|
We’re a month into the new year. Here at Bikepacking Roots, we have been working to implement organizational growth to fulfill our mission. A cornerstone of that mission is to conserve the public lands and landscapes through which we ride. As we look ahead into 2020, we’ve asked ourselves what do we anticipate advocating for, and what should you as a bikepacker be aware of to join us in protecting the quality of the bikepacking experience and the landscapes we value? After taking an inventory of the current land management and policy issues, here is our big picture forecast of what to look out for. Keep Public Lands in Public Hands: National Monuments At the end of 2017, President Trump slashed protections of two iconic National Monuments in Utah. National Monuments offer high levels of protection to preserve cultural, archaeological, and ecological resources for historic and future value. Designated through executive order under the power granted to President Obama under the Antiquities Act, President Trump’s Monument reduction was unprecedented and illegal. His action is currently being litigated, and in 2020 we will see progress in the pending cases as they move beyond an extended discovery phase. Meanwhile, under the Trump Administration, the Bureau of Land Management has moved forward with revising the management plans. A protest period occurred in 2019, during which Bikepacking Roots and some of our members submitted a second round of comments, and we are now awaiting the a decision on how the reduced status of these lands will be managed. Our soon-to-be-released Bears Ears Loops are a network of bikepacking opportunities that bring bikepackers into the original boundaries of Bears Ears National Monument. Here bikepackers can experience the landscape that has earned a place on the 2020 World Monuments Watch, a newly awarded status that highlights the global significance of this contested landscape.  Bikepackers pause to admire the Bears Ears buttes, the namesake of Bears Ears National Monument. Photo credit: Kurt Refsnider Keep public lands in public hands: NEPA Public input in the public lands process is a critical aspect of how land management policy can support and empower Americans. Early this year the Trump Administration announced intention to change guiding rules of the bedrock environmental law, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Since it was passed as law 50 years ago, NEPA has mandated that the government engage in a review of any potential environmental and public health impact of proposed decisions and projects before proceeding. NEPA ensures the federal government is transparent with the public on its plans and decisions, is methodical and researched in the consequences, alternatives, and methods of implementing the project, and brings public input into the decision making process. The aim of the Trump Administration’s ongoing reforms of NEPA rules is to expedite development on public lands. This objective will be accomplished by limiting public input opportunity (Bikepacking Roots and some of our membership already submitted comments on this realm in 2019), reducing environmental analyses, and eliminating consideration of projects ramifications on future climate change. Fortunately, the Trump Administration is required to accept public input on these changes. We have until March 10 to voice our request to uphold NEPA’s foundational code, and as we have in the past, we'll share key concerns and recommendations to include in comments. How to speak up: https://ceq.doe.gov/laws-regulations/regulations.html  The forests of the West evolved with fire, however wildfire size, intensity, and frequency is influenced by climate. Photo credit: Will Stubblefield Maintain and increase connectivity for bikepacking routes Whether you aspire to live off your bike along from Canada/U.S. border to the southern tip of Baja or you value the opportunity to experience a shorter point-to-point trip or loop, connectivity of trail systems and mountain bike access is critical to bikepacking opportunities. We aspire to be a voice in maintaining current access and expanding mountain bike access to build connectivity of bikepacking routes. Our Orogenesis project is an example of a long distance route project with potential for connectivity initiatives to expand access and opportunity. These trail connectivity initiatives can serve as an example in creative land and recreation management solutions for the future. Along the entirety of the 4,500-mile-long the Orogenesis Route, there are only 206 miles of “gaps” where no logical, legal, or safe connections can be indentified between existing route options. These gaps are opportunities for the bikepacking community to work with land managers and local trails and conservation groups to pilot bikepacking connectivity projects, restore historic trails, and work with land designations that protect or increase bike access. The first step in these projects is initiating conversation with local organizations, groups and agencies. Support from our membership base will be influential in the process, and members of the local cycling communities will be helpful in implementing local trail projects.  