers make the decisions, subject to review.

I'll have to take a closer look at this one.
 

·
membership renounced
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
Are you suggesting this is a bad thing? If I become disabled, I certainly hope the rules will be broad enough to allow for anything I can come up with.
No problem with wheelchairs at all, but motorized? I don't know. It flies in the face of the intent of the act, but then again things were different back then, and the disabled were viewed differently. It's a very broad definition right now, so maybe time to tighten it up, place some power limits on the "wheelchair" motors, get a firm description in place, and some standards on how "disabled" a person needs to be to get a pass on the non-motorized aspect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
No problem with wheelchairs at all, but motorized? I don't know. It flies in the face of the intent of the act, but then again things were different back then, and the disabled were viewed differently. It's a very broad definition right now, so maybe time to tighten it up, place some power limits on the "wheelchair" motors, get a firm description in place, and some standards on how "disabled" a person needs to be to get a pass on the non-motorized aspect.
The Wilderness Act calls for unconfined recreation. Although it bans motor vehicle travel, the definition of motor vehicle is limited to road-worthy vehicles that require an operators license. The list of banned vehicles follows the concept of passenger vehicles with engines; cars, boats, airplanes, and mechanical transport (chairlifts, trams, funiculars, gondolas). The idea of what the legislator's intent was has been mangled by Conservation groups and the recreation directors.
 

·
mtb'er
Joined
·
4,295 Posts
Except wheelchairs. Currently legal, and the definition of a "Wheelchair" is broad enough that it could be an electric ATV.
Not likely. Regulations surrounding ADA say feds will not improve any terrain for wheelchair access and wheelchairs must be suitable for use in indoor pedestrian areas. A snowmobile, for example, while useful for getting some disabled people into Wilderness in winter conditions, is not suitable for indoor pedestrian use.

https://www.wilderness.net/accessibility?print=yes

I have read some stuff where a person requested mtb access to National Park trails (not Wilderness), saying his bike was his mobility device. He was denied access.

I don't think there are any loopholes for ADA access, which is fine by me.
 

·
membership renounced
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
Not likely. Regulations surrounding ADA say feds will not improve any terrain for wheelchair access and wheelchairs must be suitable for use in indoor pedestrian areas. A snowmobile, for example, while useful for getting some disabled people into Wilderness in winter conditions, is not suitable for indoor pedestrian use.

https://www.wilderness.net/accessibility?print=yes

I have read some stuff where a person requested mtb access to National Park trails (not Wilderness), saying his bike was his mobility device. He was denied access.

I don't think there are any loopholes for ADA access, which is fine by me.
If I have the time, I'll look for it, but long story short I happened across a discussion about what constitutes a wheelchair, and they were reluctant to define it relative to use in wilderness.

.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top