Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Fairweather

More Mountain Bike Access

Recommended Posts

Many mountain trails in Canada are open to mountain bike usage, such as the approaches to Assiniboine, Berg Lake/Robson, etc. In the USA, mountain bikes are allowed on only a very, very limited number of trails in non-wilderness designated US Forest land such as Lower Lena Lake, ????, etc.

 

The reasons for this ban are highly subjective IMHO. Harvey Manning states in one of his books that mountain bikes travel at an "unnatural speed" and are, hence, banned under The Wilderness Act. But can't the same be said for skis?

 

Is it simply the 'arrogance of the booted' that prevents reasonable use of non motorized, non fossil fuel burning mountain bikes? I would support more access for mountain bikes on our mountain trails; certainly in Wilderness Areas, and even on some national park trails. Reasonable restrictions based on real/physical environmental concerns could be put into place, such as limits on tire tread that could erode downhill stretches and tight turns (ie: slicks only?), short 'walk-only' sections, etc.

 

How do they do it in Canada? What problems have arisen? Which trails down here would you like to see opened up to mountain bikes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just takes one guy, taking out a group of Brownies on a certain Oregon Descent trail at high velocity, to ruin it for everyone.... hellno3d.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The skis vs. bike comparison isn't exactly fair. Skis ride over snow which inherently protects the ground underneath. Bikes, esp. if the ground is at all wet, rut it, esp. trails.

 

I'm not saying I wouldn't like more mountain bike access, but I dont think skis are a valid comparison.

 

The trails I would most like to see opened, if any are, would be lowland trails. The alpine is no place for bikes, but what about trails like the big beaver trail, the approach to olympus,etc? It seems like some restrictions on seasonal use could keep abuse to a minimum. I think another problem would be the conflicts between trail user types. Hikers probably wont like bikes flying by.

 

What really pisses me off is trails where bikes aren't allowed, but fucking horses are. The horses tear shit up worse than any bike I've ever seen. That doesn't even address the fact that they shit right on the trail. I think I am going to start shitting on the trail. evils3d.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly, one must ask, what is the critical speed of man? What is the maximum speed a body attains when hurdling down a cliff? This is the true definition of "natural speed". And my vote is that we become a province of Canada. After all, hasn't Canada got it right on every issue? Gay marriage? Persciption drugs? Legal THC? My vote is to open the Mount Constance and Mailbox Peak to MTB. Radical sick downhill is where it is at! In our National Parks? Imagine, the first descent via mountain bike of Mount Rainier! Mondo crevass ripping jumps! Bunny hopping off of seracs! Limiting it to slicks could make it even more interesting. I'd like to bomb down from Lake Constance with a pair of Fat Boys. It's reasonable. And people could govern themselves, just like the corporations do. yelrotflmao.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference lies in the fact that singletrack is usually trail

 

Ski descents are looking for the untracked.

 

Horses, also, follow trails, but I wouldn't want to meet one on a MTB descent. shocked.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What really pisses me off is trails where bikes aren't allowed, but fucking horses are. The horses tear shit up worse than any bike I've ever seen. That doesn't even address the fact that they shit right on the trail. I think I am going to start shitting on the trail. evils3d.gif

 

yelrotflmao.gif Few years back in R&I or climbing there was an editorial called "They shoot horses, dont they?" ( after a Patrick McManus book) that dealt with the same issue in the SAME way. Do a search for it, it was pretty poignant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bikes aren't allowed not because they travel at greater than "natural speed", but because they are a mechanized form of travel...and as such, are banned from Wilderness areas.

 

Horses do a lot more ecological damage 99% of the time though. it's more than just some horse shit on the trail, it's the exotic plant species they can bring in and the trampling caused in fragile ecosystems.

 

Anyways, horses were here before the Wilderness Act and mountain bikes weren't. That's probaby another reason for the exclusion.

 

there are some debates about this right now in Idaho. the Boulder-White Clouds over by the Sawtooths is a prime example. the local mountain biking community is against a new wilderness area there because they will be excluded from their current riding area. it'll be interesting to see how that goes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What really pisses me off is trails where bikes aren't allowed, but fucking horses are. The horses tear shit up worse than any bike I've ever seen. That doesn't even address the fact that they shit right on the trail. I think I am going to start shitting on the trail. evils3d.gif

It's my understanding horses are allowed from a legacy point of view - and that if managers had their way, they wouldn't, but they're small enough not to be a big problem, but big enough to cause a big PR problem.

 

Having lived in an area VERY popular with mountain bikes, they tend to not be as compatible with other trail users as horses or hikers or dogs. Not to mention trails need to be of a different design (no switchbacks!) in order not to be turned in to ugly eroded messes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Horses fuck up the trails WAY more than responsible mountain bikers do. The problem is that only 2% of mountain bikers are responsible mountain bikers. By this I mean they don't ride when trails are muddy and most susceptible to damage, or ride without skidding swithbacks or over other terrain obstacles.

 

I'm an avid mountain biker, and I've seen so many trails destroyed by assholes on bikes that I have no problem supporting the virtual ban on bikes in wilderness or sensitive use areas.

 

- a s s m * n k e y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, bikes are no longer allowed on the Assiniboine trail (the new, faster access to the mountain is via the south side, up Assiniboine Ck...you can do the peak in 18 hours car to car, apparently!...better than 30KM of flat hiking up to Magog). Both it and the first part of the Berg Lake trail where bikes are allowed (not the whole thing), and the Diamond Head trail above Squamish (another bikes allowed "trail") are actually roads, or certainly road-like, not really trails, and hence aren't going to be impacted by erosion as much, and have plenty of safe passing room. Outside of these rare road-sized trails, there are few other mountain trails in Canada that allow bikes, so be careful in drawing conclusions based on which country the trail is in. Bikes are just as vilified here...for both good and not so good reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bike a lot in Capitol Forest and I hike anywhere the hell but there. Hiking is allowed, but CF's a "working forest," which means there are clearcut operations all over the place, and it's just not much fun for hikers.

 

That seems to have been a good solution for hiker-biker conflicts, and it lets at least some people use the public forests that are leased off to timber companies. The open areas are usually dryer than under the trees so it suits bikers just fine. So let 'em ride on the patchy clearcuts and leave the 100% woodsy stuff to folks who appreciate it.

 

Forcing MTBers to ride downhill on slicks would get somebody injured the first day you figured out how to enforce something like that. Squishy bikes with aggressive treads do reduce skidding, but the object is to let you fricken fly down the trail. I've run up on hikers a couple times, and "natural" or not, it's just not a fair encounter.

 

I hate to whine about one policy by blaming another policy, but it seems like the best solution is to manage biking on the public lands that are being timbered and keep bikes out of wilderness lands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The skis vs. bike comparison isn't exactly fair. Skis ride over snow which inherently protects the ground underneath.

Read Fairweather's post again, Josh. What he was comparing between bikes & skis were their speed, not the mark they leave on the landscape.

Bikes, esp. if the ground is at all wet, rut it, esp. trails.

From what I've heard, studies have been done which show that, under dry trail conditions, bikes erode trails no more than boots. Sorry, don't have sources to cite... go google it if ya want to prove me (well, prove my sources) wrong.

The alpine is no place for bikes, but what about trails like the big beaver trail, the approach to olympus,etc?

Why?? I mean, alpine vegetation is certainly no place for bikes, but it's also no place for boots. If ya stay on trail, what's tha big deal?

 

I say MOST trails, even most in Nat'l Parks, should be open during the dry season. (Which would, however, keep the approach to Olympus closed to bikes all year tho!) wink.gif

What really pisses me off is trails where bikes aren't allowed, but fucking horses are. The horses tear shit up worse than any bike I've ever seen.

Yeh no shit. madgo_ron.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what speed would a person begin to ablate? Assume sea-level, and set the max speed to a velocity at which average skin temperature in the direction of travel is just below the pain threshold. Tha should be the new back country human velocity standard for skiers and mountain bikers, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trails with no use and no mantanence will get screwed up.

??? Trails with no use will revert to nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed the mountain goats around Gunn peak were really hard on the trails and left crap everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.wheeled-locusts.org/ . Love the name.

 

My opinion: ^ this guy's bogus, but I'd still agree that bike areas are more degraded (and in the end that's what counts.)

 

I also think Galibraith in b'ham is a pretty good example of biker's getting some free land use. thumbs_up.gif

 

Maybe we could consider mtb parks in agency managed areas as mitigation for other recreation impacts. Or Smoky key give-a-ways. grin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bikes aren't allowed not because they travel at greater than "natural speed", but because they are a mechanized form of travel...and as such, are banned from Wilderness areas.

 

 

Skis with climbing skins. Also "mechanized".

 

Also, I would love to see a copy of the Wilderness Act in its original form. Are you sure "motorized" hasn't been changed to "mechanized" by interest groups? I'll try to do a little research in the next couple of days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never been bothered by horses but I have had the shit knocked out of me by the out-of-control-idiot faction of mtn bikers... I'm glad they don't have access to NP trails and wilderness areas. There's just too many that don't know or use trail etiquette out there and view hiker's as a pain in the ass to them getting thier adrenaline fix on that "sweet downhill run" they worked so hard for on the way up. eh, fuck'em... til they ALL grow up.

 

Horses give access to places who wouldn't be able to get there and experience the area otherwise. Like people getting up there in age, handicapped,ect... thumbs_up.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public Law 88-577

88th Congress, S. 4

September 3, 1964

 

AN ACT

To establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes.

 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

 

 

SHORT TITLE

Section 1. This Act may be cited as the "Wilderness Act".

 

 

WILDERNESS SYSTEM ESTABLISHED STATEMENT OF POLICY

Sec. 2. (a) In order to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness; and no Federal lands shall be designated as "wilderness areas" except as provided for in this Act or by a subsequent Act.

 

 

(b) The inclusion of an area in the National Wilderness Preservation System notwithstanding, the area shall continue to be managed by the Department and agency having jurisdiction thereover immediately before its inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. No appropriation shall be available for the payment of expenses or salaries for the administration of the National Wilderness Preservation System as a separate unit nor shall any appropriations be available for additional personnel stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because they are included within the National Wilderness Preservation System.

 

DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS

 

© A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation ; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.

 

NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM -- EXTENT OF SYSTEM

Sec. 3. (a) All areas within the national forests classified at least 30 days before the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service as "wilderness", "wild", or "canoe" are hereby designated as wilderness areas. The Secretary of Agriculture shall --

 

(1) Within one year after the effective date of this Act, file a map and legal description of each wilderness area with the Interior and Insular Affairs Committees of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives, and such descriptions shall have the same force and effect as if included in this Act: Provided, however, That correction of clerical and typographical errors in such legal descriptions and maps may be made.

 

(2) Maintain, available to the public, records pertaining to said wilderness areas, including maps and legal descriptions, copies of regulations governing them, copies of public notices of, and reports submitted to Congress regarding pending additions, eliminations, or modifications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regulations pertaining to wilderness areas within their respective jurisdictions also shall be available to the public in the offices of regional foresters, national forest supervisors, and forest rangers.

 

 

(b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten years after the enactment of this Act, review, as to its suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as wilderness, each area in the national forests classified on the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service as "primitive" and report his findings to the President. The President shall advise the United States Senate and House of Representatives of his recommendations with respect to the designation as "wilderness" or other reclassification of each area on which review has been completed, together with maps and a definition of boundaries. Such advice shall be given with respect to not less than one-third of all the areas now classified as "primitive" within three years after the enactment of this Act, not less than two-thirds within seven years after the enactment of this Act, and the remaining areas within ten years after the enactment of this Act. Each recommendation of the President for designation as "wilderness" shall become effective only if so provided by an Act of Congress. Areas classified as "primitive" on the effective date of this Act shall continue to be administered under the rules and regulations affecting such areas on the effective date of this Act until Congress has determined otherwise. Any such area may be increased in size by the President at the time he submits his recommendation to the Congress by not more than five thousand acres with no more than one thousand two hundred and eighty acres of such increase in any one compact unit; if it is proposed to increase the size of any such area by more than five thousand acres or by more than one thousand two hundred and eighty acres in any one compact unit the increase in size shall not become effective until acted upon by Congress. Nothing herein contained shall limit the President in proposing, as part of his recommendations to Congress, the alteration of existing boundaries of primitive areas or recommending the addition of any contiguous area of national forest lands predominantly of wilderness value. Not withstanding any other provisions of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture may complete his review and delete such area as may be necessary, but not to exceed seven thousand acres, from the southern tip of the Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado, if the Secretary determines that such action is in the public interest.

 

© Within ten years after the effective date of this Act the Secretary of the Interior shall review every roadless area of five thousand contiguous acres or more in the national parks, monuments and other units of the national park system and every such area of, and every roadless island within, the national wildlife refuges and game ranges, under his jurisdiction on the effective date of this Act and shall report to the President his recommendation as to the suitability or nonsuitability of each such area or island for preservation as wilderness. The President shall advise the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of his recommendation with respect to the designation as wilderness of each such area or island on which review has been completed, together with a map thereof and a definition of its boundaries. Such advice shall be given with respect to not less than one-third of the areas and islands to be reviewed under this subsection within three years after enactment of this Act, not less than two-thirds within seven years of enactment of this Act, and the remainder within ten years of enactment of this Act. A recommendation of the President for designation as wilderness shall become effective only if so provided by an Act of Congress. Nothing contained herein shall, by implication or otherwise, be construed to lessen the present statutory authority of the Secretary of the Interior with respect to the maintenance of roadless areas within units of the national park system.

 

(d) (1) The Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior shall, prior to submitting any recommendations to the President with respect to the suitability of any area for preservation as wilderness --

(A) give such public notice of the proposed action as they deem appropriate, including publication in the Federal Register and in a newspaper having general circulation in the area or areas in the vicinity of the affected land;

 

(B) hold a public hearing or hearings at a location or locations convenient to the area affected. The hearings shall be announced through such means as the respective Secretaries involved deem appropriate, including notices in the Federal Register and in newspapers of general circulation in the area: Provided, That if the lands involved are located in more than one State, at least one hearing shall be held in each State in which a portion of the land lies;

 

© at least thirty days before the date of a hearing advise the Governor of each State and the governing board of each county, or in Alaska the borough, in which the lands are located, and Federal departments and agencies concerned, and invite such officials and Federal agencies to submit their views on the proposed action at the hearing or by not later than thirty days following the date of the hearing.

 

(2) Any views submitted to the appropriate Secretary under the provisions of (1) of this subsection with respect to any area shall be included with any recommendations to the President and to Congress with respect to such area.

 

 

(e) Any modification or adjustment of boundaries of any wilderness area shall be recommended by the appropriate Secretary after public notice of such proposal and public hearing or hearings as provided on subsection (d) of this section. The proposed modification or adjustment shall then be recommended with map and description thereof to the President. The President shall advise the United States Senate and the House of Representatives of his recommendations with respect to such modification or adjustment and such recommendations shall become effective only on the same manner as provided for in subsections (b) and © of this section.

 

USE OF WILDERNESS AREAS

Sec. 4. (a) The purposes of this Act are hereby declared to be within and supplemental to the purposes for which national forests and units of the national park and national wildlife refuge systems are established and administered and --

 

(1) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to be in interference with the purpose for which national forests are established as set forth in the Act of June 4, 1897 (30 Stat. 11), and the Multiple Use Sustained-Yield Act of June 12, 1960 (74 Stat. 215).

 

(2) Nothing in this Act shall modify the restrictions and provisions of the Shipstead-Nolan Act (Public Law 539, Seventy-first Congress, July 10, 1930; 46 Stat. 1020),the Thye-Blatnik Act (Public Law 733, Eightieth Congress, June 22, 1948; 62 Stat. 568), and the Humphrey-Thye-Blatnik-Andersen Act (Public Law 607, Eighty-fourth Congress, June 22.1965; 70 Stat. 326), as applying to the Superior National Forest or the regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture.

 

(3) Nothing in this Act shall modify the statutory authority under which units of the national park system are created. Further, the designation of any area of any park, monument, or other unit of the national park system as a wilderness area pursuant to this Act shall in no manner lower the standards evolved for the use and preservation of such park, monument, or other unit of the national park system in accordance with the Act of August 25, 1916, the statutory authority under which the area was created, or any other Act of Congress which might pertain to or affect such area, including, but not limited to, the Act of June 8, 1906 (34 Stat. 225; 16 U.S.C. 432 et seq.); section 3(2) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796 (2) ); and the Act of August 21,1935 (49 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.).

 

 

(b) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, each agency administering any area designated as wilderness shall be responsible for preserving the wilderness character of the area and shall so administer such area for such other purposes for which it may have been established as also to preserve its wilderness character. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, wilderness areas shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.

 

PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES

 

© Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport , and no structure or installation within any such area.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS

 

(d) The following special provisions are hereby made:

(1) Within wilderness areas designated by this Act the use of aircraft or motorboats, where these uses have already become established, may be permitted to continue subject to such restrictions as the Secretary of Agriculture deems desirable. In addition, such measures may be taken as may be necessary in the control of fire, insects, and diseases, subject to such conditions as the Secretary deems desirable.

 

(2) Nothing in this Act shall prevent within national forest wilderness areas any activity, including prospecting, for the purpose of gathering information about mineral or other resources, if such activity is carried on in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment. Furthermore, in accordance with such program as the Secretary of the Interior shall develop and conduct in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, such areas shall be surveyed on a planned, recurring basis consistent with the concept of wilderness preservation by the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present; and the results of such surveys shall be made available to the public and submitted to the President and Congress.

 

(3) Not withstanding any other provisions of this Act, until midnight December 31, 1983, the United States mining laws and all laws pertaining to mineral leasing shall, to the extent as applicable prior to the effective date of this Act, extend to those national forest lands designated by this Act as "wilderness areas"; subject, however, to such reasonable regulations governing ingress and egress as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture consistent with the use of the land for mineral location and development and exploration, drilling, and production, and use of land for transmission lines, waterlines, telephone lines, or facilities necessary in exploring, drilling, producing, mining, and processing operations, including where essential the use of mechanized ground or air equipment and restoration as near as practicable of the surface of the land disturbed in performing prospecting, location, and , in oil and gas leasing, discovery work, exploration, drilling, and production, as soon as they have served their purpose. Mining locations lying within the boundaries of said wilderness areas shall be held and used solely for mining or processing operations and uses reasonably incident thereto; and hereafter, subject to valid existing rights, all patents issued under the mining laws of the United States affecting national forest lands designated by this Act as wilderness areas shall convey title to the mineral deposits within the claim, together with the right to cut and use so much of the mature timber therefrom as may be needed in the extraction, removal, and beneficiation of the mineral deposits, if needed timber is not otherwise reasonably available, and if the timber is cut under sound principles of forest management as defined by the national forest rules and regulations, but each such patent shall reserve to the United States all title in or to the surface of the lands and products thereof, and no use of the surface of the claim or the resources therefrom not reasonably required for carrying on mining or prospecting shall be allowed except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act: Provided, That, unless hereafter specifically authorized, no patent within wilderness areas designated by this Act shall issue after December 31, 1983, except for the valid claims existing on or before December 31, 1983. Mining claims located after the effective date of this Act within the boundaries of wilderness areas designated by this Act shall create no rights in excess of those rights which may be patented under the provisions of this subsection. Mineral leases, permits, and licenses covering lands within national forest wilderness areas designated by this Act shall contain such reasonable stipulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture for the protection of the wilderness character of the land consistent with the use of the land for the purposes for which they are leased, permitted, or licensed. Subject to valid rights then existing, effective January 1,1984, the minerals in lands designated by this Act as wilderness areas are withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and from disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral leasing and all amendments thereto.

 

(4) Within wilderness areas in the national forests designated by this Act, (1) the President may, within a specific area and in accordance with such regulations as he may deem desirable, authorize prospecting for water resources, the establishment and maintenance of reservoirs, water-conservation works, power projects, transmission lines, and other facilities needed in the public interest, including the road construction and maintenance essential to development and use thereof, upon his determination that such use or uses in the specific area will better serve the interests of the United States and the people thereof than will its denial; and (2) the grazing of livestock, where established prior to the effective date of this Act, shall be permitted to continue subject to such reasonable regulations as are deemed necessary by the Secretary of Agriculture.

 

(5) Other provisions of this Act to the contrary notwithstanding, the management of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, formerly designated as the Superior, Little Indian Sioux, and Caribou Roadless Areas, in the Superior National Forest, Minnesota, shall be in accordance with the general purpose of maintaining, without unnecessary restrictions on other uses, including that of timber, the primitive character of the area, particularly in the vicinity of lakes, streams, and portages: Provided, That nothing in this Act shall preclude the continuance within the area of any already established use of motorboats.

 

(6) Commercial services may be performed within the wilderness areas designated by this Act to the extent necessary for activities which are proper for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the areas.

 

(7) Nothing in this Act shall constitute an express or implied claim or denial on the part of the Federal Government as to exemption from State water laws.

 

(8) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the several States with respect to wildlife and fish in the national forests.

 

 

STATE AND PRIVATE LANDS WITHIN WILDERNESS AREAS

Sec. 5. (a) In any case where State-owned of privately owned land is completely surrounded by national forest lands within areas designated by this Act as wilderness, such State or private owner shall be given such rights as may be necessary to assure adequate access to such State-owned or privately owned land by such State or private owner and their successors in interest, or the State-owned land or privately owned land shall be exchanged for federally owned land in the same State of approximately equal value under authorities available to the Secretary of Agriculture: Provided, however, That the United States shall not transfer to a state or private owner any mineral interests unless the State or private owner relinquishes or causes to be relinquished to the United States the mineral interest in the surrounded land.

 

 

(b) In any case where valid mining claims or other valid occupancies are wholly within a designated national forest wilderness area, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, by reasonable regulations consistent with the preservation of the area as wilderness, permit ingress and egress to such surrounded areas by means which have been or are being customarily enjoyed with respect to other such areas similarly situated.

 

© Subject to the appropriation of funds by Congress, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to acquire privately owned land within the perimeter of any area designated by this Act as wilderness if (1) the owner concurs in such acquisition or (2) the acquisition is specifically authorized by Congress.

 

GIFTS, BEQUESTS, AND CONTRIBUTIONS

Sec. 6. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture may accept gifts or bequests of land within wilderness areas designated by this Act for preservation as wilderness. The Secretary of Agriculture may also accept gifts or bequests of land adjacent to wilderness areas designated by this Act for preservation as wilderness if he has given sixty days advance notice thereof to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Land accepted by the Secretary of Agriculture under this section shall become part of the wilderness area involved. Regulations with regard to any such land may be in accordance with such agreements, consistent with the policy of this Act, as are made at the time of such gift, or such conditions, consistent with such policy, as may be included in, and accepted with, such bequest.

 

 

(b) The Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to accept private contributions and gifts to be used to further the purpose of this Act.

 

ANNUAL REPORTS

Sec. 7. At the opening of each session of Congress, the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior shall jointly report to the President for transmission to Congress on the status of the wilderness system, including a list and descriptions of the areas in the system, regulations in effect, and other pertinent information, together with any recommendations they may care to make.

 

Approved September 3, 1964.

_____________________

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: HOUSE REPORTS: No. 1538 accompanying H.R. 9070 (Comm. on Interior & Insular Affairs) and

No. 1829 (Comm. of Conference).

SENATE REPORT: No. 109 (Comm. on Interior & Insular Affairs).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 109 (1963): Apr. 4, 8, considered in Senate.

Apr. 9, considered and passed Senate.

Vol. 110 (1964): July 28, considered in House

July 30, considered and passed House, amended, in lieu of H. R. 9070.

Aug. 20, House and Senate agreed to conference report."

 

 

----------------------------------------------------

as for my feelings...skis have been around for centuries whereas the bicycle, as we know it, was invented in the 1880's. Mountain bikes did not come along until the 1970's, which is after the Wilderness Act was passed. That said, I hate horses in Wildernesss a hell of a lot more than mountain bikes. boxing_smiley.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first Wilderness Act was passed in 1964 it did not mention bikes. The first repack race held in Marin County near Mt. Tam in 1976 is considered the start of Mountain Biking. Specialized came out with the Stumpjumper (first commercial mountain bike)in about 1982. I saw one on the route to Everest BC in 1983. Current WA passed in 1984 banned bikes mostly because most folks thought they were used by manics bombing fire roads (not found in Wilderness Areas anyhow)go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Public Law 88-577

88th Congress, S. 4

September 3, 1964

 

...there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport , and no structure or installation within any such area.

 

----------------------------------------------------

as for my feelings...skis have been around for centuries whereas the bicycle, as we know it, was invented in the 1880's. Mountain bikes did not come along until the 1970's, which is after the Wilderness Act was passed. That said, I hate horses in Wildernesss a hell of a lot more than mountain bikes. boxing_smiley.gif

 

This definition must include canoes and kyaks too?? ..Yet, they are allowed on lakes within Wilderness boundaries. And what about skis w/skins? (You haven't addressed my previous question) Clearly a 'ratcheting/mechanical' system.

 

How are we currently deciding which 'mechanical transport' is PC enough?

 

BTW, I think horses and pack animals are a completely valid means of transport in our wilderness areas.

 

mmmmmmm....I smell elitism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the act uses the word 'primitive' for a reason, IMO. boats have been around for millenia. sure kayaks are more modern, but they float just like a boat from 1000 years ago. skis and skins existed for centuries before the Act too. I recall reading once about old animal hide skins being used. as for the binding issue...yes, they are mechanical, esp randonee gear...

 

I'm not saying that i don't think that horsies aren't a valid means of transport in wildernesses, i just don't like them from an ecological and social perspective. most of this comes not from the animal itself, but from the person on it. if everyone on a horse used weed-seed-free hay (i.e. no exotic species in it) then i'd be much more okay with horses. or if someone could go without taking so much stuff as to necessitate 3 horses full of gear per person... from the environmental/ecological perspective 3 loaded horses do a lot more damage than one person with a full pack.

 

the issue you brought up is a good one that goes pretty deep. if we were to interpret the WA strictly, there would be no cameras, cams, synthetic fibers, etc because they are not "primitive." but who decides what is PC enough? and how? keep in mind though, that the FS, BLM, USFWS, and NPS administer Wilderness areas differently. for example, the NPS believes a chainsaw to be a minimum tool for clearing trails whereas the FS believes a crosscut saw to be the minumum tool. a lot has changed since the Act was passed--recreation use has exploded, gear has gotten better, etc-- and that needs to be kept in mind. Just because there is something that makes doing an activity easier, it doesn't mean that it has to be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PC is easy to spell when you can't make a real point. IMHO it's not about what predates what, or which definitions of "mechanical" you can think up in order to shift blame to somebody else's form of transportation. It's up to the relevant agencies to intrepret the definitions in the Act according to what makes sense.

 

It makes no sense to equate a 27 speed bicycle to a canoe, especially in terms of their likely impact by a few on other users in general. And it sounds to me like that's what your gripe is--private liberties vs the public good. I don't think there's much cover for that sentiment in the Wilderness Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×