July 4, 2015
To the Editor:
It's not that often the Forest Service makes the
"right" moves before being dragged into court,
but this prohibition of mountain bikes is
laudable, even though it represents virtually
the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the
scale of the landscape that should be closed to
motorized and mechanized abuse.
Some will shriek and complain about my use of
the adjective "abuse," but the reality is the
presence of mechanized and motorized vehicles
(and yes, thats what mountain bikes
are—vehicles) in any landscape
has a negative impact on biodiversity, ranging
from water pollution, to vegetation destruction
and invasion by weeds, wildlife harassment and
displacement and alienation from habitat, and
degradation of the quality of recreational
experience for those that like to walk, hike,
picnic, or horseback ride.
And I want to stress that this impact is not
confined to a few bad apples, as the mountain
biking industry likes to say in dismissing it's
impact; it is all users with machines in
ecosystems whether
their invasion is off trail or on trail. Because
some biker declares himself / herself to be a
non entity--"Hey, its not me! I didn't do
that!"--does not negate the reality of their
presence in an ecosystem.
So, good on the Forest Service for this start.
Now let us, the public, and the regulatory
agencies like the Forest Service, look at a much
broader and comprehensive elimination of
mechanically facilitated abuses of landscapes.
Brian L. Horejsi
Ecologist / Wildlife Scientist
Frequent user of public lands, except where
I've been driven out by mechanized / motorized
intrusion. |
