Lawsuit Seeking to Ban Mountain Bikers From Teton Wilderness Study Area Thrown Out Due to Not Having Legal Standing

Mar 25, 2021 at 9:38
by James Smurthwaite  
Local Flavours Eastern Idaho

A lawsuit that sought to ban mountain bikers from the Palisades Wilderness Study Area in Wyoming has been thrown out, the Jackson Hole News and Guide reports.

Wilderness Study Areas are protected areas of land that may one day be designated as Wilderness. Unlike in true Wilderness areas, motorized and mechanized activities like mountain biking are allowed in Wilderness Study Areas so long as the level of use remains similar to the time of designation.

The lawsuit was filed in 2019 by Mountain Pursuit, a group that advocates on behalf of Wyoming's hunters. It was an attempt to sue the Bridger-Teton National Forest (BTNF) for allowing mountain bike access and argued that mountain bikers and ATV drivers were in danger of eroding the Wilderness eligibility of the Palisades. Mountain Pursuit particularly cited increased mountain biking in Black Canyon and on the Lithium Trail near Teton Pass, and it described a "negative impact...on big game, specifically elk and deer." The lawsuit also targeted ATV use in the Shoal Creek Wilderness Study Area.

However, U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Freudenthal dismissed the case as it had no legal standing. "In short, Mountain Pursuit does not identify the specific federal conduct, decision or action at issue and, because of that, it fails to explain how any of the general allegations... would constitute final agency action," she said. "It is Mountain Pursuit’s burden to identify a discrete and legally-required action that the [U.S. Forest Service] failed to take.”

The judge believed that Mountain Pursuit took issue with “about 30 years of perceived U.S. Forest Service mismanagement of certain trails,” rather than a specific unlawful decision, and dismissed the case. After an earlier initial dismissal, Mountain Pursuit's attorneys amended the complaint, but Freudenthal ruled again that the group failed to identify a specific action from the past six years.

Local Flavours Eastern Idaho

The case was thrown out in August last year, but it was not widely publicized until Mountain Pursuit's founder, Rob Shoal, wrote about it in the organization's newsletter. He said, "What we really wanted to do was demonstrate that hunting organizations truly care about wildlife and habitat. We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate.”

Freudenthal's order can be read here.


156 Comments

  • 324 30
 So the guys who go out to shoot and kill wildlife are worried that we're out here... what, annoying the wildlife?
  • 175 326
flag Beachboy223 (Mar 25, 2021 at 11:12) (Below Threshold)
 Actually the guys that go out and kill wildlife (myself included) are the main driving force behind wildlife management and protection. When you buy a hunting license, part of those profits go to maintaining wildlife populations and a healthy habitat. So without hunters the forests that we love to bike in would not be in as pristine condition
  • 114 21
 They could also be called "the guys who directly or indirectly fund the vast majority of most state wildlife departments."

Yes, disturbing wildlife is an issue, especially in spring.
  • 77 1
 To clarify, I don't necessarily support this litigation and think user groups should try to work together for issues on multi use public land. I hike, bike,dirt bike,and hunt on public land all the time and like seeing people get outside and enjoy our natural spaces.
  • 114 17
 @Beachboy223: You mean part of the profit from hunting licenses goes to pay lawyers for frivolous lawsuits.
  • 92 10
 @Beachboy223: So basically the same argument car drivers use when they claim road supremacy over all other users?

