Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Perpetually Intermediate
Joined
·
312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I know we'd like to ride our bikes in Wilderness areas, and I know we sometimes complain about trail closures or the occasional ineptitude of the US Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management....I mean, we wanna be free to ride, man.

However, don't forget that as seemingly bad as some rules and regulations seem, they beat the hell out of having NO PLACE TO RIDE AT ALL other than gravel roads and private bike parks.

Our public lands are always at risk of being sold "to the states", which could then dispose of them as they wish, or sold outright to the highest bidder, maybe billionaires wanting a huge ranch or foreign investors looking to get money out of China, or Qatar or Saudi Arabia...any of which would certainly lead to NO TRESPASSING signs and a permanent end to ALL access. There are many in Congress and the White House right now who would LOVE to sell it all and be done with it. Here's the latest on a proposal from Utah Senator Mike Lee to do just that.

https://www.adventure-journal.com/2...s-to-eliminate-public-lands-as-you-know-them/

Not trying to insert politics into this forum--indeed, one of the main reasons I mountain bike is to free my mind from that sort of thing--but if you like to ride your mountain bike on a public trail in the forests or deserts of America then beware.
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,715 Posts
What kind of weed were you smoking when you wrote this? Selling land to private industry is a good thing if it’s to obtain valuable minerals or energy to run the country.
I’d ask the same thing of you.

How many trails are you going to build on a given piece of formerly public land that is now fenced off for surface mining?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Perpetually Intermediate
Joined
·
312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
What kind of weed were you smoking when you wrote this? Selling land to private industry is a good thing if it’s to obtain valuable minerals or energy to run the country.
I gave up weed a few years back...and you can obtain valuable minerals and energy on public lands without SELLING THEM and privatizing them and making them off limits to everyone except the owner. Surely you've spent time in our National Forests or Bureau of Land Management lands. Shared use: mineral extraction, camping, logging, mountain biking, camping, Jeeping, fishing, cattle grazing, spelunking, hunting, bird watching and much much more all happening on a given chunk of land. Sell that land to a Chinese or Canadian mining company and all you get is mineral extraction and eternal no trespassing signs. Hope that clears things up for you.
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,715 Posts
I think so. I built part of the green dot, all of the blue dot, comfotably dumb, MPS, LPS, part of the UPS, part of hazard, and one other trail.

Since then Trail Mix has built over two hundred miles of new trail on USFS and BLM land that has oil and mineral (?) extraction going on. Not sure if you are concerned about the oil and mineral extraction or so many new trails.
Great. So you’re also aware that the trails you named are on federal land. Which, if federal lands are “returned” (misnomer, really) to the states in which they exist, those trails could cease to exist as well.

This is a pretty simple concept. Say that the above happened. And then, a resource was discovered on or under UPS. That trail would no longer exist once the state saw fit to sell off the land in question.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,113 Posts
I think so. I built part of the green dot, all of the blue dot, comfotably dumb, MPS, LPS, part of the UPS, part of hazard, and one other trail.

Since then Trail Mix has built over two hundred miles of new trail on USFS and BLM land that has oil and mineral (?) extraction going on. Not sure if you are concerned about the oil and mineral extraction or so many new trails.
Well, one entity is tasked to make land open to recreation if at all possible. The other, well they can do whatever makes their life easier. Not sure you understand the difference in public vs private property.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,826 Posts
Someone is missing the concept of split estate.

Basically, the minerals under a piece of property are sold separately from the surface rights.

Someone with mineral rights can destroy five acres of surface out of every 40 acres, and can destroy even more for access roads. Look on Google Maps at a satellite map of the area around Rifle, CO or south of Durango down into New Mexico. See all of those lines running between round spots? Those round spots are well pads and the lines are the roads and pipelines that connect them. Does those look like areas where you could ride on anything other than a dirt road?

I guarantee any politician who is a Utah Republican wants to take over Federal Lands for one reason - to sell to some entity that has given him a shitload of money.

