There’s an Op-Ed in the NY Times by Doug Scott titled Keep Bikes Off Our Wilderness Trails. A group called the Sustainable Trails Coalition is behind a bill to open Federal wilderness lands to mountain bikers, arguing the 1964 Wilderness Act banning mechanical transport should not include them, because mountain bikes didn’t come on the scene until some years later. (What exactly makes a bike a mountain bike is a matter of debate, but it’s intended to be used off paved roads with things like heavier tires, special suspensions, etc. Then there are Fat Bikes...)
The STC argues the ban on wheeled vehicles and other tools is making it difficult to maintain wilderness trails:
The Pacific Crest Trail, the Continental Divide Trail, and similarly majestic trails in our nation's Wilderness areas are our country's pride and joy, but they are in serious disrepair. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the U.S. Forest Service can maintain only about 25 percent of its trail mileage! According to that same GAO study, they recommend improving the sustainability of our trails as well as improving the collaboration with volunteers to maintain our trails.
Under current rules, federal land managers cannot use tools as basic as a wheelbarrow or a chainsaw to maintain Wilderness trails. As a result, it's too costly to maintain them and they have deteriorated like our national highway system. Compound these facts with the heavy use certain areas receive, the legislation that was intended to protect our lands is preventing them from being repaired and as a result is becoming an environmental problem and safety issue for all visitors.
This is a laudable goal — but it’s a bit of a stretch in my opinion to see how allowing mountain bikes on wilderness trails is a solution to a problem created by years of under-funding, efforts to privatize the wilderness, and the impact of increasing use.
To my way of thinking, allowing mountain bikes onto wilderness lands would have the effect of increasing environmental damage because of A) the effects of knobby tires on unpaved trails, B) the increase in trail use, C) lack of Federal personnel or funding to cope with an influx of new users, D) the prevalence of A**holes in any group who would use the new access irresponsibly, and E) the increased pressure from ATV groups for similar access. Here’s Scott’s take:
Ultimately, this is not really a debate about whether to allow bikes in wilderness, but whether we will allow the first incursion against a law that has held firm for 52 years to protect America’s disappearing wild heritage. Senator Lee has argued that his legislation is intended to “enrich Americans’ enjoyment of the outdoors by making it easier for them to mountain bike in wilderness areas.”
The two Utah senators sponsoring this effort have made no secret of their disdain for the federal government’s ownership and management of Western lands. They also support putting hundreds of millions of acres in the hands of the states and localities.
More than 600 million acres have been set aside as national parks, forests and other federal lands. Of that, 109 million acres have been designated as federal wilderness, with its extra layer of safeguarding. Much of the rest is available to cyclists.
emphasis added
Cycling has become a popular form of recreation because of its health benefits and because it’s a form of exercise that is both enjoyable in its own right, and because it is accessible to people of varying physical ability. It generates a lot of enthusiasm among those who pursue it. Perhaps too much so.
As someone who has been hiking in the Adirondacks, at Philmont Scout Ranch and the Kit Carson National Forest, and canoed the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, I don’t think the experience would have been the same if I had been sharing trails with people flying by on mountain bikes. Given the differences in the way hikers versus bikers make use of the trails, shared use is going to be problematic. I think I’m with Scott on this. Keep wheels out of the wilderness. There are already plenty of places for mountain bikers to go; how much more is enough?
What do you think?