Thread: Possibly an interesting bend in the Wilderness rules

Not directly related to biking in this context, but a thread over on T-tips about new Wasatch wilderness designation and the possible allowance of the heli to fly in that wilderness. Who knows if it's all bullshit, but if it isn't, then bikers have found a chink in the armor of the Wilderness designation.

For those actually interested in the future of the Wasatch mountains, a new master plan is in process.
I spoke with a representative from SOC about the wilderness proposal for the Wasatch and it is likely WPG will be allowed to continue operation in any new wilderness. So much for wilderness designation in the local mountains.
_________________

Yea, I can't wait to ride my bike down the face of lone peak then shred all of Jacob's ladder and at the same time try to knock Trackhead off the trail on his little xc bike. For real though, riding down timp would be sick.

Originally Posted by otter

Yea, I can't wait to ride my bike down the face of lone peak then shred all of Jacob's ladder and at the same time try to knock Trackhead off the trail on his little xc bike. For real though, riding down timp would be sick.

I'll be on my moto, so good luck. 500lbs of steel, fat, and blubber.

you going to spin doughnuts all over question mark wall?

Originally Posted by otter

you going to spin doughnuts all over question mark wall?

Triple Overhangs, bitch.

We used to ride bikes in the current Mt Olympus wilderness. Park at Porter, ride the road, up Big Water, take Desolation trail around and ride down Porter. Don't think that fact changes anything.

Originally Posted by wra

We used to ride bikes in the current Mt Olympus wilderness. Park at Porter, ride the road, up Big Water, take Desolation trail around and ride down Porter. Don't think that fact changes anything.

You wouldn't want to do that now even it it was legal. I decided to loop the east and west forks of Butler Fork via the Desolation trail this summer trail running. The desolation trail section was a completely fucked, overgrown thrash almost the entire way. No maintenance had probably been done in decades. Best part, I didn't wear a shirt so by the time I was done I was completely covered in welts. It looked like I had diaper rash over my entire upper body.

Little confused here. Haven't non-conforming uses been grandfathered into Wilderness areas since the establishment of the Frank Church with their jetboats on the Main???

Originally Posted by Tye 1on

Little confused here. Haven't non-conforming uses been grandfathered into Wilderness areas since the establishment of the Frank Church with their jetboats on the Main???

Yep, or the allowance of flights into Schaefer(sp?) Meadows airstrip.

This means little except to really piss off us MTB types.

Originally Posted by Bunion

Yep, or the allowance of flights into Schaefer(sp?) Meadows airstrip.

This means little except to really piss off us MTB types.

Got it. But MTB's don't have motors, so obviously much more impact.

Originally Posted by Tye 1on

Little confused here. Haven't non-conforming uses been grandfathered into Wilderness areas since the establishment of the Frank Church with their jetboats on the Main???

I don't know. It seems the discussion is wilderness expansion. So my thinking was, if they are expanding wilderness, and letting a motorized vehicle fly in that NEW wilderness..............

Who the hell knows. It's a quagmire any way you look at it.

Originally Posted by Trackhead

I don't know. It seems the discussion is wilderness expansion. So my thinking was, if they are expanding wilderness, and letting a motorized vehicle fly in that NEW wilderness..............

Who the hell knows. It's a quagmire any way you look at it.

Yep, if only the minds of our elected representatives worked in a logical fashion.

What if we changed tactics and fought harder to allow mountain bikes in Wilderness in stead of fighting against it. You could also get the hunters on board with allowing game carts. I mean, some trails are still flat out unrideable, so you'd basically getting back what was lost, and maybe gaining a bit.
Then again, it's ridiculous how much we're losing outside of Wilderness are losing. Like, can't even bike up to it in most places.
The two strongest lobbies here seem to be the logging industry and Wilderness groups, and everyone gets fucked. We're gonna have some tracts of Wilderness and everything else with be logging roads. WTF?!
I just think it would be a good area to start advocating, since mountain bikes are non-motorized.

Originally Posted by Tye 1on

Little confused here. Haven't non-conforming uses been grandfathered into Wilderness areas since the establishment of the Frank Church with their jetboats on the Main???