Don't believe? Look at what is happening to land that Utah Republicans control already. They want to sell almost 5000 acres of state land south of Moab for development so that the population of the area can triple. Never mind that there is not enough water to serve that many people, once they get their kickbacks, it is someone else's problem. Bucks to be made. That is the only worth to a Utah Republican.

In the opinion of a Utah Republican, a piece of "public" land is nothing more than an opportunity for them to get richer. If the land is controlled by the Federal Government, it is a lot tougher for them to get their cut - although not impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
The giveaway of our public lands is being proposed so that the Utah Repulicans can line their own pockets with money. Its just a sell out so they can get their campaign controbutions now and lobying jobs after they are voted out.

Its just a money and power grab taking it from all of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,098 Posts
I don’t really get if anything you said is illegal. Are we mountain bikers going to loose some popular place we currently ride? If so are the trails on Trailforks? Is the land being sold someplace you want to live? Do you hate Utah Republican politicians?
Why does it being legal make it something we should want to happen? What does that have to do with anything?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,826 Posts
I don’t really get if anything you said is illegal. Are we mountain bikers going to loose some popular place we currently ride? If so are the trails on Trailforks? Is the land being sold someplace you want to live? Do you hate Utah Republican politicians?
So your moral compass is that is something is legal, it is OK?

Actually yes, my wife and I had planned on retiring to Moab. The "New Moab" they are getting ready to build in San Juan County, three miles south of the Moab city limits, was the last straw. Grand County refused to extend water and sewer down there, because there simply isn't enough water for Moab to grow much more. So the f*&ktards in the state legislature decided *they* would just go ahead and drill a bunch of wells into the same acquifer, build a water and sewer system, and assist San Juan in transforming an area that now has 300 rural houses into an area with 12,000 people and all of the associated infrastructure, restaurants, stores, hotels, condos, a Wal Mart. Never mind that a new water study *just* completed by the state itself said there is nowhere near enough water to support that many people. Moab currently has 6000 people. "New Moab" will *triple* the number of people drawing on the water supply.

And yes, I hate every single Utah Republican politician. They are all complete idiots. Every. Single. One. They are all for sale to whatever special interest wants to buy them, as long as that special interest is approved by their handlers at the Temple.
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,715 Posts
FWIW, regardless of their political affiliation, I’d be very much against any elected official that was a proponent of the sale of public lands.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,067 Posts
What kind of weed were you smoking when you wrote this? Selling land to private industry is a good thing if it’s to obtain valuable minerals or energy to run the country.
And what kind of crack* were use smoking when you wrote this? "Private industry" and "run the country" are two different things.

*I mean Oxycodone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
So your moral compass is that is something is legal, it is OK?

Actually yes, my wife and I had planned on retiring to Moab. The "New Moab" they are getting ready to build in San Juan County, three miles south of the Moab city limits, was the last straw. Grand County refused to extend water and sewer down there, because there simply isn't enough water for Moab to grow much more. So the f*&ktards in the state legislature decided *they* would just go ahead and drill a bunch of wells into the same acquifer, build a water and sewer system, and assist San Juan in transforming an area that now has 300 rural houses into an area with 12,000 people and all of the associated infrastructure, restaurants, stores, hotels, condos, a Wal Mart. Never mind that a new water study *just* completed by the state itself said there is nowhere near enough water to support that many people. Moab currently has 6000 people. "New Moab" will *triple* the number of people drawing on the water supply.

And yes, I hate every single Utah Republican politician. They are all complete idiots. Every. Single. One. They are all for sale to whatever special interest wants to buy them, as long as that special interest is approved by their handlers at the Temple.
So, let me get this straight. You want to move to Utah to retire, but you're complaining about 2 things. 1) A large percentage of the population of Utah and 2) anyone else who wants to move there.

Apparently you weren't planning on using any water when you retire there?
 

·
Location: 10 ft from Hell
Joined
·
4,492 Posts
First of all I don’t smoke crack. Secondly if natural resource extraction is going to benefit the US citizenry I am for it. I would much rather see that energy is used from our country than purchasing it from a foreign country.

Have you thought about Germany buying 70% of there natural gas from Russia? Do you think that’s a good idea for stimulating revenues for Russian interests?

