Montana Roadtrip. Tour of to be closed trails

[livefreerdie]

Line Creek Plateu was already Research Natural Area, so it's status stays the same (open to bikes)

In addition to Backcountry Area, Key Linkage Area also has some language about system trails, so there may be some issues there.

[toast2266]

The preferred alternative F does indeed have the entire Lionhead as a "Backcountry Area".

It also says " In all backcountry areas where mountain biking is suitable, mountain biking would
be suitable only on approved system mountain biking routes. " which is language I don't recall hearing before. Will the FS have to designate "mountain biking routes"? Opens up a whole nother can of worms.

Line Creek Plateau looks like it's designated a Research Natural Area. No idea what that means.

That sounds like they're sorta kicking the can down the road. Seems like they're skipping the RWA designation (which is a win), but it also sounds like they're leaving it open for a fight in the travel plan. So they'll get the forest plan in place, then do travel planning a few years later. In the travel plan stage, wilderness groups will try to limit bike access as much as possible to curtail established use arguments and make it easier to pursue an rwa designation in the next forest plan (20+ years from now).

[hick]

That sounds like they're sorta kicking the can down the road. Seems like they're skipping the RWA designation (which is a win), but it also sounds like they're leaving it open for a fight in the travel plan. So they'll get the forest plan in place, then do travel planning a few years later. In the travel plan stage, wilderness groups will try to limit bike access as much as possible to curtail established use arguments and make it easier to pursue an rwa designation in the next forest plan (20+ years from now).

Toast knows how the game is played. I think this is dead nuts on.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[livefreerdie]

I don't think they would have gone through the trouble of un-recommending the RWA on Lionhead if they just wanted to kick us out later. Backcountry Area is a new opportunity to freeze the footprint of existing use without kicking anyone out, they haven't had that option before.

In the travel plan stage, wilderness groups will try to limit bike access as much as possible

Well yes, that will still happen.

[toast2266]

I don't think they would have gone through the trouble of un-recommending the RWA on Lionhead if they just wanted to kick us out later. Backcountry Area is a new opportunity to freeze the footprint of existing use without kicking anyone out, they haven't had that option before.

I don't think the forest service wants to kick bikes out. They want something that's legally defensible and generally makes sense. But they also know that various wilderness groups aren't shy about suing to get their way. So if the forest service doesn't think an rwa makes sense in that area, they can still throw the wilderness groups a bone by signaling that bikes are negotiable in the travel planning stage. The forest service would do that in hopes of holding off a lawsuit, and with the knowledge that the wilderness groups are probably going to be more knowledgeable and more effective in the travel planning discussions.

[kidwoo]

I don't think the forest service wants to kick bikes out. They want something that's legally defensible and generally makes sense. But they also know that various wilderness groups aren't shy about suing to get their way. So if the forest service doesn't think an rwa makes sense in that area, they can still throw the wilderness groups a bone by signaling that bikes are negotiable in the travel planning stage. The forest service would do that in hopes of holding off a lawsuit, and with the knowledge that the wilderness groups are probably going to be more knowledgeable and more effective in the travel planning discussions.

To my knowledge there is no 'travel management' component that involves pedal bikes. That's strictly a motorized thing, not 'mechanized'.

The backcountry designation is the administrative attempt that's been long lacking. IE: acknowledging that bicycles are not a strip mine. The wilderness society has had a problem distinguishing the two in the past.....at least in their real product: solicitation emails.

[toast2266]

To my knowledge there is no 'travel management' component that involves pedal bikes. That's strictly a motorized thing, not 'mechanized'.

The backcountry designation is the administrative attempt that's been long lacking. IE: acknowledging that bicycles are not a strip mine. The wilderness society has had a problem distinguishing the two in the past.....at least in their real product: solicitation emails.

Yeah, I believe the travel plan rule only requires addressing motorized uses. I'm just speculating here since they make it sound like there will be some aspect of route designation for pedal bikes. That sounds like they'll effectively be travel planning for bikes as well, at least in that one location.

But I don't really know - there's a good chance I'm just reading into this a bit too much.

[panchosdad]

Yeah, I believe the travel plan rule only requires addressing motorized uses. I'm just speculating here since they make it sound like there will be some aspect of route designation for pedal bikes. That sounds like they'll effectively be travel planning for bikes as well, at least in that one location.

But I don't really know - there's a good chance I'm just reading into this a bit too much.

It's possible it's just an awkward way of saying you have to ride on system trails, but it sure is an odd way to phrase it if that's the case.

[evasive_MT]

It's possible it's just an awkward way of saying you have to ride on system trails, but it sure is an odd way to phrase it if that's the case.

What I’ve seen in other documents is just “system trails.” This definitely sounds like a subcategory of nonmotorized system trails.