The Melehas boys used to Heli-ski Table Mountain (and many others) from the Teepee before 1984...how tits would THAT be? (they didn't get grandfathered, obviously)

I also love how drilling bolts into pristine rock faces is grandfathered into wilderness for the climbers.

However I've heard from several sources that any Utah red rocks legislation that passes should have extensive cherrystemming to allow continued access to existing mtb trails. Take that FWIW.

I was riding in Wilderness Area's before 1984 and I'm almost a grandfather.

I should be grandfathered in!

Originally Posted by Bunion

Yep, if only the minds of our elected representatives worked in a logical fashion.

they logically respond to money and the promise of money. that's the logic you're looking for.

Originally Posted by Shredhead

I was riding in Wilderness Area's before 1984 and I'm almost a grandfather.

I should be grandfathered in!

That seems reasonable, but it might lead to higher teenage pregnancy rates.

Originally Posted by Particle

I also love how drilling bolts into pristine rock faces is grandfathered into wilderness for the climbers.

I'm pretty sure that installing new fixed anchors in wilderness areas is a no-no. Not very likely that you would get caught and prosecuted though.

Originally Posted by Particle

However I've heard from several sources that any Utah red rocks legislation that passes should have extensive cherrystemming to allow continued access to existing mtb trails. Take that FWIW.

Should? Or Would? The former goes with saying, but the latter seems far from certain.

Originally Posted by Dantheman

I'm pretty sure that installing new fixed anchors in wilderness areas is a no-no. Not very likely that you would get caught and prosecuted though.

I am under the impression that fixed anchors are legal in wilderness, but they need to be hand drilled. I think Park rules limit fixed anchors. Please correct me if I am wrong

Originally Posted by Particle

However I've heard from several sources that any Utah red rocks legislation that passes should have extensive cherrystemming to allow continued access to existing mtb trails. Take that FWIW.

The crappy thing is that there is so much good riding in the proposed area that isn't a designated trail....it is all rock riding.

Originally Posted by Bunion

Yep, or the allowance of flights into Schaefer(sp?) Meadows airstrip.

This means little except to really piss off us MTB types.

It doesn't seem fair, although in the defense of airplanes, we have a very light footprint since the wheels are just freewheeling, not driven. As both a mountain biker and a pilot though, it strikes me as pretty backwards to disallow bicycle traffic yet allow aircraft.

The aircraft user groups who advocate for these airstrips have worked very hard to keep them open. I know Schafer only allows a limited number of annual charter flights, per an agreement with the USFS, but all private traffic is allowed.

The airstrips in Idaho and Montana have a long history as well as firefighting value, so luckily they're spared. I think the only user who is happy about Wilderness designation is the one who has no interest in anything but foot travel. I can see the point of the view of the group opposing WPG, but I also see the fact that they're allowed to operate in Wilderness as a good sign for other interest groups. I'd be happy if all "Wilderness" meant was no development and no road travel.

Originally Posted by uncle crud

they logically respond to money and the promise of money. that's the logic you're looking for.

Unfortunately that is a promise I cannot make nor keep.

Originally Posted by Dantheman

You wouldn't want to do that now even it it was legal. I decided to loop the east and west forks of Butler Fork via the Desolation trail this summer trail running. The desolation trail section was a completely fucked, overgrown thrash almost the entire way. No maintenance had probably been done in decades. Best part, I didn't wear a shirt so by the time I was done I was completely covered in welts. It looked like I had diaper rash over my entire upper body.

We can't maintain the trails now in the wilderness because we have no funding, so lets just make more wilderness. YEAH! People are smart.

We can't maintain the trails now in the wilderness because we have no funding, so lets just make more wilderness. YEAH! People are smart.

They ARE smart, about 10 steps ahead of us actually.
They want people OUT of these places, period. This is the point:



Do you know what the Wildlands Project is?

Do you know what Agenda 21 is?

They are real globalist policies. Fully documented and out in the open, not conspiracy. Not just stuff some quack made up on the internet. Research it and get back to me.

Until then, stop banging your head against the wall, it does you no good.