As you stated the fees are primarily for wildlife management and protection, so lets not get all "we're the saviors of the forest" over here.
  • 28 62
flag LOTCP (Mar 25, 2021 at 11:28) (Below Threshold)
 @kingpine: Brosef, roads are a manmade construct specifically and exclusively engineered and build for cars. Wildlands are not. Your stance about saving the wildlands by actively murdering and destroying them is a typical idea your group throws around. I hear logging companies pandering the same flawed thinking. Clearcut it to save it.
  • 29 8
 I watch "Meat Eater" a lot and those guys follow the hunting rules to the letter. Amazing to see and admirable too.
  • 58 12
 @jaame: I'm currently in South Carolina and my experiences in the thin woods they have here involve large numbers of obese white people with compound bows and 30-30 rifles trouncing around the woods shooting anything that moves. Most of these people are trophy hunter mentality and they do not follow the (flawed) rules. In Oregon where I live they tend keep to themselves far away from MTB trails which is much better.
  • 16 11
 @jaame: as do most hunters Smile
  • 44 32
 @Beachboy223: so paying to kill wildlife helps to keep wildlife alive; makes perfect sense.
You could also pay for a lisence and not kill and animals!
  • 32 37
flag laxguy (Mar 25, 2021 at 11:36) (Below Threshold)
 @john303: yes it does, do you know anything about population control?
  • 11 1
 @LOTCP: Huh? The analogy with roads is that drivers often say that they pay all the money for them so they should have exclusive access. Its an analogy, man. My 'stance' is not to murder willdands, whatever the F that means, and I'm not sure which 'group' you think I belong to...
  • 38 18
 @Beachboy223: no you are a part of the conservation efforts, you are not the primary source. And despite the funds hunters out into the system, they also cause an inordinate amount of damage thanks to their largely backwards habits. So GTFO with your bullshit.
  • 6 26
flag joshtuzyk (Mar 25, 2021 at 11:39) (Below Threshold)
 you should start biking at the gun range...
  • 3 7
flag mrjim (Mar 25, 2021 at 11:42) (Below Threshold)
 @Beachboy223:

Good call pal!
  • 21 12
 @LOTCP: Actively murdering and destroying? Great rhetoric the throw around when the reality is we have two user groups (bikers and hunters) that both have a great interest in preserving wild places. Caring about and having great respect for animals is not mutually exclusive with eating them.
  • 31 43
flag LOTCP (Mar 25, 2021 at 12:25) (Below Threshold)
 @texag: I respect you so you don't mind if I murder you and eat your flesh do you? I really don't need to because we have all the food available all the time but, you know, I just LIKE to kill and eat you. Cool? I know you have children back in your den somewhere and they'll die too but dammit, I'm out here trying to protect you!
  • 51 13
 @john303: there's a balance in nature between predator and prey. Hunting may seem brutal but letting prey animals destroy their own habitats and starve due to overpopulation is far more cruel. Hunters do far more for wildlife conservation in the US than we generally do as mountain bikers. I'm not even a hunter but I understand this as a user of public lands.
  • 1 0
 Fackin hippie hunters that's who!!!
  • 8 22
flag NoriDori (Mar 25, 2021 at 12:48) (Below Threshold)
 Shoot and kill mostly just for the fun of it.......
  • 14 8
 @laxguy: over on this side of the pond the populations have been controlled to the point that its rare to see anything bigger than a small animal in the wild.. You guys will catch up with us sooner or later
  • 5 1
 @Beachboy223: truth. All about the balance. Def need to have areas(maybe seasonal) where hunters can operate without endangering other user groups.
  • 5 6
 @john303: yes. Game.management is key.
  • 6 14
flag laxguy (Mar 25, 2021 at 12:54) (Below Threshold)
 @qualms23: doubt it, but thanks for adding this unnecessary and pointless comment.
  • 10 10
 @Beachboy223: keep telling yourself that. Absolute BS
  • 10 4
 @Beachboy223: Only hunt it if your gonna eat it.
  • 25 5
 @laxguy: I know of one specimen that's grossly overpopulated and no-one even cares about it.
It's also funny how the world has made it for millions years without forementioned specimen managing it all but now it suddenly wouldn't work. Hypocritical much?
  • 8 11
 @LOTCP: Why would you use skin color to make your point? You could have said everything you wanted with out the racist part.
  • 12 3
 @LOTCP: you forgot the 12 packs of beer and being intoxicated and littering the forests with garbage.
  • 11 4
 @jwestenhoff: we could reintroduce apex predators that we have slaughtered and have them keep prey animals in check. You know they actually kill the week sick and old and leave the strong to reproduce.
  • 8 3
 @laxguy: nature control is own population as long humans dont screw it up in the first place.
  • 21 6
 @LOTCP: I'm not a vegan, so animals are dying to feed me. They're dying to get you fruits and veggies too.