[Dantheman]

Yeah, I believe the travel plan rule only requires addressing motorized uses.

"In recent years, electric motorized mountain bikes have become nearly indistinguishable from traditional mountain bikes. Therefore, we have determined that allowing traditional mountain bikes on non-motorized routes is unenforceable and all bicycle travel on these routes shall be prohibited."


That's my cynical take. Hopefully it doesn't happen.

[evdog]

Don't give them any ideas!

[toast2266]

It's possible it's just an awkward way of saying you have to ride on system trails, but it sure is an odd way to phrase it if that's the case.

Maybe, but I think that'd actually be a somewhat significant change in how bikes are managed. Currently, I don't know of any rule requiring bikes to stay on trails (system or otherwise). I believe cross country travel (i.e. off trail) is generally allowed for bikes the same way it's allowed for horses and foot traffic.

Disallowing cross country travel probably wouldn't be too big a deal in most places, since bikes generally don't work that well off trail. But there are a lot of trails that are non-system trails that get plenty of use.

[panchosdad]

Maybe, but I think that'd actually be a somewhat significant change in how bikes are managed. Currently, I don't know of any rule requiring bikes to stay on trails (system or otherwise). I believe cross country travel (i.e. off trail) is generally allowed for bikes the same way it's allowed for horses and foot traffic.

Disallowing cross country travel probably wouldn't be too big a deal in most places, since bikes generally don't work that well off trail. But there are a lot of trails that are non-system trails that get plenty of use.

I know that our NF district travel plan forbids off trail travel by bikes, but I don't know how common that is. It's their way of enforcing illegal trail usage.

[toast2266]

I know that our NF district travel plan forbids off trail travel by bikes, but I don't know how common that is. It's their way of enforcing illegal trail usage.

Huh. Interesting. Are any other user groups singled out for off trail travel? Like, can you hike on an illegal trail, but not bike on it?

[panchosdad]

Huh. Interesting. Are any other user groups singled out for off trail travel? Like, can you hike on an illegal trail, but not bike on it?

HIkers and Horseback riders can go anywhere, so I would assume there are no illegal trails for them. Bikes and Motos have to stay on system trails. I think it's a reasonable regulation actually.

[toast2266]

HIkers and Horseback riders can go anywhere, so I would assume there are no illegal trails for them. Bikes and Motos have to stay on system trails. I think it's a reasonable regulation actually.

That'd be tough around here. There are quite a few popular trails that aren't system trails. But they're not really "illegal" - a bunch of those trails have been around for decades. Everyone knows about them, and generally speaking, the forest service doesn't have any problem with their existence or use.

[kidwoo]

"travel management" is a specific rule, with specific guidance and very specific douchebag groups of do gooders that show up whenever it's involved. As it stands, it very specifically applies to motors because that's what was formed after the two executive orders (nixon, then carter) issued to deal with off route motorized vehicles on public land. Of course what it's turned into is a complete shit show.

And yes you can walk all over sensitive plants all you want but damn you to hell if you ride a bicycle off trail. Check with your local wide brimmed hat walking pole trail Karen for clarification

[evdog]

I still find it amusing (and aggravating) that hikers and equestrians can go off trail pretty much anywhere yet they still bitch and moan about sharing trails with bikes.

[rideit]

I think the only fair solution is to ban hikers and equestrians from established trails.
There, no conflict, it’s a win-win!

[kidwoo]

In my experience the real, functional answer is just ignore what happens legally and just continue to go build trails. Dirtbikers are still bedding in their own, mountainbikers still go build illegally, and the hateful old hikers association gets to pat themselves on the back and send out donation solicitations because they won a paper victory. The USFS, BLM, and your favorite state and county "representatives" can sit around scratching their butts, wondering why this keeps happening after they completely ignore what's essentially a disenfranchised recreation population.

Hell, half the trails out there are 'adopted' non-network trails. You can only lead a horse to water so many times.

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

Quick highjack: Line Creek probably not melted out enough yet?

[livefreerdie]

I hear the Beartooths have melted more than usual for this time of year, so now would probably work but I haven't seen it myself.

[idahospud]

Not sure if anyone here is familiar with the shit show that is Ridge to Rivers in Boise, but somebody there is gently calling them on their bullshit: https://www.instagram.com/ridge_to_ruins/

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

Not sure if anyone here is familiar with the shit show that is Ridge to Rivers in Boise, but somebody there is gently calling them on their bullshit: https://www.instagram.com/ridge_to_ruins/

WTF

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

I hear the Beartooths have melted more than usual for this time of year, so now would probably work but I haven't seen it myself.

I assume it's pretty easy to hitch a ride in a pickup bed up the pass with a bike? Other trails nearby worth riding if I make the drive down there?