Thanks for your efforts with trailwork and education. Although I’m still pretty ticked off at the careless damage done by a handful of bad moto riders, I do realize that there are good and bad eggs in every user group. Thanks for doing your part!

As much as I dislike motos, I realize that they do have the right to be on the trails. However, if motos are damaging the trails moreso than other trail users, there needs to be some education and, if necessary, restrictions put in place–plain and simple.

And yes… there are bad users in all user groups. Mountain bikers are inflicting damage, yes, but they can in no way do the harm that one twist of the throttle can do on a wet and muddy trail. At the end of the day, a motorcycle with its extra heft and powerful motors can do more damage to a sensitive trail than any other user group. Therefore, motos might just need extra regulations placed on their use in the area to maintain trail quality for all other user groups.

How about banning mountain bikes? Surely you won’t argue they don’t also damage the environment? It’s just that mountain bike damage is an amount that you as a mountain biker are comfortable with?

Or is it just your mountain biking trails you’re worried about?

What a hypocrite.

Thanks for your thoughts and your comment on this issue. Yes, we both enjoy the beauty of the area, but liking/disliking rough trails is definitely not the major issue here. The issue is near trail destruction.

Over the course of the summer the trails have improved, but some areas are irreparably damaged so much so that the USFS in conjunction with local user groups (motos, mtb, hike, equestrian) have already built new trail sections and are planning more with wholesale changes to better manage wet trail traffic come next Spring.

The balls are in motion here and who knows… all “mechanized” traffic may get banned at some point if we can’t all work together.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and re-state the obvious… when the trails are wet and soggy, a motorcycle does more damage than a bike can ever do. That said, both do damage and both are to blame for making the trail worse.

If the current trails can’t support motos, then we all need to work together to build trails that do support motos, mountain bikes, hikers and horses to be happy. As it stands now, much of the trail network in AF Canyon simply can’t handle the traffic it’s getting.

In the end, there will have to be some sort of compromise by all users (limited access, rotating usage, trail closures when wet), but in the end, our natural resources should be the #1 concern here… not who can ride and when. If we as users are destroying the trails, then we all deserve to be banned.

If you feel comfortable with your use of the trails and can confidently say that you have done no harm, then congratulations. But, if you have knowingly ridden through muddy sections, throttled through other sections and spun out just for fun, then we will all have to live with the results of that type of behavior and all user groups will be hurt.

In the end, education is the answer. Riders need to know when to turn around and they need to educate each other on how to take care of nature and the public land we are so blessed to have–I don’t care if you walk, bike, throttle, swim, sashay, skip or ride a goat. If you don’t respect the trails and take care of them then we are all going to have to live with the results of the few careless people who don’t. That’s what scares me.

1st – What a MTB rider views as destruction of the trails(Jason), a MOTO rider views as heaven(Galen). For an MTB rider to enjoy they want the buttery smooth trail while the MOTO rider is very happy with rougher/rutted terrain. The natural beauty of the area is obviously what both agree on and why all want to be there. The challenge of single track is also very appealing to both.

2nd – I have noticed that although MTB riders are looking for a solution so both can utilize the trail system, they revert back to if none can be found that MOTO riders should be banned. These two observations have created certain conclusions that some people might want to hear and others may not. The MTB rider seems to be of the opinion that their rights to enjoy the area take precedence over the rights of the MOTO rider. The MOTO rider has not once in this blog stated that if no equal use solution is found the MTB rider should be banned. The MTB rider states it repeatedly. As someone who enjoys both types of riding very much (just at different times of the year), I would not like to see either one banned. Coexistence is definitely possible but it is not ideal for either user.

We know this because it is already being done in other areas of UTAH. The forest service does this by alternating trail usage each year. It keeps any one trail from deteriorating to the point where an MTB rider will no longer enjoy it. Although it is not ideal for either rider because of the usage restrictions,it is a compromise that allows both groups to continue to enjoy the area (just not on the same trails at the same time). You can never change the fact that an MTB rider considers a rough and rutted trail deterioration while a MOTO rider considers it better/more challenging riding.

