Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    BoZone
    Posts
    429

    NY Times article- When Biking and Bears Donít Mix

    "Conservationists worry that the popularity of recreational mountain biking and e-bikes in public lands leads to unsafe conditions for humans, as well as for bears and other wildlife." and "Some mountain bikers revel at bombing down trails at 20 or 30 miles per hour on single-track trails that hikers also frequent."
    http://https://www.nytimes.com/2019/...nal-parks.html

    Seems like a anti-bike piece that will find a receptive audience unfortunately...
    Buy the ticket...take the ride.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    9,059
    The biologist they interviewed is our local anti bike nut job. They've been pumping anti bike propaganda out of the biker that died a few years ago since before he was even buried. They are, of course, perfectly happy to overlook the fact that the vast majority of bear maulings are hunters and hikers. But whatever. Bikes are bad.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    177
    the article tries very hard to link together mountain biking and e-biking, which is completely disingenuous, considering how few popular mountain bike trails in the west allow e-bikes. most mountain bikers don't want e-bikes on their trails, and anti-biker types REALLY hate e-bikes, and mountain bike access is a separate issue from e-bike access. to someone who doesn't bike or doesn't spend any time on public land in the west, they might assume that e-bikes are common on USFS land in sensitive wildlife habitat.

    the concern that bikers are being unsafe by going 20-30mph is ridiculous. should we stop people from rock climbing and mountaineering on public lands? should we stop elderly frail men from walking on pathways in grand canyon national park in 110 degree heat? the concern about bikers encountering bears is also obviously overblown from a statistical perspective. elk hunting in grizzly country is very dangerous too, but we let hunters accept those risks.

    I would like to have more data on the impacts of recreation on wildlife, but the current data is very inconclusive. the vail elk study they cite is also questionable, considering that rampant real estate development along the i70 corridor and adjacent valleys has greatly impacted winter range for elk.

    elk respond to recreation, but there is no evidence that it is this response that results in increased mortality or reduced populations, which the article does admit. elk seem to prefer certain areas for calving and you really don't want to disturb them during calving season, so it's not difficult to close trails during elk calving season in specific areas where that's a concern. the skyline trail in Jackson is closed until July 1st specifically because of concerns about elk calving. the elk are gone in July and August, so there is no concern about bikers causing harm to elk populations.

    damn this article

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Missoula
    Posts
    1,369
    The forest service put out a reply that basically said, "nah, don't worry about it."

    https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...t23R2unohKcob4

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,838
    Quote Originally Posted by jamal View Post
    The forest service put out a reply that basically said, "nah, don't worry about it."

    https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...t23R2unohKcob4
    It appears that the way they segmented the activities people were doing when killed cuts the documented risk in half of what it seems to actually be for biking and running They had hiking and walking together as 12% However they put biking and running separate with biking at 3% and running at 4%. Why separate the fast moving activities but combine the slow moving ones? It should really be biking and running at 7% and hiking or walking at 14%. It still seems like biking and running are probably more noisy and bears have great hearing. Walking/hiking you might be more likely to catch a bear by surprise. If they hear you coming they tend to go the other way.
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    in your second home, doing heroin
    Posts
    14,628
    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyBill View Post
    "Some mountain bikers revel at bombing down trails at 20 or 30 miles per hour on single-track trails that hikers also frequent."
    I take exception to that.

    The true reveling doesn't happen until I'm tickling at LEAST 35mph.
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Missoula
    Posts
    1,369
    The last bear encounter I had on trail was on a really fast one where I regularly see 30+ and that bear was already running the other way. Unfortunately it was running straight down the trail and went around a corner so I was stopped there for a bit wondering where it went and what I should do. Kept going after about a minute. Didn't see it again.

    My thought is that a fast moving, quiet mtb potentially has less impact on wildlife. A bike zips by at 15-20mph, does the bear or elk or whatever 50 yards off trail even notice or care? It probably notices the group of loud, slow moving hikers or horse riders.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    in your second home, doing heroin
    Posts
    14,628
    Quote Originally Posted by jamal View Post
    The forest service put out a reply that basically said, "nah, don't worry about it."

    https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...t23R2unohKcob4
    It seems weird they would lump black and grizzly bears together. Their reactions to bikes and moving people are so different.
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    san diego
    Posts
    1,678
    Quote Originally Posted by LesterSmoove View Post
    the article tries very hard to link together mountain biking and e-biking, which is completely disingenuous, considering how few popular mountain bike trails in the west allow e-bikes. most mountain bikers don't want e-bikes on their trails, and anti-biker types REALLY hate e-bikes, and mountain bike access is a separate issue from e-bike access.
    Well except that e-bikers and manufacturers are trying their hardest to play it off like e-bikes are no different from regular mountain bikes and should have the same access. It doesn't help that outside of the USFS, treatment by land managers is completely inconsistent with many simply sticking their heads in the sand. Then you have e-bikers themselves who ignoring rules and riding where ever they want. All this is going to turn access for mountain bikes and e-bikes into the same issue. We may not lose access to areas we can currently ride, but this will make it a lot harder to gain access to things like WSA's, Wilderness, PCT that some are fighting for.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Carbondale
    Posts
    10,579
    Quote Originally Posted by kidwoo View Post
    It seems weird they would lump black and grizzly bears together. Their reactions to bikes and moving people are so different.
    At what latitude do black bears turn brown?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    in your second home, doing heroin
    Posts
    14,628
    Quote Originally Posted by grskier View Post
    At what latitude do black bears turn brown?
    It's not latitude, it's elevation. They get burnt and crispy up high.

    About 9,500ft
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Carbondale
    Posts
    10,579
    Quote Originally Posted by kidwoo View Post
    It's not latitude, it's elevation. They get burnt and crispy up high.