The Continental Divide Trail through the Lion Head boasts world class singletrack that has historically been open to bikes and maintained by mountain bikers. Henry Fork Mountains, ID/MT. Photo Credit: Kurt Refsnider. Support public lands designations that protect landscapes and allow bike access We are bikepackers and we are for the wild. We believe that through responsible bikepacker stewardship, bikes can coexist with wildness in places suitable for bikes. While we believe bikes do not detract from wilderness character, we also believe in protecting the environment for intact ecosystems, healthy and recovering wildlife populations, clean water and air, and a stable climate. We also know that it is through experiencing wildness first hand through recreation such as bikepacking that inspires a sense of personal responsibility to protect the environment. Because of this, we are committed to support creative land management designations that ensure environmental protections and allow bike access to trails. An example of this is the upcoming release of the Custer-Gallatin National Forest (CGNF) Final Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. The draft plan proposed designating the Lionhead Roadless Area (just west of Yellowstone National Park) as a Recommended Wilderness Area, which under this new designation would ban bikes from an incredible slice of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem that has historically offered mountain bikers unparalleled mountain experience in the largest intact ecosystem of the lower 48. We support the CGNF in adopting an alternative designation, a non-motorized Backcountry Area, that would still provide environmental protections while maintaining mountain bike access. You can directly keep tabs on the process here or stay tuned for an announcement from us that either celebrates the CGNF hearing the voices of the mountain bike community or calls for protests.  Problem solving connectivity requires vision, collaboration, resources, and support. Photo Credit: Gabriel Amadeus, Limberlost Bikepackers hold a unique position in that we rely on large swaths of landscape that provides connective bike access to wild places. Valuing bike access and preserved landscape gives us a voice at the table for creative land management solutions that protect the present and future landscape for all, including bikepackers and the environment. As the forecast unfolds into the realities of this year under the politics of election year, management plan revisions, heated access debates, we encourage you to use your voice to advocate for your values and join us in our effort to ensure the future for bikepacking and the landscapes through which we ride! And as always, please help us stay informed of local issues that could/will impact bikepackers so we can create a collective voice by submitting issues through our advocacy submission form!
Words and photos by Jan Bennett
The Pony Express Bikepacking Route was born of a desire to expand my comfort zone, push boundaries, and explore new places. What I hadn’t planned on were the intense emotions and rediscovery of self that caught up with me along the way. 
After scratching from the Tour Divide in 2016, I found myself passing time scrolling through maps of the American West, an area of the country that had captivated me since my first drive down US-50, the ‘Loneliest Highway’, through Nevada a few years before.
The vast expanses of wide-open, uninhabited public lands spoke to my desire to disconnect fully from a world that constantly had me questioning my reality and searching for meaning amongst a life-long sea of confusion. I wanted to go remote, on my own, and explore areas where the history of a place was still palpable. I quickly found myself drawn to a dot on the USGS survey maps labeled “Sweet Water Pony Express Station”. From there I discovered that many of the roads through the area came about because of the Pony Express and Pioneer trails. The Pony Express Route follows much of the same route as the Oregon, California, and Mormon Trails. In some places, the wagon ruts left by those enterprising pioneers, and in one instance even the very wagon itself, can still be seen along the route. As Native Americans had discovered well before the first pony rider crossed those mountains, the land tells you which way to go.
In the mid-1800s, a call was put forth by the US Postal Service for a contract to deliver mail as quickly as possible to California from the east in an attempt to keep the new territory as part of the Union as the American Civil War was brewing. Entrepreneurs Russell, Majors, and Waddell hatched a far fetched plan to create a route of relay stations whereby riders would launch themselves on hearty mustangs at full speed for 10-15 miles at a time to the next station, only to dismount and remount in a matter of seconds on a fresh steed and head off to the next station, carrying valuable news and mail in a purpose-made saddle bag called a mochila across the American West.
The prospect of propelling myself on a bicycle across such a historic route fully captured my attention. I started to map the original stations and plot the route utilizing the National Historic Trails website. After driving and riding certain sections of the route I decided I would tackle it via mountain bike, on my own, in the spring of 2018. My main concern would be the vast expanses without available resupply. Four hundred miles from Salt Lake City, UT to Austin, NV without knowing for sure where the next water supply would be was daunting. There are no convenience stores, no grocery stores, no restaurants, and no shops along long stretches of the route. 
A week before I was to head out on my ride I received news that my father had overdosed and died. After quite a bit of trepidation, I decided that I needed this trip. For myself.
