Last edited by a moderator:
Congress passes bill to expand wilderness in 9 states
- Thread starter B the Hiker
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
darren
Poobah Emeritus
IMO it is kind of a double edged sword. protect the land = good, but wilderness rules can = bad. It will ban mountain biking in a lot of great areas. It also prevents trail maintenance and backcountry shelters etc. Again, preservation good, rules bad.
- darren
- darren
dentonfabrics
New member
From the article...
Supporters said the bill would preserve national forests, parks, rivers, battlefields and other public lands for generations.
Opponents...called the bill a "land grab" that would block energy development on vast swaths of federal land.
If you're concerned about the enviornment, I think you'll agree that the benefits of this bill outweigh the negatives by a country mile. And I like the term "land grab" very much, however I feel that "land grab it back" would be more appropriate.
bob
Supporters said the bill would preserve national forests, parks, rivers, battlefields and other public lands for generations.
Opponents...called the bill a "land grab" that would block energy development on vast swaths of federal land.
If you're concerned about the enviornment, I think you'll agree that the benefits of this bill outweigh the negatives by a country mile. And I like the term "land grab" very much, however I feel that "land grab it back" would be more appropriate.
bob
Gris
New member
Yes, it almost seems like there should be special consideration/another category for mountain biking - a 'tweener' category/buffer zone?; clearly not as invasive as motocross, 3/4 wheelers, etc., but more so than foot travel.
Puck
New member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,272
- Reaction score
- 162
Here are some AP details. I hope to find out if these provisions are driven by ESA consideration.
A look at key provisions in wilderness bill
By The Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iNxcU_BFTp9RSRfUTY7BDDGnBybwD97593984
<mod hat> Reminder, please don't post copyrighted articles here, just post a link </mod hat>
A look at key provisions in wilderness bill
By The Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iNxcU_BFTp9RSRfUTY7BDDGnBybwD97593984
<mod hat> Reminder, please don't post copyrighted articles here, just post a link </mod hat>
Last edited by a moderator:
psmart
Active member
I beg to differ. For example, most of the WODC's trail maintenance work is in the Sandwich Range Wilderness. In fact, the Club specializes in the kind of low-key trail work that protects the natural environment while also facilitating hiker access. During the past 15 years this has included major restoration projects on a number of trails including Dicey's Mill, Blueberry Ledge, Walden, Lawrence, and others. The same type of work is conducted by the USFS and other trail clubs throughout the Wilderness areas in the WMNF.
andrewb
Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 132
- Reaction score
- 10
I just wish NH was a 10th state seeing more protected land. I do think we have a lot to be thankful for without in increase. I consider myself lucky to have grown up in NH and hiked as often as I have been able to over the years. By and large, even our unprotected lands in the White Mountains are still awesome places to visit .. some may be too crowded but there's nowhere else I'd rather be.
darren
Poobah Emeritus
psmart - is my understanding wrong that you can not blaze / mark trails and can not have trail signs etc?
Again, I am all for protecting land, but that land was already protected and was already NF land and designated potential wilderness. I want the land protected but I don't like all of the wilderness rules.
Something like 1000 miles of some of the best mountain biking in the country just got closed to mountain biking. Some of those trails have been built and maintained by mountain bikers. People have been biking those trails for 20 years and now suddenly they can't.
As for damage by mtn bikes, there have been several studies done that showed mountian bikes do not cause any more trail damage than hiking does. Yes, it is true, read up on it. The real offenders to trails are dirt bikes, atv's, and horses. It is ironic that the horses that do way more trail damage than bikes are still allowed in the wilderness areas.
For those of you who like to hike and like blazes and trail signs, how would you like it if all of a sudden the NF took all of the White Mountains and made it "wilderness" - meaning no more marked trails. Now there are so many hikers in the whites that the most popular trails could remain defined, but eventually hikers would be squeezed out of the "wilderness".
Wilderness areas might be ok for contained areas like the Pemi, but when you apply the same rules over a much larger area - like an entire area such as the White Mountains or some of the NF land areas out West which are much larger - you exclude and impact a lot of the users (who are the tax payers who own the land).
I'll say it again, because I'm probably in the minority here, I am all for protecting the land. I just don't think the wilderness rules is the best way to do it.
- darren
Again, I am all for protecting land, but that land was already protected and was already NF land and designated potential wilderness. I want the land protected but I don't like all of the wilderness rules.
Something like 1000 miles of some of the best mountain biking in the country just got closed to mountain biking. Some of those trails have been built and maintained by mountain bikers. People have been biking those trails for 20 years and now suddenly they can't.
As for damage by mtn bikes, there have been several studies done that showed mountian bikes do not cause any more trail damage than hiking does. Yes, it is true, read up on it. The real offenders to trails are dirt bikes, atv's, and horses. It is ironic that the horses that do way more trail damage than bikes are still allowed in the wilderness areas.
For those of you who like to hike and like blazes and trail signs, how would you like it if all of a sudden the NF took all of the White Mountains and made it "wilderness" - meaning no more marked trails. Now there are so many hikers in the whites that the most popular trails could remain defined, but eventually hikers would be squeezed out of the "wilderness".
Wilderness areas might be ok for contained areas like the Pemi, but when you apply the same rules over a much larger area - like an entire area such as the White Mountains or some of the NF land areas out West which are much larger - you exclude and impact a lot of the users (who are the tax payers who own the land).
I'll say it again, because I'm probably in the minority here, I am all for protecting the land. I just don't think the wilderness rules is the best way to do it.
- darren
Last edited:
NewHampshire
New member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,554
- Reaction score
- 311
Signs are still allowed, but are low key (meaning they are not like some of the new and flashy white painted or orange stained signs out there right now). Also, corridor standards are tighter. A typical corridor is suposed to be maintained at 4x8 feet whereas Wilderness corridors are maintained to a tighter tolerance (not positive but I think 3x6)
I am not even a mountain biker and can agre this "wheel-phobic" approach to protection isa bit misguided. I understand banning anything with a motor, but if biking is kept to maintained trails whyats the big deal? Like my Wilderness experience is going to be ruined because I see a couple mountain bikers go pedeling through as opposed to fellow hikers clad in day-glo colored clothing with bright red packs, etc etc.
Then count me in the minority too. I have always felt that there has to be a better way and a better balance to this. The rules seem a bit counterproductive at times......
Brian
wardsgirl
Active member
Page 35 of the linked document contains the rules for Wilderness maintenance according to the AMC. The trails are 'defined' by proper brushing and blazes are omitted. Signage is still allowed.
http://www.outdoors.org/pdf/upload/vol-adopter-handbook.pdf
Similar threads
