2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

True. Most mtn. bikers will follow the herd to the most popular, easiest to access trails. The group of bikers that want to get away and explore is relatively small, so why keep that from them? Perhaps a good option is to sell mechanized permits for the small population who wants to explore on their bike. Or others who want to volunteer their time and take a chainsaw to clear the trail for all users.

Mountain bikers help all user groups access their forests...and are not prejudice about who uses the trails they maintain.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Guess who cleared those trails for the hikers and birders. If it weren't for mountain bikers, a lot of trails wouldn't exist anymore at all. Kudos to squarehead above, you hit the nail on the head...

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

I too spend nearly every weekend mountain biking. Last summer we explored some of the trail systems within the proposed Mt. Hood wilderness expansion area. What we found was astonishing:

A contracted trail crew was ?maintaining? the trail using a Kubota dozer/backhoe. The section I saw was on the shoreline of a pristine high-mountain lake, less than one-half mile from the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT). This being my third time to the area, I had really come to enjoy this quiet, beautiful area. Especially enjoying the natural obstacles and narrow singletrack, which my friends and I had hand-cleared earlier in the summer. Now there was heavy machinery making the trail 6-10ft wide! Removing every rock and boulder, cutting and ripping up tree roots, digging the hillside to flatten the trail...all this 30ft from the shoreline of a natural high-mountain lake! It looked as if they were getting ready to pave it. Is this reminiscent of wilderness to anybody??

This was taxpayer money being dished out by the Forest Service to a private contractor, at a cost of $10K-$15K per mile, possibly more.

Most amazing to me was that these trails were in perfect shape before this. I spoke with every hiker and equestrian I ran into that day (about 12 in all). Every person was in awe at what they saw. So I ask; who are they ?maintaining? the trails for? Mountain bikers, hikers, and equestrians do not like the resultant trail, yet these are the groups that use this area.

Allowing mountain bikes and chainsaws will help keep the trails clear and maintained. Restricting them will crowd other trail systems and cause more issues. I can understand wanting to protect against MORE logging and development, but this land does not fit the definition of wilderness (see above link, Section 2.c) as the proposed wilderness area has many substantial imprints of man's work already clearly noticeable. I hope the Senate can find a way to protect the land while allowing non-motorized groups, who use and currently maintain the area, to continue using the trails.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context