At one point, as I crested a pass that led to an expansive view of low mountain peaks to the southeast of Casper, WY, I was overcome by intense emotions. I screamed. I cried. I laughed. I sang. I danced. For the first time in my life, I felt a sense of freedom. Freedom from a burden that I had become so accustomed to bearing that I simply didn’t know any other way. In that moment, on that dirt road in Wyoming, on a self-supported ride across half of the country on a route that no one had attempted yet, I discovered a new sense of self. As I hopped back on the bike to continue my journey I recognized the impact that the route had on me. The opportunity for healing and self-discovery I found along the way should be made available to everyone. I had found purpose in my struggles and wanted to do what I could to provide an opportunity for others to do the same. The remainder of that ride and subsequent scouting rides allowed me to verify natural springs and identify supportive private landowners who agreed to passage for subsequent bikepackers and who were willing to share their water with other riders who would come after me. I rediscovered human connection and the good that still exists in a world of seemingly endless chaos. I found peace through the incredible interactions of those I met along the way. Looking back now I realize that the Pony Express Route and the journey to make it a reality for others is precisely what I needed to give back to a community that has helped me grow in ways I thought unimaginable just a few years earlier.
Bikepacking Roots is excited to be supporting the final stages of development of the Pony Express Bikepacking Route, a vision and undertaking being driven by Jan Bennett. The route begins in St. Joseph, Missouri and covers more than 2,200 miles as it makes its way to Sacramento, California, crossing Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California along the way. 85% of the route is on dirt and gravel with a few car-free bike trails to get riders through major cities. But some sections, particularly in the mountains of Nevada, are rough, rocky, and are decidedly not dirt or gravel roads. History is alive and well along much of the route, with the remains of original Pony Express stations still visible in many places, and commemorative markers along the way denoting important landmarks, graves, and important information.
Interested in being one of our Route Scouts in 2020? We are seeking adventurous, experienced bikepackers interested in being volunteer scouts. Although extensive reconnaissance of the route has already been conducted by Jan Bennett, we are looking for a cadre of veteran bikepackers who are eager to ride [some of] an ambitious new route, provide feedback, additional assessment and information about water and services along the way, share photos, and potentially help out in some other ways. Click here to learn more about the Pony Express Route and how to get involved in 2020!
Professional, intentionally-designed bikepacking routes are time-consuming to develop – extensive scouting and collaborations with local land owners, land managers, communities, and test riders are critical parts of the process. Creating the accompanying navigational and educational resources like the 90-page Wild West Route guide and the mobile app make routes even more accessible and impactful. But all this costs money, and it is for that reason that we are running our “10 Routes. 10,000 Miles. $100,000.” year-end campaign. As we look ahead into 2020, we have 10 new routes at various stages of development to bring the bikepacking community 10,000 more miles of bikepacking opportunity – opportunity for the empowering, inspiring, life-changing experiences that we believe bikepacking can facilitate. Help us finish the development of these 10 new routes by making a contribution toward the $100,000 goal for supporting these projects!