Given that any time I eat meat, at least one animal had to die to provide it, what is so crazy about going out and obtaining it through my own efforts?

You whole den argument is overwrought. I hunt deer, elk, and antelope, during hunting seasons their young are clearly visible and close to mom, so I just don't shoot any adult females with young.

It almost seems like you have an entrenched position and aren't even open to the idea that others could have a different view that is reasonable, valid, and/or rational. Must be fun.
  • 28 20
 @Beachboy223: Controlling wild life populations is the hunters gospel to keep the killing in full throttle and ejaculate their macho megalomaniac spunk.

(Hunting for food) is all what it should be; not a multi billion dollar sporting outlet with designer clothing and equipment. To add, it should be mandatory that hunting is an inconvenience and not a drive through grab -n-go side of the road stop. Remote areas only, miles from any populated areas unlike places where others use land as a place for daily exercise activity or near dwellings or properties and buildings.

And yes, i was raised under the tutelage of those that did hunt.
  • 5 5
 @Beachboy223: Youe not wrong dude
  • 22 9
 @john303: Here in the USA, hunting organizations have been the biggest drivers of conserving lands. Either directly (starting with Roosevelt, i.e. Yellowstone) or by purchasing hunting licenses or by purchasing land (Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, etc.). The successful rebound in the numbers of wildlife in the USA is directly tied to hunting and fishing seasons. In fact, the state I live in has worked hard to maintain a certain number of hunters and narrows down/type the number of licenses if wildlife numbers get to low.

This is also how several African countries have kept relatively decent populations of animals - elephants, rhinos, etc.

The rule of eating meat should be this: if you won't hunt it, if you won't raise it or you won't pay someone to raise it, you shouldn't eat it. Its far more damaging to planet to get meat at the grocery or a fast food restaurant than taking the time to go out and get meat yourself. There are many more people that recognize this.
  • 2 2
 @Beachboy223: While I agree with you, you have to admit these people don’t understand the meaning of “bad optics”.
  • 5 3
 @CycleKrieg: on an economy of scale and efficiency, going out to buy your meat at a store is orders of magnitude less impactful than those same number being hunted by people in the wild. Whats going on in African countries' wildlife management/game ranges is essentially extortion; give them some so they don't take all.
  • 7 2
 @john303: yep you absolutely right, pay to save the animals to only kill them yourself next weekend. Couldn't be more stupid than that.
  • 6 1
 @LOTCP: The group that filed the lawsuit isn't part of the department of wildlife resources. So no money from hunting licenses went towards the lawsuit.
  • 15 2
 @laxguy: You realize the only reason there is "population control" is becuase the predators were eliminated right? I am not against hunting, I only find the "excuses" laughable. Animals don't need our help and will do just fine once we all are gone.
  • 4 3
 ...the guys who go out to shoot and kill wildlife FOR FUN, that is.
  • 4 6
 @laxguy: "Population control" is such an incredibly wrong and unethical argument.
  • 2 0
 Hey at least they aren't just stabbing them all..
  • 10 3
 @Beachboy223: not sure why people are down voting you. You are correct. Although I am not a hunter, I aspire to be because of the net positive benefits for flora and fauna.
  • 7 4
 @Spin84:"the net positive benefits for fauna and florae" dumbest thing I heard
  • 6 2
 @Beachboy223: I agree with you amazing how narrow minded these people are in the PB comment section
  • 5 14
flag Don23 (Mar 26, 2021 at 7:00) (Below Threshold)
 @Beachboy223: ahhahhahaha yea ok redneck keep shooting animals bc it makes u feel like a big man when indeed ur a big pu$$y ur pennies for a hunting license doesn’t do anything for the forest let’s be real here so go crack a beer and drive ur tractor some more bc ur a useless piece of flesh. Let me see u go hunt bare handed bc any 5yr old can shoot a gun
  • 5 4
 @Beachboy223: Ignore the mental midgets downvoting you.
I personally think dialogue is better than banning one group to the benefit of the other.
Just regulate the use of the area if it's a big stress factor for the animals, banning one group will only lead to friction and less unity.
  • 4 1
 @jaame: Mea Eater is a damn good show, and it's what got me to finally get my hunter's license, which I had been postponing for years.
I think it's very good that Netflix picked it up, as it can have a very positive effect on the dynamic between hunters and non-hunters, while also positively affecting those that don't have the right mindset when it comes to hunting.
  • 8 3
 @BenTheSwabian: Do you eat meat?
If you eat meat bought in a store, then you have no moral high ground over any hunter, period.
  • 5 3
 @Don23: Yah but “hunters” are some how the ignorant ones... Bet you think meat is grown in the grocery store huh?
  • 9 1
 Also in the west we should be way more concerned about new housing and development destroying traditional wintering habitat more then anything. New building around lower mtn areas are killing our wildlife winter havens.
  • 5 1
 I hunt quail, Jeremy. They’re overpopulated in this region and they’re decimating the grub worm population, you got a f*ckin problem with that?!
  • 5 7
 @Losvar: Hold on. I'm not the one trying to defend an anachronistic habit that has nowadays turned into a pastime activity for morally deranged people, who enjoy killing animals for fun. I'm definitley not the hypocrite here. The people who claim to somehow save nature by hunting are.
  • 4 0
 @texag: that's generally because most state forest/game land bureaucracies don't offer mountain bikers, ATV users, and others the opportunity to fund them. virtually everyone I've spoken with would pay an annual fee to have access to expanded riding areas.
  • 3 0
 @RickBullotta: As far as I'm aware, the outdoor industry as a whole has opposed an excise tax that would specifically fund/support agencies that provide a majority of these opportunities. If we're talking specifically about funding wildlife departments at the state level, buy a hunting or fishing license, then don't go hunt or fish if you don't want to. You are directly funding the agency and increasing their funding from the Pittman-Robertson and Dingall-Johnson (if you didn't chuckle I feel bad for you) receipts.