    About 9,500ft
    Oh, I thought that was deer to elk.

    Speaking of which, do you know where they store the brake bumps during winter?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    4,567
    Quote Originally Posted by grskier View Post
    <snip>
    Speaking of which, do you know where they store the brake bumps during winter?
    On the Front Range! Duh.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    in your second home, doing heroin
    Posts
    14,628
    Quote Originally Posted by skaredshtles View Post
    On the Front Range! Duh.
    Yeah I'd always assumed they just keep them in longmont at vail headquarters.

    Not sure where ikon keeps theirs. Storage space in aspen is too pricey.
    Besides the comet that killed the dinosaurs nothing has destroyed a species faster than entitled white people.-ajp

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    4,567
    Quote Originally Posted by kidwoo View Post
    <snip>
    Not sure where ikon keeps theirs. Storage space in aspen is too pricey.
    Green Mountain in Lakewood.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,919
    Bears have as much right to ride bikes as anyone else.

    Name:  index.jpg
Views: 278
Size:  9.8 KB
    Ooof!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    5,980
    I thought this thread was about burly gay dudes. NTTAWWT

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Posts
    2,868
    Quote Originally Posted by evdog View Post
    Well except that e-bikers and manufacturers are trying their hardest to play it off like e-bikes are no different from regular mountain bikes and should have the same access. It doesn't help that outside of the USFS, treatment by land managers is completely inconsistent with many simply sticking their heads in the sand. Then you have e-bikers themselves who ignoring rules and riding where ever they want. All this is going to turn access for mountain bikes and e-bikes into the same issue. We may not lose access to areas we can currently ride, but this will make it a lot harder to gain access to things like WSA's, Wilderness, PCT that some are fighting for.
    But ebikers keep saying that any concerns over land access are just "whataboutism" and aren't real! Good to highlight situations like this and throw it back in their faces. I don't even blame the industry at this point but annoying as hell when consumers tout that BS.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,919
    Coming down to the wire on a set of decisions here in SW MT.

    Let the hyperbole begin.

    bozemandailychronicle.com
    We have time to shape future of the Gallatin Range
    By Joseph Scalia III Guest columnist
    4-5 minutes

    Imagine it’s the year 2065. The Gallatin Valley has a population of 250,000 people. There’s an active, thriving recreational spirit here, and mountain bikers converge from all over the country to ride Porcupine and Buffalo Horn Creeks, two iconic lower-elevation valleys of the Gallatin Range. It’s 7 a.m. on a Saturday morning in late July and the large, paved parking lots at both trailheads are filled with Outbacks, BMWs, Audis, SUVs and cars of all sorts. Mountain bikes adorn them all, and youthful crowds of vibrant riders chat, excited and abuzz after their morning espressos and pastries at the many gourmet cafes just down the road at Big Sky, itself now home to 45,000 human denizens of the land.

    Soon, the bright-eyed, spirited mountain bikers will test their mettle riding to the headwalls, in and out of side canyons, and over the top of the ridge between the valleys. Others will ride the latest, sleekest full suspension E-bikes to ease their way over the rough terrain. Now and again, a stray elk might be seen and raved about. And there’s even the ghost of the grizzly bear to be marveled at, having roamed abundant and free here a few decades ago. Five years back, a couple of folks claimed to have seen one of the bruins, browsing on a ridgetop meadow, but it was probably just a wishful fancy that the young are prone to.

    In 2020, there was still a viable grizzly population here and, on a given day, one would have seen hundreds of elk in these valleys. When the valleys were still part of the Hyalite Porcupine Buffalo Horn Wilderness Study Area (HPBH WSA) and were thereby allowed to be traveled by humans only at the impacts occurring in 1976, when the area was designated a WSA. There had been talk of making the entire WSA a designated wilderness and including all roadless lands of the Gallatins in that legislation.

    People even talked of maintaining the elk herds in their enormous numbers. They talked about making highway crossings for the grizzly bear, so that the Yellowstone grizzly population of then 700 could maintain its genetic viability by connecting to grizzly bear populations north of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem as they passed through the Porcupine and Buffalo Horn valleys. But it’s 2065 now, and those daydreams are of a bygone era.

    But what if? After all, it is actually still 2020. We do have the chance to chart a different future. What if our ideals were to go in a different direction than the on-the-go and on-the-rise majority and instead were to go toward one shared by some of today’s young and old alike? Imagine that we do set aside the entire WSA as wilderness and keep out mechanized travel. What even if we were to do that with the entirety of roadless lands left in the still wild Gallatins?

    Imagine that we do not flood the area with our adrenaline but succeed at keeping it wild, even as we grow in human numbers. Can we see ourselves butted up against a Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and managing ourselves in a way that maintains those lands’ great biological diversity and original wildlife intactness?

    Can we keep our fitness balanced, as a fitness of the body and the soul, a soul needy of wildlands, and a body requiring an earth filled with intact, large wild spaces and the health those spaces give to the planet and its ability to sustain human life? Do we have the forethought and self-restraint to set aside a Gallatin Mountains Wilderness and preserve the earthly and spiritual riches still clinging to existence just outside our ever-increasing doors?

    Joseph Scalia III, is president of the Gallatin Yellowstone Wilderness Alliance and a former president of Montana Wilderness Association.
    Ooof!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Livingston, MT
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunion 2020 View Post
    Coming down to the wire on a set of decisions here in SW MT.

    Let the hyperbole begin.
    Jesus Christ Bunion, thanks for that disturbing alarmist bullshit from one of our local crazies. Ya, bikes will cause the collapse of an ecosystem for sure!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    20,470
    What a dipshit.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •