Quote Originally Posted by Aggie_Ama View Post
Thanks for explaining.

I think in Texas it is a bit of a sore subject because of parts of Big Bend that could be used but only parts are allowed and I think it is only a small fraction when you consider how huge Big Bend is. I am not 100% sure but it was in reference to Big Bend I first heard about this being a positive change and that was from an IMBA advocate.

I do not know the whole issue since I am very new to mountain biking. Being married to a biologist (by education not trade at the moment) am a little leary of encroaching on any natural place by bike, foot, car, boat, etc..... Especially places where sensitive plants and animals may live.
Mountain Bike advocacy has an interesting history. As people powered sports go, it's pretty new to the scene. For a long time land managers weren't quite sure what to think of it, and there was a lot of misunderstanding and conflict. It's quite sad that in California, kind of the birthplace of mountain biking ( that, or Crested Butte) Many areas are closed to riders - they got closed by the horse lobby before anyone had a chance to really have conversations back and forth between user groups and land managers.

The access thing is huge: many mountain bikers feel they have been unfairly locked out of areas due to misunderstandings, or excessive lobbying by other more powerful (well funded) groups.

There is a lot of science being applied to the issue now. There have been quite a few impartial trail impact studies that have looked at bike-hiker-horse trail use and which one has the most destructive use.


I could go on forever on this topic, sorry....