I seriously doubt that there will be a huge amount of existing popular MTB trails lost due to the extraction of energy and other natural resources. Please let me know where it’s currently happening.

Not sure what an aquafier in San Juan County has to do with Moab’s supply of water in Grand County? Are you sure there is a Walmart south of Moab? I have spent hundreds of hours camped out at Walmart in my motorcasa and have never scene one there.

Lastly, do only Republicans benefit when public lands are sold for natural resource extraction, and is it illegal to sell public land?




I thought you were leaving the country to build e-motorbike trails? Could you please expedite the process?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,414 Posts
It will certainly be nice when the USFS and BLM allow Ebikes on current system trails. It is coming in the future and if I am still alive by then, I will be on an Ebike trying to keep up with my younger friends.

What a Country!
Such a change in regulations won't help much if those BLM and USFS lands have been sold off to mining companies and developers by then.

Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
 

·
Perpetually Intermediate
Joined
·
312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
First of all I don’t smoke crack. Secondly if natural resource extraction is going to benefit the US citizenry I am for it. I would much rather see that energy is used from our country than purchasing it from a foreign country.

Resources are already being extracted from our public lands, so there is no need to sell those lands off in the name of energy independence. The current leasing system isn't perfect but at least the land remains open to all.

Have you thought about Germany buying 70% of there natural gas from Russia? Do you think that’s a good idea for stimulating revenues for Russian interests?

What does this have to do with selling our lands? Foreign companies could buy those lands just as easily as American companies. Again, we can access our oil, gas and minerals without selling the lands outright.

I seriously doubt that there will be a huge amount of existing popular MTB trails lost due to the extraction of energy and other natural resources. Please let me know where it’s currently happening.

Again, you are confusing energy extraction with the selling of public lands. You are missing the point of my post entirely. I'm not saying that mineral extraction is causing the loss of trails, although a strip mine or spider web of natural gas roads and well pads does make it hard, and often impossible, to have any sort of. trail system for bikes or hikers.

Lastly, do only Republicans benefit when public lands are sold for natural resource extraction, and is it illegal to sell public land?

It is not illegal to sell public land right now, but it is not typical (due to current laws that keep public land generally public) and usually the Feds swap land with private owners rather than sell outright. What Utah's Senator is calling for is a massive transfer of our lands to private ownership.

As far as Republicans benefiting....yes, it is their constituencies that would benefit most from the wholesale sale/transfer of public lands, and the rest of us would just watch as it was mined, logged, paved, or simply fenced off forever. If are pissed now because you can't ride your bike in a Wilderness area, just wait until you can't ride anywhere at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,802 Posts
I know we'd like to ride our bikes in Wilderness areas, and I know we sometimes complain about trail closures or the occasional ineptitude of the US Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management....I mean, we wanna be free to ride, man.

However, don't forget that as seemingly bad as some rules and regulations seem, they beat the hell out of having NO PLACE TO RIDE AT ALL other than gravel roads and private bike parks.

Our public lands are always at risk of being sold "to the states", which could then dispose of them as they wish, or sold outright to the highest bidder, maybe billionaires wanting a huge ranch or foreign investors looking to get money out of China, or Qatar or Saudi Arabia...any of which would certainly lead to NO TRESPASSING signs and a permanent end to ALL access. There are many in Congress and the White House right now who would LOVE to sell it all and be done with it. Here's the latest on a proposal from Utah Senator Mike Lee to do just that.

https://www.adventure-journal.com/2...s-to-eliminate-public-lands-as-you-know-them/

Not trying to insert politics into this forum--indeed, one of the main reasons I mountain bike is to free my mind from that sort of thing--but if you like to ride your mountain bike on a public trail in the forests or deserts of America then beware.
Earlier this year, Utah Rep. Jason Chafettz was forced to kill HB 621, a bill intended to do essentially the same thing, after an outcry from hunters, fishers and other outdoorsman across the West. Hopefully Hall's proposal will suffer the same fate. Many of the people expressing outrage were conservatives, who unlike Switch appreciate public access to public lands.
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top