I do pay a small amount ($25/yr) for my offroad vehicle permit to ride my dirt bike on public lands in Colorado. Imagine the funding if parks and wildlife in this state asked non-consumptive users to pay $5 for an annual pass?
  • 5 1
 @ybsurf: Exactly that and a useful reminder, thank you. Nature is perfectly capable of looking after itself and when it’s off balance, it’s purely as a result of human activity. The so-called need for game control for example is totally negated by healthy and varied populations of natural predators. Game control is only the result of natural predators being persecuted by humans in the first place.
  • 1 1
 @Chuckolicious: Yeah, Don't buy a Norco...
  • 1 0
 @Kylemayfield89: those apex predators might keep the MTB population under control too :eeps:
  • 1 0
 if they want to get rid of this group then they just need to be pushing for the return of apex predators instead. It won’t take too many reports of getting taken down and eaten alive by grizzly bears or mountain lions to make most recreational riders to think twice about going to a particular area.
  • 1 0
 @TheUnknownMTBR: know your surroundings keep your head up and carry bare mace.
Or stay home if your scared
  • 1 2
 @ears-in-snow: There will never be "normal" predator populations, as nobody wants their kid eaten by wolves.
  • 4 2
 We are nature. We are part of it. We are a species that is successful over other species. We are not the first species to hunt and kill others and we won't be the last.
  • 2 2
 @jaame: we're the only one that kill for fun or when not hungry, big difference.
  • 1 1
 @ybsurf: check out the concept of surplus killing.
  • 3 1
 @ybsurf: That’s just not true at all.
  • 181 0
 "We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate"

This is what is wrong...
  • 7 0
 You beat me to it!
  • 24 0
 f*ck Rob Shoal. He’s had an obsession with this particular area. What truly effects the deer, elk, bear, and moose in the area, is the heavily trafficked mountain highway less than 1.5mi away to the south as the crow flies. Not to mention the elk don’t migrate through this area in the first place. There is no sanctioned trails further south of this area. Head another 20 miles and you hit another heavily trafficked highway. In the summer you hear semis and dump trucks hitting exhaust brakes from miles away, and can smell burning brakes of tourists in the bottom of the drainage .5 miles from the road. Mountain bikers are the least concern for this area.
  • 2 0
 **Rob Shaul
  • 3 0
 *** Rob Ghoul
  • 2 0
 flat out said they’re only doing it to prove they “care” and now they’ll look for a different excuse to express their care for.

that alone should be worthy of a countersuit to bankrupt them and put an end to such nonsense once and for all.

.
  • 88 1
 As a Hunter and Mountain Biker I see where they are coming from but at the end of the day use groups just need to get along...

I hunt the very same National Forest I ride in here in NC and I do occasionally see hikers and riders while I am trying to hunt Turkey or Deer. As a member of both user groups I am more mellow about this since I enjoy both equally.

Would a rider coming through the area I am hunting scare game? Yes...

I still tag out every year so it sounds like these Hunters are just entitled a$$holes...

The " My needs are more important than your needs" feelings reeks on this one...
  • 7 0
 @JudyYellow Bullseye!!!
  • 6 1
 Ya, especially in Wyoming, the mountain biker/hunter group has a ton of overlap.

This isn't like road biking, where you can ride in the middle of the road and get mad at cars for not accommodating you, and then while you're driving yell at road bikers in your lane.....
  • 1 0
 They’re probably in their 60’s, just a guess
  • 87 1
 "What we really wanted to do was demonstrate that hunting organizations truly care about wildlife and habitat."

So, obviously, suing over mountain bike access was a natural first step...
  • 50 0
 "We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate".

Maybe just poorly worded but this statement seems to epitomize a major problem with many lawyers and our legal system today. From a man with a Family filled with Lawyers.
  • 38 0
 "We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate.” This strikes me as a great way to get future filings dismissed. Nothing impresses judges like learning you were actively seeking to litigate before you even knew what the case was.
  • 40 8
 So the guys that shoot guns at the animals are upset that we are are kicking up dirt?

Seems legit
  • 28 0
 "What we really wanted to do was demonstrate that hunting organizations truly care about wildlife and habitat. We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate."

I think that says it all. Not about an actual issue, simply an expensive PR stunt. Hopefully the above statement is put before a judge considering a cost award when the next meritless claim is similarly dismissed.
  • 29 0
 Teton... this name is always funny in french as it means "nipple". So "Téton Wilderness" is kind of... Hou la la!!!! Smile
  • 14 0
 That's actually where the mountains got their name, at least as far as I've heard... Some French trappers out in the woods without women for a little too long. The mountains reminded them of what they had been missing. Google image Grand Teton to see what I mean.
  • 18 0
 The Grand Tetons were named after tig ol bitties.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Teton?wprov=sfti1
  • 5 1
 @mtbgt: @sjma: Ha ha!! thank you so much for the information. I knew there was something french behind this. I'm not that surprised actually, knowing how sexually inspired we can be, even lost in the middle of nowhere Wink
BTW, Barelli mentioned it in its last video when he met Métailler: "Raymond, mangeur de petits tétons / Raymond, little nipples eater".
Cheers mates! Have fun!
  • 1 9
flag cuban-b (Mar 26, 2021 at 5:55) (Below Threshold)
 Wow this is the FIRST time in history someone has noticed Teton is nipples wow how do you figure it out u must be smart
  • 4 0
 @cuban-b: ... I think your problem has to do with your mommy's nipples. Privation -》frustration -》anger -》hate.
Sigmund Freud explained that very well...
  • 1 7
flag cuban-b (Mar 26, 2021 at 6:22) (Below Threshold)
 @danstonQ: you can do better than a mom joke. Try again lol
  • 1 7
flag cuban-b (Mar 26, 2021 at 6:24) (Below Threshold)
 @danstonQ: omg did u see that new space movie that just came out with some bloke named Skiwalker and Dark Vador. It’s really good u should check it out I’m sure no ones ever seen it before other than me.
  • 1 4
 And it’s: fear — anger — hate — suffering
  • 5 0
 @cuban-b: I love you too Buddy - but don't you have better things to do in your life than wasting your time posting 3 or 4 hateful immature useful comments. Are you bored? Missing love? Missing tétons?
If you don't like something or someone, or if you feel angry, frustrated, whatever, just pass your way and have a good ride instead, for instance.
It's not our fault if you're not happy.

Breathe.
  • 1 0
 @cuban-b: Yeah I saw "The return of the Jedi" something like 35 years ago; I was probably 10y-o... I didn't wanna see it and missed the first ones. I was there to "please" a fellow who loved Star Wars.
I just remember it was spectacular but nothing else. "Entertaining" like you say.

BTW: your cinematographic culture is very impressive Smile
  • 1 0
 @mtbgt: it’s not so different now in the ever expanding age of lesbianism ... I’m assuming that’s why you’re all talking about them.
  • 15 1
 Its a bit like the Southpark episode where the hunter goes "oh my god, its coming right for us" before shooting a rabbit.... but in real life

Murica
  • 12 0
 "We learned a lot with our lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and are looking for another issue to litigate.” They just sound like a bunch of tools looking to cause problems for anyone or anything they disagree with. Ftards!
  • 13 0
 Lumping cyclists in with motorized users seems a little odd. One of these activities disturbs wildlife a whole lot more than the other.
  • 3 1
 Seems like they were basing their complaint on this: www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/pnw_2004_wisdom001.pdf

It still seems like the sound from motors had more impact on elk than bikers, hikers, and horses, and on deer the results were all over the place.
  • 6 0
 The highway 1.5 miles away disturbs the animals more than anyone recreating
  • 9 0
 Moneyed interests are funding groups like these to push lawsuits so they can feel warm and fuzzy about looking at a wilderness area out the back window of their 3rd or 4th home in Wilson. The vast majority of Teton County is already wilderness or national park, which is awesome, but please leave some for the rest of us to enjoy. Yes, many people do carry too much speed at the base of the old pass trailhead, but maybe you should keep an eye on your dog so he stops shitting in the creeks and literally chasing the beaver. Oh, and hunters do use the bike trails on the pass already.
  • 6 1
 At first glance, I would've guessed that this was a lawsuit coming from guides who are gumpy that it's harder to make good on their hunts. Same groups of people who are mad about wolves in YNP, but Mountain Pursuit doesn't appear to be that type of group. I don't know much about hunting, but their issues on their web page seem reasonable. Can someone who hunts tell me if I'm missing something?
  • 10 0
 I think your first assumption was actually correct. I hunt almost every year in central utah with my family and I think they're just throwing a hissy fit because they can't walk 2 minutes away from their truck and bag a 4-pointer whenever they want. I also don't make a living being a guide for the teton crowd of movie stars and tech start-ups, though.
  • 8 0
 Some of their stances are reasonable, some will totally hamstring state wildlife departments in the West. As for the issue at hand, starting a dialogue between user groups would've been a way better way to go about things that suing to remove access. Closing trails during calving times or when animals are near starving during spring could be a reasonable compromise.
  • 8 0
 Specialized and Knolly we need your lawyers
  • 2 0
 Knolly? You mean that straight seat tube story?
  • 6 0
 I wonder how these hunters feel about using motorized vehicles near wilderness areas and within WSAs. I also wonder how they feel about ranchers grazing cattle in WSAs.
  • 6 0
 Personally, I don't want to be riding in open space park that is shared with hunters.
  • 5 0
 "looking for another issue to litigate"

We don't know why we don't bikes, but we'll think of something. When we do it'll be really important.
  • 13 8
 Just here to say that wilderness is a white colonial construct that erases the history of indigenous people on this land.
  • 9 10
 Thanks for trying to make everything about race! Have a great day!
  • 3 0
 Meaning what? We shouldnt protect the delicate biosphere?? All these riders acting like population control of prey species because the vast majority of predators have been eradicated isnt important to ecosystem health sound ignorant. Hunting and eating a prey species is a lot less unethical then buying factory farm meat at the grocery store.
  • 2 0
 @moondustdictator: Or allowing predators to do their job again? For example: Case studies have proven without natural predators, large populations of Elk, will only continue to decline due to CWD, as well as do significant environmental damage. I agree, hunting is good, but it is not the answer. Sometimes I feel like we will learn from our mistakes, then I read up on the comments sections...
  • 3 0
 @RBalicious: I think reintroduction of predators in al lot of areas is great, I voted for the reintroduction of wolves here in colorado, in some areas that hold a lot of livestock however, propositions like wolf reintroduction wont pass, and therefore hunting will be necessary to protect against habitat degregation. Of course there are still yahoos that just kill to kill and dont no one thing about wildlife preservation.
  • 2 0
 @moondustdictator: Definitely, I have a degree in Natural Resource Management and work for a management organization. So I always find these types of arguments interesting. I really like hearing what both sides have to say, yet it always blows me away when a side takes such an arrogant stance of being the “main driving force”, such as this eloquent statement:
“Actually the guys that go out and kill wildlife (myself included) are the main driving force behind wildlife management and protection. When you buy a hunting license, part of those profits go to maintaining wildlife populations and a healthy habitat. So without hunters the forests that we love to bike in would not be in as pristine condition”

A VAST majority of hunters are road hunters, or use some form of motorized transport during their hunt.. “So with out hunters the forests that we love to bike in would not be in as pristine condition?” What a joke! My family has plenty of hunters/fishermen in it and none of them use motorized transport to roam around and “hunt.” They park their truck, and get out and hike all day/as needed. I know this will ruffle some feathers, but the truth hurts for many.

We are merely a species of animal that has inherited a gift that is continually squandered. A vast majority of native tribes were able to live with Nature harmoniously, until the “civilized” man arrived. Then the forest was a scary place that had to be tamed. Over 100 years of horribly mismanagement and we are still marching down that path.
Wish people would start learning some history. Here is a video to learn some history from.
youtu.be/Aa71l-t8bJw
  • 8 2
 Sport Hunting and being entitled , name a more iconic duo.
  • 6 1
 This is great, usually when lawyers get involved everybody loses.
  • 1 0
 Except lawyers
  • 5 2
 environmental activist masquerade as hunters in no way represents hunting out west, most hunters advocate for more accesse to federal lands.
  • 4 1
 That I would be correct, once again the media trying to divide and conquer.. it's all about access to the public certain groups want thing closed to everyone.. except hikers..
  • 1 0
 "In short, Mountain Pursuit does not identify the specific federal conduct, decision or action at issue and, because of that, it fails to explain how any of the general allegations... would constitute final agency action,"

Mountain Pursuit (or rather their attorney) clearly didn't do their homework. Amateurs mistake.
  • 4 3
 The hypocrisy of hunters complaining about bikes having an impact on the environment. Hunting is not a viable form of conservation. All the claptrap in these comments about it saving African wildlife, managing game and protecting species science is not backed up by any studies, other than those sponsored by hunters themselves. Its all a smokescreen for the activity. Id have more respect for hunters if they stopped greenwashing their sport. This idea that humans need to be actively engaged in 'managing' populations in pristine habitats is also farce. Wilderness areas have been around for hundreds of millions of years and very happily managing themselves thus humans claiming we now have to 'control' or 'manage' them is farce. Hunters like to portray themselves as big men and women so be brave and honest. Stop hiding behind fake conservation measures. If you want to go into the wilderness and kill an animal and you want to impact on the faunal balance of the ecosystem, then be honest and own it, dont hide behind fake excuses, that's lame.
  • 4 1
 This would be relevant if humans didnt already kill all the natural predators. But we have so, yes mitigation is necessary for ecosystem health. At least here in North America, idk about Africa.
  • 2 0
 @moondustdictator: Thats kinda weird because last time I checked you had a range of apex and lesser carnivores including coyote, wolf, bear, puma in wilderness areas? Think of all the money spent on hunting in the US and the think about how if you used that to protect those species then you wouldnt need to hunt to 'manage' wildlife?

Funnily enough I do work on this issue in Africa and I can tell you it isnt a viable form of conservation.
  • 1 0
 @bombdabass: Your wrong, if you think we have an effective population of wolves, bear puma in all parts of North America to naturally mitigate against overpopulated prey species I highly doubt you actually work on any sort of conservation issue, anywhere.
  • 2 0
 im beginning to believe that all this mountain biking is contributing to erosion and other negative impacts that are claimed is pure bullshit so certain group can have things all to them selves
  • 1 0
 This article and the reference "Wilderness" article conflict each other regarding if biking is allowed in Wilderness Study Areas. My understanding is that it is not, which is it?
"Wilderness Study Areas are protected areas of land that may one day be designated as Wilderness. Unlike in true Wilderness areas, motorized and mechanized activities like mountain biking are allowed in Wilderness Study Areas so long as the level of use remains similar to the time of designation."

Ref article "Most recently, Montana’s Bitterroot Valley lost 110 miles of singletrack to the Sapphire and Blue Joint wilderness study areas in a series of court battles that hinged on administrative technicalities and inflamed tempers on both sides of the issue."
Confused!
  • 1 0
 The Forest is required to manage these lands to protect them. They may allow uses that were/would have been allowed at them time they were designated, but they have the option to restrict them.
  • 3 1
 Shoal Creek Wilderness Study Area.

Mountain Pursuit's founder, Rob Shoal.

Coincidence or has the Shoal family been in the area long enough to have a creek named after them?
  • 2 0
 Typo in article. His last name is actually Shaul.

@jamessmurthwaite
  • 3 0
 "Looking for another issue to litigate" wtf, get a hobby go ride a bike or something.
  • 1 0
 Underrated comment
  • 4 1
 I hunt with an ebike. Best way ever to get theoufh
  • 2 0
 Would have made more sense to keep mountain bikers off hunting land in risk of being shot.
  • 3 0
 yerrrrrrr
  • 3 0
 yerrrrr
  • 2 0
 Sick riding up there. Ever heard of the boner log?
  • 5 6
 "What we really wanted to do was demonstrate that hunting organizations truly care about wildlife ..."

That's pretty scary ...truly caring about something means that you care about it so much that you want to kill it.
  • 11 2
 The entire concept of the national park service was created by Rosevelt, who wanted to preserve the land so he could hunt the game on that land. Ducks Unlimited preserve wetlands to hunt birds but also preserve wetlands for every other creature that lives in them. Population dynamics have been so thoroughy studied that you can hunt AND preserve populations. With this being said, I don't hunt and find this lawsuit a load of elk poop. But... Hunting and wildlife preservation can happen together.
  • 5 5
 @Sscottt: Yah people don’t want to hear it but hunting is the biggest driver to wildlife conservation. (Which does seem weird I suppose but everything dies or gets eaten eventually, people involved or no.) I also think mtbs have as much right to these areas as any. I hunt and ride.
  • 3 1
 @Sscottt: finally, a legitimate & educated response! Well done
  • 2 0
 Don't mess with the Dutton Ranch you will get a ride to the train station.
  • 1 0
 Couldn't find any pictures from ya know....Wyoming? Jeeze we ain't Idaho for a reason.
  • 1 0
 Posted my reply in the wrong spot...ugh.
  • 2 1
 @Beachboy223: hahaha! That is pretty funny, thanks for the laugh.
  • 1 0
 Sounds like the lithium trail is ebike specific. Nice.
  • 1 0
 As the brat says on Simsons. Ha ha!
  • 6 7
 You know what has a "negative impact...on big game, specifically elk and deer"? Shooting and killing them.
  • 7 7
 let hunters shoot at each other, then feed them to each other.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2021. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.020224
Mobile Version of Website