However, you can educate and create more tolerance and understanding of each other. Banning one group of users to give another preferential usage/treatment of PUBLIC land should NEVER be an option. The MTB riders here are showing the presumption that their rights come first. I’m pretty sure that if the MOTO riders were trying to ban the MTB riders as a final solution, the MTB riders would be pretty upset.

My loss this year has been my reluctance to return to some of these trails that have been damaged by excessive runoff and overuse too early in the season by all users. Yeah, it’s easy to pick on the motos, but in the end if we’re not careful, all “mechanized” travel could be restricted.

BTW… motos were allowed in AF for years, then banned for a few years before being re-allowed in the past 2-3 years. The unfortunate thing is that not all users (motos, mtb’s, equestrians) are educated in proper trail use nor do all of them have the same reverence to the areas that you and I both do. That’s the key.

Thanks again for your comment… very well put.

My pure joy of flicking my way through the aspens was infinitely compounded by the fact that for the 24 years I’ve lived in Utah, I’ve been pretty much confined to the bleakest, un-vegetated, dustiest, ruttiest, unimproved garbage to ride on, that I began to wonder if I’d died without knowing it, and was now experiencing my idea of heaven. I’ve seen area after area get closed to riding for reasons not confined to “damage.” Development of housing, businesses, roads, infrastructure, etc., have left many of us not just feeling like second-rate citizens, but quite blatantly and unabashedly treated as if we have no right to exist. And it never matters how much money we get charged, or how much time we put in trying to make up for the few idiots; it’s never enough. There is a very vocal minority who will not stop until all public lands are locked up, except to allow whichever recreation they themselves participate in. The methods they use are reprehensible, and they have a lot of political power due to the services of a few lawyers well-trained in guerrilla legal tactics. For several years I quit riding, because it takes all the joy away when you have to worry that despite your best efforts to pitch in and get along, it’s never good enough.

We are not the enemy. Many of us love and revere those trails just as much as those of you on other vehicles (including shoes), and we take care to tread as lightly as possible. And we’re willing to show up and help maintain trails, too.

That said, I will say that the tone of this thread has been much more civilized than I’ve seen elsewhere, and I appreciate the sentiment that you’re at least willing to consider options other than immediate closure to motorcycles. I can’t help the feeling, though, that this is really just lip service, intended to be used as evidence that you really did “try” to work it out with OHVer’s, before providing some pictures showing it was really a hopeless cause all along. So I sound a little cynical, I hear you saying. Well, yes, I admit that after years of fighting for reasonable access to more than just the West Desert, and years of being treated like a second-class citizen, I do have a bit of a persecution complex.

I’m not unsympathetic to your concerns. In fact, I don’t want those trails to be destroyed any more than you do. And I feel just as powerless as anyone else to defend them against the losers of all stripes who treat them disrespectfully. But I still bristle when I hear people demanding trail closures because “they’re not the same as they used to be.” These are the same people who buy a $50,000 high-clearance 4-wheel-drive truck with a Triton V-10 engine so they can feel cool driving down Main St. USA; but they drive it like it’s made of fine crystal that will shatter if they cross a gutter without stopping completely first, unless you happen to be in front of them on the highway on-ramp, because Lord-help-you if you impede their progress. I’m tired of people who believe that whatever it is they do is the most important and most valid activity, and that what anyone else does is therefore inferior and subject to derision, harassment, and legal exclusion. I can’t explain the selfish actions of those who disregard the rules of trail hygiene, but I will not quietly abide elitists who are so limited in their ability to process ideas that the only solution they default to is closure. To me, this kind of thinking comes from the same geniuses who gave us “Zero-Tolerance” rules in our public schools and our legal system; and my response is that zero-tolerance is born of simplistic and mindless mental laziness. Those limited by this inability to find creative solutions ought to be excluded from the discussion. But, unfortunately, political behavior is rarely scientific, so I’ll continue to wonder when the “No Mechanized Vehicles” signs are going to re-appear in AF Canyon…

Oh, and for those of you who didn’t notice my careful choice of words; I intentionally used the word “mechanized” instead of “motorized,” because it’s an example of the craftiness of the elitists who are working toward full wilderness designation.

So, mountain bikers, be watchful, and not so quick to support talk of closure, because when the signs go up outlawing mechanized vehicles, it includes you, too.