Written by Kurt Refsnider, Executive Director My bikepacking story began more than a decade ago when my mountain biking ambitions began to pull me toward bigger and bigger rides in unfamiliar landscapes or to connecting familiar but distant places. I spent hours pouring over print maps and fuzzy satellite imagery and enjoyed awe-inspiring trips with varying levels of success following the “routes” that I had created. But no matter the outcome of any particular adventure, I found myself absolutely enamored by multi-day mountain bike rides.  Amid a transformative month-long solo trip across the Colorado Plateau in 2013 Early on, I shared some of these routes with other relatively new bikepackers who had seen my trip photos and wanted to experience those places for themselves. And with reliably unfortunate consistency, those folks bailed from my routes and sought more reasonable alternate tracks. It didn’t take me long to realize that where I opted to ride (or often push) my bike wasn’t necessarily about the riding but rather where I was riding. And that part of the passion often didn’t translate to other riders who more often expected where I had gone to have been driven by the search for great trails. That, however, wasn’t necessarily the case. A month-long solo trip across southern Utah in 2013 highlighted that for me as my focus was on conceptually connecting familiar parts of the desert landscape through the unknown country in between and trying to better understand the geologic relationships along the way. For me personally, bikepacking was a means for exploring and learning rather than seeking out as much great riding as possible.  My first bikepacking rig (a 2008 full-sus) adventuring in 2008 This pattern culminated in 2014 when Bikepacking Roots co-founder Kaitlyn Boyle and I spent 30 days pedaling along the length of the Alps – L’Aventure Alpine. It was far and away the most arduous trip either of us had ever (or have since) done – 30 high passes, 320,000 feet of climbing, endless sections of above-treeline riding, countless hike-a-bikes of at least 3,000 vertical feet, and so much great trail. But despite the absolute magnificence of that 800-mile route, we never ended up sharing the data publicly because for most bikepackers, the over-the-top rigor simply wouldn’t be enjoyable. The same theme applied to long trips in Patagonia, Australia, New Zealand, and throughout the American West. Subsequently, Kaitlyn and I devoted quite a bit of time to creating a series of 2- to 4-day routes on the Colorado Plateau and in the Central Rockies for Geology through Bikepacking, a Prescott College course in which we took groups of new bikepackers out on a series of self-supported trips and explored the diverse geology of the region. The impacts of the route development decisions are never more evident than while traveling with new bikepackers on those exact routes. Those routes and itineraries evolved from year to year, being honed by past experiences that went particularly well – or poorly.  Bikepacking Roots co-founder Kaitlyn Boyle somewhere in the midst of 320,000 feet of Alpine climbing in 2014  The first edition (2013) of Prescott College's "Geology Through Bikepacking" course It was through endeavors like those described above that I began to recognize the transformative power bikepacking experiences can have on individuals, and the vision for Bikepacking Roots as on organization began to congeal. On the route development side of our mission, the goal is to create professional and intentionally-designed routes with particular rider audiences in mind. Our initial offerings were varied in this way – the Colorado 14ers and Craters and Cinder Cones Loops are relatively short circuits designed for newer bikepackers seeking out singletrack and dirt road/4x4 track riding experiences, respectively. And the 1,100-mile Plateau Passage was created to offer experienced bikepackers a rugged, remote, and lengthy backcountry epic like no other. The Wild West Route development was a whole different beast. The goal from the outset was to create a non-technical riding experience showcasing the wild and public lands of the American West – a place like no other on Earth. We sought to balance remote and immersive riding with regularly spaced services so as to make the experience as accessible as possible. And the physical demands of the route had to remain reasonable. Putting all this together resulted in a suite of criteria upon which the entire project progressed.  Tired, dusty, and sweaty after a 3,000+ mile stint of driving possible Wild West Route segments in Utah, Idaho, and Montana. Scouting the Wild West Route took more than 8 weeks and involved more than 5,000 miles of driving on dirt roads, rough 4x4 tracks, and official Forest Service roads that really no longer were roads at all. In most areas, two or three parallel options for the route were scouted, incorporating input from local cyclists and land managers. For me personally, the scouting turned into a legitimate motorized adventure, allowing me to explore parts of the West that had been quite unfamiliar, but on a timeline that often dictated 12+ hours of driving for days on end. Dead ends, unexpectedly steep and blown out tracks, challenges associated with private lands, and completely annihilated “forest roads” turned me back on a daily basis. In Arizona, water resources dictated the alignment of the route in places, and I worked with private landowners in to offer additional water resources for bikepackers. On Navajo Nation in northern Arizona, I spent two years collaborating with their newly-launched Trails Initiative and the Navajo YES non-profit to envision, create, and institute regulations and a permitting process for the Nation’s first long-distance recreation route. Upon completion of this extensive scouting, I set about determining how to best link up the sections that offered the most enjoyable and wild riding experiences while keeping the flow of the route on a broader perspective from becoming too taxing or remote. What I thought were the most stunning options that were scouted didn’t always make the cut for a variety of reasons. But the assemblage of sections that came together offered a consistent riding experience that met our criteria. By the summer of 2018, we had nearly 50 bikepackers ride some or all of the Wild West Route to provide feedback, help refine a few short sections, and build awareness of the new route in communities along the way. Personally, it was amazing to hear from these riders about how their experiences along the way were so closely aligned with the goal we set upon initiating the Wild West Route project. After incorporating the feedback from these riders, we released the Wild West Route in 2019 along with a 90-page route guide and an innovative new mobile app for bikepackers.  Meeting up with Wild West Route pioneering riders Karen and Tracey Bartow in central Idaho Since the Wild West Route was released, riders from across the globe have pedaled segments or the entirety of the route, and the appreciation voiced by these riders for the wild landscapes and public lands along the way has made my heart sing. A decade of adventures in route development, combined with input and feedback from literally hundreds of individuals, culminated in a route that will live on for decades. Hopefully one day I’ll have the opportunity to ride the Wild West Route, but for now, my attention has already been pulled elsewhere for other route development initiatives.
