Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > Biking in the Adirondacks
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-09-2015, 08:34 AM   #61
bmike-vt
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSettahr View Post
This is a singular example that occurs quite late in the history of the exploration of the US, though. Yellowstone had already been a park for nearly 25 years in 1896.
Agreed. It's about as legit as the idea that modern canoes (and cars to ferry them to put ins) and horses (and trailers and trucks to pull them) should somehow have privileged status.


Just pointing out that there are examples where people have traversed long stretches of the world on bikes, and it happened before suspension forks and GPS, and hydraulic brakes, etc.

I'm in agreement that over 'managing' wilderness is an odd thing. A contradiction. But you can take the human out of the city and town - but you can never take the human nature out of the human - so we end up with pages and pages or regs and rules. And we live in a world where from 'wilderness' I can text via cell phone (in some cases making use of a satellite that required a rocket to put into orbit and the brute force of the military industrial complex to make happen and sustain) while cooking over a canister stove imported from Japan on Ti cookware sitting in a shelter made of the lightest waterproof materials available... While I wait out some weather so I can paddle my Kevlar boat across a pond to take wildlife pictures with my digital camera and then come back here and write all about it....

That's all ok in 'wilderness'. But a bike is not.


And I agree that they houldn't be allowed everywhere... Just like there are places that we shouldn't develop trails and parking lots and etc.
bmike-vt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2015, 11:04 AM   #62
Riosacandaga
soggy
 
Riosacandaga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Falls on Shanty Brook
Posts: 617
Very informative and interesting discussion! I'm headed out today for a bike ride in the Wilcox Lake Wild Forest. I don't think my impact would be any greater than if I was riding in the Siamese Pond Wilderness. I'm mindful of the skiers with metal edges and snowshoers with metal crampons that have scraped the moss off rocks out in the wilderness. I have often wondered about the wilderness trail with nailed markers on the trees.
I for one am NOT a proponent of opening ALL of the wilderness to MTBs. I would like to see, and I believe it to be appropriate, to have a primitive bike corridor through some, not all, wilderness classified lands.
Regardless, I'm happy for what we have, and now I'm going to enjoy it. (appropriately)
Peace
Riosacandaga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2015, 12:44 PM   #63
bmike-vt
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riosacandaga View Post
Very informative and interesting discussion! I'm headed out today for a bike ride in the Wilcox Lake Wild Forest. I don't think my impact would be any greater than if I was riding in the Siamese Pond Wilderness. I'm mindful of the skiers with metal edges and snowshoers with metal crampons that have scraped the moss off rocks out in the wilderness. I have often wondered about the wilderness trail with nailed markers on the trees.
I for one am NOT a proponent of opening ALL of the wilderness to MTBs. I would like to see, and I believe it to be appropriate, to have a primitive bike corridor through some, not all, wilderness classified lands.
Regardless, I'm happy for what we have, and now I'm going to enjoy it. (appropriately)
Peace
+1 many times over.
Enjoy your ride!
bmike-vt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2015, 01:03 PM   #64
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmike-vt View Post
Agreed. It's about as legit as the idea that modern canoes (and cars to ferry them to put ins) and horses (and trailers and trucks to pull them) should somehow have privileged status.
The cars to ferry canoes to put ins, and the trailers and trucks to pull horses, don't have any special privileges in wilderness either, though. They aren't allowed beyond the parking area for the trailhead. You'd never be issued a citation for parking at a wilderness area trailhead with a bicycle on a bike rack on your car, either.
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2015, 07:00 PM   #65
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmike-vt View Post
...That's all ok in 'wilderness'. But a bike is not.
Thankfully this is true.
I agree that there should be areas within the Adirondacks where bicycles are not allowed, whether a trail is suitable or not.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2015, 01:55 AM   #66
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmike-vt View Post
The 25th Bicycle Corp was 'mountain' biking long before suspension forks, GPS, and even many of our National Parks. Even long before the Wilderness Act, way before paved roads and even well marked trails back in 1896.
Also, as a clarification, the Wilderness Act and the first wilderness areas designated by congress may not have occurred until 1964, but the Forest Service itself began designating wilderness areas 40 years earlier, with the creation of the Gila Wilderness in 1924.
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2015, 07:32 PM   #67
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,678
Which is why much of the language in these acts in antiquated, and needs to be reviewed in light of more recent developments. Some areas ban mountain bikes and/or climbing, simply because they are not mentioned in a 70 year old act, because they were not known by the writers.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2015, 08:18 PM   #68
bmike-vt
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Thankfully this is true.
I agree that there should be areas within the Adirondacks where bicycles are not allowed, whether a trail is suitable or not.
Why though? If the trail is suitable, and I'm not running a motor... Why ban a bike and not skis, kayaks, canoes, guideboats, rafts (do the raft companies get to traverse wilderness with their business boats?).

It's a tool. Just like the rest.
bmike-vt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2015, 08:21 PM   #69
bmike-vt
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSettahr View Post
The cars to ferry canoes to put ins, and the trailers and trucks to pull horses, don't have any special privileges in wilderness either, though. They aren't allowed beyond the parking area for the trailhead. You'd never be issued a citation for parking at a wilderness area trailhead with a bicycle on a bike rack on your car, either.
Yeah, I know. But I was responding to the notion that somehow horses and canoes and boots are more traditional and historically significant.

