Whats the consensus on the IMBA?

[JD]

I just got a solicitation in the mail to donate and dont know much about them. Yay or nay on my $40 donation?

[raisingarizona13]

Depends on who you talk to but I say yay.

[jono]

You like trail access. IMBA and your local club seem like no-brainers...are you asking if $40 is enough? Too much?

I'm sure you'll find someone here that feels about IMBA the way most bikers feel about the (W)ilderness-supporting groups that advocate closing trails to mountain bikes. They have their reasons and maybe they'll tell you all about them, but I haven't heard an argument against IMBA's effectiveness.

[Catch22]

I wish IMBA would just keep its focus on advocacy. IMO they are far too involved in building and establishing building guidelines. I feel like they have become the governing body of trailbuilding and are really starting to throw their weight around and have become numb to what riders really want. I'd much rather support a local trail group than IMBA as I think it's easier to see that money put to work. Just seems like that money is going to go much further with a local org than a big national organization that has way more bills to pay.

There was a really interesting discussion on this recently over on BetterRide's blog, well worth a read of the article and the comment section. Lots of input from both sides including some pretty discouraged trail builders:
http://betterride.net/blog/2013/moun...-too-powerful/

[rideit]

I am conflicted, and for once, will remain mostly silent. They have done a lot of good, I'll concede that.

[kidwoo]

I just got a solicitation in the mail to donate and dont know much about them.

let me put it this way: I'm actually considering putting up a picture of goatse in this thread to answer that question.

[mntlion]

Yes, they have helped to get more trails in my area, and Its nice to see both the IMBA groomed, built, manicured trails, as well as the more natural ones.

also a good resource for road trips to find areas to ride. (IMBA epic, classics, etc)

$40, is MUCH less then what we spend on a single day lift ticket in the winter.

[t.odd]

I wish IMBA would just keep its focus on advocacy. IMO they are far too involved in building and establishing building guidelines. I feel like they have become the governing body of trailbuilding and are really starting to throw their weight around and have become numb to what riders really want. I'd much rather support a local trail group than IMBA as I think it's easier to see that money put to work. Just seems like that money is going to go much further with a local org than a big national organization that has way more bills to pay.

There was a really interesting discussion on this recently over on BetterRide's blog, well worth a read of the article and the comment section. Lots of input from both sides including some pretty discouraged trail builders:
http://betterride.net/blog/2013/moun...-too-powerful/

thanks for the link, looking forward to reading that.....but I pretty much agree with your first paragraph, support advocacy but they've become much much more than that, and I'm not sure it's for the better. I'm a long time volly for the Whistler Off-road cycling assc and a member of another 3 clubs, so I'm firmly in the support your local groups club camp.

[toast2266]

+1 for Conflicted.

[robnow]

Yes, they have helped to get more trails in my area, and Its nice to see both the IMBA groomed, built, manicured trails, as well as the more natural ones.

Curious as to how IMBA has helped locally compared to local BVMBA?

[hortence]

You'll have more ability to refocus IMBA on advocacy if you are a member.

But $40 seems high. I think I paid $25/year and got some pretty swank socks out of the deal. I'm up to two pair now.

Work with your local club though, as they do a lot of the trail building.

[mntlion]

Curious as to how IMBA has helped locally compared to local BVMBA?

both are key, IMBA does more of the background talks at a higher level.

BVMBA does more of the hands on work, and keeping to what parks and IMBA have agreed on.


this is only MY take, and odds are the reality is different...

[rideit]

Good discussion brewing here, with some valid points all around.
And some garbage, of course.
http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-buildin...ba-885426.html

Have to say it took stones for Gene to get vocal, and it is a conversation I have heard muttered in backshops and trail days for a few years now, so I think it was going to happen.
Hopefully they can use this constructively, and not entrench.

[Telemahn]

+1 for conflicted.

Pro's:
Advocacy at the federal level on policies for BLM, USFS, NPS etc. They bring a lot of good information to a discussion that was once very anti-bike.
They have developed a body of work on trail building and trail management that helps a lot of groups get goind or get past issues that prevent new trails from going in.
They partner with the locals to build lots of fun flowy trails.
They provide a good network of information on trails around the country

Con's
They have opposed wilderness designations that I support even if it means I can't ride my bike there anymore.
Their trails tend to be too wide, too overbuilt, and too much like giant pump tracks.

My approach has been to support my local chapter Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance with my time and some financial resources, but I have avoided joining IMBA because of the whole wilderness thing. I'm a crotchety old leather boot wearing telewhacker and I just can't get over it, so piss off.

[rideit]

IMBA's communication director just chimed in on that thread, so obviously it's got some legs. Should be interesting to see where it goes.

[raisingarizona13]

Your local political pulling power is a lot more greater when you have the imba behind you. Patrick from the south west division is coming to our public meeting this month here in Flagstaff and I am very happy he is. He is very excited to see legal dh trails on NF land outside of a ski area I can tell you that. And these aren't some mamby pamby flow/jump trails (not that I don't love those two), the trails we are looking to create have some of that but are mostly steep and more natural techy dh lines.

[jono]

+1 for conflicted.

Pro's:
Advocacy at the federal level on policies for BLM, USFS, NPS etc. They bring a lot of good information to a discussion that was once very anti-bike.
They have developed a body of work on trail building and trail management that helps a lot of groups get goind or get past issues that prevent new trails from going in.
They partner with the locals to build lots of fun flowy trails.
They provide a good network of information on trails around the country

Con's
They have opposed wilderness designations that I support even if it means I can't ride my bike there anymore.
Their trails tend to be too wide, too overbuilt, and too much like giant pump tracks.

My approach has been to support my local chapter Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance with my time and some financial resources, but I have avoided joining IMBA because of the whole wilderness thing. I'm a crotchety old leather boot wearing telewhacker and I just can't get over it, so piss off.

I notice you say wilderness and not Wilderness, so on the off chance that we're talking about different things here, and not just using different notation, are you saying IMBA opposed protection of an undeveloped area with something less restrictive than the federal Wilderness designation? I haven't heard of them doing that, but maybe there's a first time for everything. I've probably spent too much time listening to that debate, but it certainly seems that protection is available without blocking mountain bikes (typically referred to as w not W). Obviously there is also a place for full on restriction in some places and circumstances, but living in ID I've seen entirely too many instances of the big W being a great opportunity for horse and mule traffic to carry in tourists and hunters and trash big chunks of land or 'swap' unpaved trails for paved ones to create more jobs for bulldozer operators, so I find it hard to get behind that as an environmental approach. Any idea how many meth shacks are in the Frank Church? Sometimes a little legal traffic is a good thing.

My firm hope is that as the Sierra Club et al continue to be blocked when they take a hard line for that designation (and old timers with romantic notions about horses die off) they'll accept that bikers are a better ally. Maybe they can even come up with a designation for no-horses-allowed and we can apply that, say, on either side of the CDT in Montana where the Wilderness designation stalled and bikes were kicked out. Like the grandfathered road, but singletrack. Sorry if this seems to need padding; I'm really not interested in the back and forth name calling kind of debate on this despite my passion for access. It's really only interesting if it's interesting.

[skinipenem]

Few if any political/professional/advocacy organizations are perfect; however, they 'in general' support the majority of us. IMBA is not perfect, but it does a lot of good for two wheeled freaks like us. Is the $40 tax deductible?

[JD]

^^ yep, tax deductible ^^

[Sirshredalot]

Yes, IMBA is a good organization worth supporting. Not a perfect organization, but good.

[Vt-Freeheel]

nay.....

[ColMan]

Is IMBA still in Boulder? I always found it ironic that they chose to setup shop/spend money in an area where the city council is comprised of a bunch of douchebags who are VERY anti-mountain biking.

[Empty Beer]

I believe we, as a community, would be much worse off without a strong IMBA. They are key to big picture issues and do assist with local issues. One bike tire costs more than $40 and might get me through a Summer. Our collective investment in IMBA will get us a lot further. It's a no brainer to me.

[TheMessenger]

FYI Federal "Wilderness" legislation is horribly anti-bike, 100% of the time. No one who rides bikes or wants access should ever support it under any circumstance. Nether should IMBA

[Particle]

Another conflicted.

I've kinda settled on getting a membership with a local club who uses IMBA insurance being as far as I'll go. That doesn't exist on the Wasatch Front so... yeah.