 We have one more opportunity to provide input on the future of the lands of Grand Staircase National Monument (GSENM), a future that will include minimal protections to the landscape and natural and cultural resources if the newly-released management plan goes into effect. The reasons that inspired the initial designation of Monument status are congruent with the reasons we as bikepackers seek backcountry travel by bike through GSENM. The entire planning area is one of the most scenically pristine areas in the United States, including for nighttime dark skies. We value clean air to breathe, and dark skies to sleep under. Many of us live in parts of the country where this is not an option, and bikepacking across this landscape provides a rare and valuable opportunity. As bikepackers, we value the opportunity to ride through open, wild landscapes with minimal human development. GSENM as managed as a monument offers rare opportunity for solitude, remote travel, and healthy, minimally impacted landscape. Last month, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released a plan to open nearly all of the lands removed from Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument (GSENM) to mining and drilling. President Trump’s unprecedented Monuments reduction cut 900,000 acres from GSENM, a decision that is currently being challenged in court. And just two weeks ago, the BLM released their proposed management plan for the remaining GSENM lands within the greatly reduced Monument boundaries, further undermining the protections granted by National Monument status. These plans threaten cultural and historical sites and wilderness qualities from increased mining and grazing leases, the prioritization of motorized travel and road development, and non-native grass seeding. The BLM chose the least protective version of the four draft plan options considered after a public comment period in the fall of 2018. Bikepacking Roots submitted our own commented at that time, and we urged members to do the same and provided a number of our concerns related to how the different options would potentially affect the bikepacking experience. Why should we, as bikepackers, care about this? GSENM offers bikepackers a particularly remote and undeveloped high desert bikepacking experience on a network of 4x4 roads that traverse the wild valleys and plateaus of southern Utah. Our Plateau Passage and Wild West Route explore parts of GSENM, and the Cottonwood, Skutumpah, and Smokey Mountain Roads have long been popular with bikepackers and bike tourers. The quiet and wild experiences afforded in this Monument would be drastically altered by some of the changes we're likely to see should the protections of National Monument status be removed - coal mining, the chaining of native pinion and juniper forests to promote grazing, paving of some of the gravel roads, and more. We strongly encourage other bikepackers to share their concerns with the BLM and to to advocate for greater protections for GSENM and the integrity of future protections granted by National Monument status. The most effective comments will cite specific sections of the management plan with specific concerns. To see our suggestions on what you might include in your own commenting, please see our annotated section references below. Comments are due on September 23, 2019. To learn more about the management plan, check out this concise article published by the Salt Lake Tribune. And just this week, the Department of the Interior’s Board of Land Appeals halted the BLM's plans to chain native pinyon-juniper forest and sagebrush stands in one large area within GSENM for cattle grazing range development (a process that generally involves two bulldozers dragging a large chain through the woodlands to uproot trees in their entirety). This highlights the level of protection, or lack thereof, being given to an area with designated National Monument status. The Southern Wilderness Alliance details here the implications of the Board of Land Appeals' decision and how you can support the continued protection of native habitat in GSENM. To see the full plan and final environmental impact statements, visit the BLM's GSENM planning website and look for the "Volume 1: Chapters 1-4 of GSENM-KEPA Proposed RMPs/Final EIS" document. To submit your own protest, follow this link to the BLM website, look for the "Volume 1: Chapters 1-4 of GSENM-KEPA Proposed RMPs/Final EIS" document, and then click on the "Submit Protest" button at right.  The overarching theme of the proposed plan is notably reducing protections on resources in GSENM. Thousands of additional acres are opened to livestock grazing and rangeland development (and some subject to native forest removal and reseeding for increased livestock forage), roads will be paved and/or further developed and greater OHV use will be permitted, constraints will be lessened on mineral leasing and mineral materials disposal, group size restrictions are reduced, and zero acres are managed for their wilderness qualities. These notably reduced protections outlined in the proposed management plan are acknowledged to reduce air quality, degrade wildlife and fish habitat, decrease soil, water and vegetation health, and alter, harm or destroy cultural and paleontological artifacts and sites.
In our initial comment submitted in November, 2018 and in the talking points we recommended including in public comments at that point, we raised a number of concerns. These were related to how the then-proposed alternative management plan options failed to address key concerns that would negatively affect the bikepacking experience and would harm natural and cultural resources. The now-preferred management plan alternative, Alternative D, offers nothing to mitigate our original concerns, and we strongly urge GSENM management to remain under the directive of the No Action/Current Management Plan. This plan, what GSENM has been managed under in recent years, offers far more extensive protections to the scenic, cultural, ecological, and human-powered recreation values. Based on our original comments, we would like to clearly point out the following specific examples of how our original concerns have not been addressed in the new proposed management plan. 11.17.2018: Under 2-3.13, mineral leasing for oil/gas/geothermal, Alternative D (Preferred Alternative) opens nearly all of the lands removed from monument status by the president to oil gas and coal development. 9.19.19 protest: The proposed plan “places the fewest constraints on mineral leasing and mineral materials disposal in GSENM. 650,888 acres (of 861,538 total acres) in Kanab-Escalante Planning Area (KEPA) is opened to mineral development. Only 120,990 of these acres have major constraints; the rest are moderate. Opening these lands to drilling, strip mining, and underground mining would have incredibly detrimental effects on the largely undisturbed natural values of the greater GSENM landscape. These values are what draw bikepackers to this region – the opportunity to ride for hours on 4x4 roads without seeing other cars, to traverse large landscapes without traveling among mineral extraction operations and large-scale grazing operations. This is a rarity in the West, and it is one of the most unique values of the original GSENM. 11.17.2018: Under 2.3.71, when outlining management of vegetation, destruction of native piñon-juniper forest for range improvement to support increased cattle grazing (2.3.12). Increased cattle grazing will have a detrimental impact to the biological soil crusts of GSENM lands; reduced biological soil crust coverage will decrease air quality as dust is increased. 9.19.19 protest: The proposed plan opens up the most acres to livestock grazing in GSENM (991,874 acres), and prioritizes rangeland health. This increases emissions and reduces air quality in GSENM. Again, our largest concern with this is the chaining and destruction of native forests – uprooting tens of thousands of acres of native vegetation to support increased grazing should not be done within any National Monument. We acknowledge that GSENM is and will be a “working Monument,” grazing should be permitted only in areas where it will not damage remaining soil crust and with herd sizes that can be supported by the naturally-occurring native forage. 11.17.2018: Under 2.3.14, plan D opens up lands to cross-country off-road vehicle play and increases the number of legal off-road vehicle routes in the backcountry. 9.19.19 protest: The proposed plan opens 1,002,350 acres to OHVs, and there are only 1,464 acres of OHV closure within the Monument. Identified OHV routes are increased under the new plan. As mentioned earlier, solitude and seldom-traveled roads are among the most attractive elements of GSENM for cyclists. Increased OHV traffic will eventually lead to GSENM feeling (and sounding) like so many other areas in the West that are dominated by motorized recreation. This should not be the case within a National Monument. 11.17.2018: Under 2.3.5, the Preferred Alternative calls for allowing “casual collection” of fossils by anyone. This would legalize the removal of any fossils by anyone, opening up the risk of rare specimens being removed from GSENM. 9.19.19 protest: Although casual fossil collection is not permitted under the proposed plan, the plan will result in increased impact – disruption or destruction – of cultural and paleontological resources due to increased OHV access, lessened protective measures on resources and increased resource extraction and associated surface disturbance with mining, drilling, and road development, and a smaller area managed for the protection of wilderness characteristics. 9.19.19 Protest: Additionally, the proposed plan poses the greatest threat and likelihood for disturbing wildlife, fish and special status species by reducing protective measures such as increasing group size, reducing resource-specific protective measures that increase habitat degradation through surface disruption (ie: mining, grazing, drilling), and applying fewer restrictions on OHV use and competitive events. In the proposed plan, only four localized areas are managed within the already-halved GSENM with appropriate protection of a SRMA. Ultimately, the proposed plan dramatically reduces protection of the resources integral to the health and future of the GSENM lands; this poses a notable threat to the future of this landscape and our bikepacking opportunity for generations to come. We strongly request that you do not implement a change in management until after the current litigations around the Monument reduction are settled, and once settled continue to manage GSENM and KEPA (the Kanab-Escalante Planning Area) under the directive of the No Action/Current Management Plan. The US Forest Service is revising NEPA regulations and has proposed eliminating the requirement of public input for many land management decisions. Now is the time to speak up to preserve scoping and public commenting - the somewhat ironic comment period closed on 26 August. (Note: This comment period has closed) 8 August 2019  Public lands need public input. Seems simple enough, right? Maybe not. Right now, the Forest Service is trying to eliminate public input from many of the decisions affecting public lands.