It's just that the cars and trucks that ferry us and all our gear to go experience wilderness (and the roads and infrastructure to support them) aren't.
bmike-vt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2015, 01:05 PM   #70
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmike-vt View Post
Why though? If the trail is suitable.....
I already expressed my opinion why earlier in this thread.
It's okay if we disagree. I don't see the need to continue this off topic discussion. Perhaps you can start another thread about the merits of bicycles in wilderness areas.
As I mentioned earlier, I hope that the effort to create more trails in the Moose River Plains Wild Forest is successful, so those of us who enjoy mountain biking will have more options to choose from.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2015, 06:51 PM   #71
ILikeRocks
Member
 
ILikeRocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Barneveld, NY
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post

As I mentioned earlier, I hope that the effort to create more trails in the Moose River Plains Wild Forest is successful, so those of us who enjoy mountain biking will have more options to choose from.
That's what I'm hoping for
ILikeRocks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2015, 09:45 PM   #72
Riosacandaga
soggy
 
Riosacandaga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Falls on Shanty Brook
Posts: 617
More stacked loops. How many options do MTB 'rs need of the same basic trail design. Are the MRP stacked loops going to offer more diversity or just "more". How will it be different between Loggers Loops, Craig Woods, Flume Trail, Hardy Road.. how about Luther Forest , Thatcher Park or Central Park. SMBA, Pittstown? How many circles do MTB'rs need? NYS DEC is a behind the development curve in MTB trail development . Connectivity is what we need, routes that go 'places' ... Moab, Fruita, Durango, the U.P. the great Divide trail; all trails that go to places or have options to go places other than where you started. Long rides, multi day trips, bike packing. There are Adk routes that could connect the ends of the park without encroaching on the experience of hikers, skiers and snowwshoers.
What does the MTB community need? How can it balance with other users of the park? And how can it benefit the economy of local communities in the park?
Riosacandaga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2015, 04:17 PM   #73
VeloBob
Member
 
VeloBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Saranac
Posts: 2
Old but worthwhile discussion

It would be nice to have a few linear corridors or thru-routes or whatever you need to call them. I just want the hypocrisy to stop...the arguments against mountain bikes in the wilderness are old and tired...since the late 80's - early 90's. Like a religious mantra they are repeated, in spite of research that contradicts the belief. All users have an impact on their surroundings - it's just physics. And all our tools (bike, canoe, ski, snowshoe, etc.) allow for more efficient, faster longer travel than without these implements. The backpacker-akin to an astronaut visiting another planet is no more appropriate or inappropriate to the wilderness than a mountain biker traveling a 100 mile wilderness thru-trail; each experiences the remoteness in their own way and neither is more holy than the other. Want to see how radical and extreme some of the anti-mountain bike crowd can be? Check this out..
http://mjvande.nfshost.com
Yes he's an example of the extreme, but you can see where the current rhetoric parallels. And he has become malicious...physically and in cyberspace. The more extreme the idea, the more extreme (and intolerant) the adherent.
In the end, we need to share and remain honest, but respectful. Question your assumptions and even the things you hold as facts.
VeloBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2015, 12:35 PM   #74
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 961
I'm a bit late to the party but I finally got a chance to read the IMBA Proposal. I should have read it initially, because I think it's TERRIBLE! I'll elaborate why but I think some of that has been addressed.

Does anyone have an update on what has been accepted from that proposal? A pump track? Stacked loops? I'm a huge bicycle advocate (if you haven't been able to tell from my other posts) but none of that fits within the scope of the Forest Preserve IMO.

So let me explain why I think that's a bad idea:

First and foremost, it's seems counter-intuitive to a backcountry experience. It sounds more like a theme park. The Adirondacks don't need that for a number of reasons.

Secondly, it's not going to help the local economy. There are already a number of these short, isolated stacked loop type areas to ride in the park, and particularly in this vicinity. Fern park has a plethora of this type of terrain and is free. McCauly Mtn has trail, and should develop their own private system for this type of riding. There are a number of other short loops that are good ride in this area.

What is lacking, and it's very obviously lacking, are trail that are ridable and sustainable for bikes that connect these areas, and allow riders to tour, or bike camp in the backcountry. Dirt roads exist, but these must be shared with vehicles, so it detracts from the experience. Connector trails, in most cases, do exist, but they are not designed as bike trails and suffer from lack of maintenance or proper design.

My humble opinion is the state needs to take what it has and enhance it for bicycle use, and by that I mean long rides, not pump park, ski resort type biking... that already exists and the private or town owned places do it better. That means improving or re-routing existing trails to make them bike friendly, and adding connectors where they need be. Some of this was addressed in the proposal, and I hope that's what sticks. The last thing we need are more tightly developed areas that will see heavy use.

Last edited by montcalm; 05-06-2015 at 03:41 PM..
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2015, 11:19 PM   #75
JimB
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: cincinnatus,NY
Posts: 151
I just got back from Florida where I rode at the Santos mt bike area. It was my third time there and I was able to explore an area that I had previously seen but was unable to enjoy. The Santos area itself has many miles of loops (I think that is what you are calling stacked trails?) with clearly marked recommended skill levels, pump track, advanced level extreme area, etc, They also join up to the cross Florida Greenway which is the trails that I rode this time. I managed to ride 30 miles out and decided to turn back making for a 47 mile day. Each "section" had a trailhead at a road crossing with 4 trails. An orange marked cross Florida hiking only trail, a clearly marked horse only trail and 2 mt. bike trails. They were a yellow beginner level that was flatter and shorter and a blue advanced level that was more flowy and covered rougher terrain and had a longer length. No one would consider riding on the wrong trail. They were cleary marked no horses or no bikes accordingly. The trails sometimes crossed and had signage warning of other users that might be encountered. I did see some hikers on the bike trail but it was no big deal. Every time I have visited there I have ridden with people who have traveled a long way to enjoy the riding there. They have really designed it to appeal to every user at every skill level. That is what we need in MRP or other places in NY. It takes a lot of work but there are plenty of clubs that would be willing to work with DEC to make it happen.
__________________
I'm not a Hippie, just a well groomed Mountain Man.
JimB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.