The Forest Service manages all the National Forests, where extensive bikepacking takes place in most every region of the United States (to learn more about the history of Forest Service lands, check out our public lands history article). Whenever the Forest Service makes a decision that significantly affects these lands or our access to them, the agency is required to seek input from us, the public. The law that guarantees our opportunity to tell the Forest Service what we think is called the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. The Forest Service is currently revising the regulations it uses to implement NEPA. As part of this revision, the agency wants to get rid of the Scoping phase of public input for projects that require an Environmental Assessment or that fall into a Categorical Exclusion. Basically, this means the agency wants to eliminate the initial phase of public input from certain types of projects, types of projects that are already streamlined compared to larger and more drawn out decisions that require a full environmental impact study. That may not sound like much, but Scoping is particularly important. Scoping is often when we learn about projects. Scoping also gives us the chance to tell the Forest Service what we know and what we want at the very beginning of the process. Somewhat ironically, the Forest Service is looking for public input on its proposal to eliminate public input. This is our chance to tell the agency why public input matters and why getting rid of it is a bad idea. Bikepacking Roots encourages you to learn more and submit a comment at https://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/revisions/index.shtml Comments are due August 26, 2019. The Forest Service really notices unique comments, so make your comments your own. Here are a couple of points you can use:
 Bikepacking Roots' Wild West Route (WWR) showcases the wild and public lands of the American West. At more than 2,700 miles in length, the WWR is among the longest bikepacking routes in the world. It's development involved collaboration with public lands managers, private landowners, Navajo Nation Department of Parks and Recreation, and 50+ bikepackers.
The WWR is more than 80% dirt, ranging from graded gravel to seldom-traveled dirt roads to rough 4x4 tracks. It offers bikepackers a remote, rugged, expedition-scale riding experience balanced with resupply options in small communities generally spaced a few days apart. Nearly 70% of the WWR's length is on public lands, passing through 18 National Forests, 6 National Parks and Monuments, 4 areas with BLM National Conservation Lands designation, and 2 tribal parks. Bikepacking Roots is proud to offer a suite of resources for the route, including a comprehensive 82-page print or digital route guidebook with maps and conservation/public lands educational content, GPS data for navigation with ~1500 waypoints (services, water, campgrounds, etc.), and a smartphone app.  Our mission at Bikepacking Roots is to advocate for the bikepacking experience and for the landscapes through which we ride. As such, we have been soliciting comments regarding the ongoing threats to the future of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (GSENM). The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the federal agency that manages the monument, is seeking comments between now and November 30, 2018 on a draft management plan and environmental impact statement (you can view the plan and other documents here or download a PDF of it here). In December 2017 President Trump unlawfully slashed Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Proclamation 9682. It is currently in court and should be overturned as the Antiquities Act only grants a president the authority to designate national monuments, not to revoke or diminish them. Meanwhile, the BLM has moved forward with passing a new management plan for the shrunken monument and the lands now outside of the monument. The plan proposes four management scenarios, or “Alternatives”, of which the agency has identified Alternative D as the “Preferred Alternative.” Alternative D poses substantial threat to the future of the lands that GSENM house, and should be a concern for bikepackers. To ensure a future for bikepacking, recreating, learning, and preserved landscape within GSENM, please submit a comment to the BLM identifying one or a couple points outlined below that you are not in support of and why it personally matters to you. A story or anecdote is extremely valuable to include in your comments, and specific references to chapter/section numbers is a critical part of your comment (see our talking point suggestions below) How to submit your comment
You can also mail a hard copy to: Bureau of Land Management Attn: Matt Betenson 669 S Hwy 89A Kanab, UT, 84741. And email your comments to: escalante_interagency@blm.gov Thank you for taking the time to advocate for bikepacking and the landscapes through which we ride.  Concerns and recommended talking points
Here we take you through the points of concern in the Preferred Alternative and the impacts these changes may have. Note that the law requires that National Monuments be managed to protect the resources for which they were designated; GSENM was designated a National Monument for its paleontological resources and spectacular geology, clear air and dark skies, cultural significance and archeological sites, and extensive biological soil crusts. The “Preferred Alternative” or “Alternative D” presented in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and Kanab-Escalante Planning Area Draft Resource Management Plans and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) present the following management "solutions" that are of concern to us, as bikepackers and advocates of healthy landscapes. Chapter 2, section 3.13 Mineral leasing for oil/gas/geothermal, Alternative D (Preferred Alternative) opens nearly all of the lands removed from monument status by the president to oil gas and coal development. Chapter 2, section 3.14 Plan D opens up lands to cross-country off-road vehicle play and increases the number of legal off-road vehicle routes in the backcountry. Chapter 2, section 3.71 When outlining management of vegetation, destruction of native piñon-juniper forest for range improvement to support increased cattle grazing Chapter 2, section 3.12 Increased cattle grazing will have a detrimental impact to the biological soil crusts of GSENM lands; reduced biological soil crust coverage will decrease air quality as dust is increased. Chapter 2, section 3.5 The Preferred Alternative calls for allowing “casual collection” of fossils by anyone. This would legalize the removal of any fossils by anyone, opening up the risk of rare specimens being removed from GSENM. Alternative D presents a management plan that dramatically reduces protection of landscape and would have a notable impact on the quality of bikepacking experience and opportunity in GSENM. Opening the landscape to mineral extraction would increase traffic, noise, and developed landscape. Increasing logging of native and old-growth piñon-juniper forest for rangeland improvements would transform the riding experience from forest habitat to rangeland inhabited by cattle. Allowing cross-country off-road travel would trample vegetation and develop unregulated roads, and have the affiliated traffic. Lifting protection of paleontogical sites and resources would result in the irreversible loss of opportunity for science and education that is preserved in the GSENM geologic story. Bikepacking Roots has established two long-distance bikepacking routes that visit GSENM (the Plateau Passage and the Wild West Route). The reasons that inspired the initial designation of Monument status are congruent with the reasons we as bikepackers seek backcountry travel by bike through GSENM. The entire planning area is one of the most scenically pristine areas in the United States, including for nighttime dark skies. We value clean air to breathe, and dark skies to sleep under. Many of us live in parts of the country where this is not an option, and bikepacking across this landscape provides a rare and valuable opportunity. As bikepackers, we value the opportunity to ride through open, wild landscapes with minimal human development. GSENM as managed as a monument offers rare opportunity for solitude, remote travel, and healthy, minimally impacted landscape. Ultimately, the Preferred Plan dramatically reduces protection of the resources integral to the health and future of the GSENM lands; this poses a notable threat to the future of this landscape and our bikepacking opportunity for generations to come. In your comments, also identify what you urge the BLM to consider, a couple options that would be in the best interest of the monument and bikepacking experience are:
Additional points:
|
Bikepacking Roots is the only non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and advancing bikepacking, growing a diverse bikepacking community, advocating for the conservation of the landscapes and public lands through which we ride, and creating professional routes. We value human-powered experiences and an inclusive, engaged, and informed membership (6,000 strong) that makes a positive impact as we adventure by bike.
|
|
Our Business Partners that support the bikepacking community, conservation, and public lands:
Our organizational partners that support bikepacking, advocacy, conservation, and outdoor recreation:
