Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-09-11, 10:48 AM   #1
valygrl
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 8,327
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Blue Ridge Parkway - legislation to close to cyclists - act now!

I received a message from PacTour this morning, indicating there is some proposed legislation that will close the BRP to cyclists. Here's the message from PacTour which includes contact information on how to voice your comments:

URGENT!

The Blue Ridge Parkway

Is Under Attack!


The Blue Ridge Parkway is a popular route for many cyclists and perhaps many of you have ridden it along with PAC Tour on our Eastern Mountains Tour. It is a stretch of road like a dream, closed to commercial vehicles like semi trucks, the parkway winds through the Blue Ridge mountains, along ridges and through hollows. Climbing out of the valley and into the misty mountains at sunrise is an enchanting memory.

Like many recreation areas in the USA, the Blue Ridge Parkway is under-funded and is considering restricting access to bicyclists. The Parkway has released a new draft management plan that focuses on "the recreational driving experience." If you are reading this email, you are probably a supporter of "the recreational cycling experience" and realize the danger in passing legislation in support of cars and limiting the use of bicycles.


A more detailed account of the draft management plan can be found here.

As PAC Tour has scheduled the Eastern Mountains Tour for fall of 2012, this change in legislation could alter the tour significantly. Please consider writing to the Blue Ridge Parkway with your concerns if you are in support of continuing to cycle on this beautiful stretch of Appalachia.

If you enjoy the Blue Ridge Parkway in its current state and would like to submit a written comment, please do so before December 16th to the Blue Ridge Parkway Draft Management Plan:

Superintendent Philip A. Francis, Jr.
Blue Ridge Parkway
199 Hemphill Knob Road
Asheville, NC 28803

Or you can formally submit comments online here.
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentID=43487

Here is a standardized response in support of bicycle access to the Blue Ridge Parkway that you can use in the online form:

Question 1: What proposals or aspects do you like/dislike about the alternatives in this Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (DGMP/EIS)?
I can support proposed Option C only if comprehensive changes are made to include and promote bicycling, walking and other non-motorized forms of transportation as an integral part of the Parkway’s mission.
As a cyclist, I cannot support the over-arching goals presented in the Draft Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement.
First, a National Historic Landmark designation is the wrong way to protect the Parkway. This status will create obstacles and bureaucratic red tape, and entomb the Parkway in a virtual time capsule. Instead, we should trust the good judgment and stewardship of future generations to preserve and protect this treasure in perpetuity, while meeting the changing needs of our citizens.
Second, Park managers need to understand that the legislation that created the Parkway as a “driving experience” doesn’t fully meet the needs of today’s Parkway users, or potential users. The Parkway shouldn’t be promoted as a car-only roadway, but should meet the National Park Service’s Call to Action and Secretary Salazar’s vision of Connecting Americans to the Great Outdoors. By promoting and accommodating cycling and other forms of alternative transportation, Parkway managers will provide interactive and lasting experiences with one of America’s most loved treasures.
Finally, the Draft Plan’s alternatives do not address the growing interest in cycling, and fail to acknowledge the benefits that cycling brings to both the Parkway and surrounding communities. The Blue Ridge Parkway is an international cycling destination, and important recreation facility for surrounding communities; vital to their economies, and to provide them with healthy lifestyle opportunities.
Merely allowing cycling on the Parkway is not enough and the message to promote active, healthy use of the facility must be an integral part of the core management plan.

Question 2: Do you have any suggestions for improving the preferred alternative in this DGMP/EIS? If so, what are they?
Parkway management should:
1) halt the National Historic Landmark application process;
2) recognize and promote cycling in the Draft Management Plan as a viable and important aspect of Parkway visitation;
3) modify the Draft Management Plan as presented and work with cyclists, the surrounding communities and the general public to meet the needs of today’s changing world. The plan should have a goal of building cycling and alternative transportation into the park planning process in order to meet the National Park Service’s Call to Action and Secretary Salazar’s vision for Connecting Americans to the Great Outdoors.
valygrl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 11:34 AM   #2
punkncat
LBKA
 
punkncat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: OTP South
Bikes: Spec Roubaix SL4, GT Traffic 1.0
Posts: 2,699
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Although I have not cycled the BRP, and don't think my fitness level would ever actually permit it, I think this would be one hell of a loss to the cycling community. I drive and ride motorcycle there quite often in the past, and have dreamed of doing the seven mile descent. One of the few places I have actually been passed by a cyclist on a motorcycle.
punkncat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 11:45 AM   #3
MassiveD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 2,370
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
I would probably replace terms like "cyclist", with terms like as a "taxpayer", "citizen" (pretty weak), or "tourist spending vacation time and money..." I would add the word "choice" as often as possible. Choice is the holy grail of government policy. One thing I learned as a lobbyist was to write "choice" whenever possible.

One should also represent that the good guys (those burning gas) may also want the choice to ride those bikes they have on the back of their campers. "as an RV owner who often travels through your state/fascility, I enjoy the occasional outing on my bike and would miss the opportunity choose to ride sections of the parkways while buying gas for my motorhome in your state, and shopping my way accross your malls", kind of thing.

What is the issue here? Most of the time I have driven the parkway it has been empty, which at the very least begs the question about off peak access. It could be the case that one cyclist is a problem for a disproportionate number of cars, but there are times when it doesn't mater.

I remember once going through a one lane construction zone. I held up traffic in both directions because I was slower to get through than the cars. Everyone was nice about it, but there are problems sometimes accommodating vehicles at different speeds. And there can be safety issues where there are features like long tunnels and blind curves. But there may be strategies, and there may be off peak times. Cyclists don't pay the taxes cars do, and they spend longer times on a feature like the BRP, so when times are lean they are going to look at those who take more and give less.

Last edited by MassiveD; 12-09-11 at 11:49 AM.
MassiveD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 01:02 PM   #4
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 9,622
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MassiveD View Post
Cyclists don't pay the taxes cars do, and they spend longer times on a feature like the BRP, so when times are lean they are going to look at those who take more and give less.
Cars don't pay taxes. People pay taxes, and the last time I checked I was still paying the same gas, income, sales, etc., taxes that are used to fund roads that everyone else pays. Funny thing though is that when I am riding my bike I am not causing the same wear and tear (if any) on the roads as I am when I am driving. So in essense, I am taking less while still giving.
indyfabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 01:12 PM   #5
Jude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Philly, PA
Bikes:
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is it just me, or is the legislation not, in fact, to close the parkway to cyclists?
Jude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 02:00 PM   #6
Pedaleur
Je pose, donc je suis.
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Back. Here.
Bikes:
Posts: 2,898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jude View Post
Is it just me, or is the legislation not, in fact, to close the parkway to cyclists?
Of course not. Hey valygrl, stop being such a tool and maybe people will listen to your honest concerns.

"The parkway and other park roads would
continue to be available to bicyclists and
provide an outstanding cycling experience. In
general, the parkway’s limited access, lower
traffic levels, and scenic setting provide for a
quality cycling experience. This would
continue to be a long-term beneficial impact
on the quality of visitor’s bicycling experience.
However, the parkway was not built as a
bicycling facility, and therefore the
narrowness of the roadway, the lack of paved
shoulders, foggy weather, and local road
paving activities would continue to challenge
cyclists and pose safety concerns as they share
the road with motorists, especially in areas
where traffic levels are increasing, especially
commuter traffic in the more urban areas of
Waynesboro, Roanoke, Boone/ Blowing
Rock, and Asheville. The proposals to
construct grade separation structures at some
locations along the parkway would have a
long-term beneficial impact on helping
manage commuter traffic levels in some
locations. This would likely help improve
safety and the bicycling experience at local
areas along the parkway."
Pedaleur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 02:16 PM   #7
valygrl
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 8,327
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedaleur View Post
Of course not. Hey valygrl, stop being such a tool and maybe people will listen to your honest concerns.
Um what? I just passed on what PacTour sent me. If they mis-understood or misrepresented the proposed legislation, I didn't catch that.

No need to call names.
valygrl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 06:59 PM   #8
mattotoole
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Potomac MD, USA
Bikes: Klein Quantum Pro w/ Ultegra, Klein Pulse Comp w/ Marzocchi Z3 & XT/LX
Posts: 286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The essence of the issue is, Parkway management is trying to wall themselves off from having to interface with local communities and user groups, by closing side roads and feeder trails; then preserve their fifecom with National Historic Landmark status.

Cycling on the Parkway will probably always be “allowed,” but…

This is still devastating to road and mountain bikers, hikers, and equestrians who have had “out your backdoor” access for decades. Now they may have to go miles out of their way — probably in their cars — to access Parkway trails, or ride on the Parkway itself.

A convenient side effect would be fewer everyday cyclists, which management often views as being “in the way” of their preferred customer, The Motorist.

Mountain bikers especially are being sawed off at the knees.

We have an action alert on our blog, but the best analysis so far is from Anne Whisnant. We have links to her articles.

Also submit comments on the proposed closing of Roanoke Mountain Campground, an important stop for long distance bike tourists.
mattotoole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-11, 09:16 PM   #9
Shifty
Sore saddle cyclist
 
Shifty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Road, touring and mountain
Posts: 3,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
If we get many more of these Tea Party nuts in office it will become the Frito-Lay Blue Ridge Parkway, and we all know how much they hate bicycling. It's more important than ever to vote, and write letters too if that will help.
Shifty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-11, 12:36 PM   #10
spinnaker
Every day a winding road
 
spinnaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: 2005 Cannondale SR500, 2008 Trek 7.3 FX, Jamis Aurora
Posts: 4,699
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 319 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedaleur View Post
Of course not. Hey valygrl, stop being such a tool and maybe people will listen to your honest concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valygrl View Post
Um what? I just passed on what PacTour sent me. If they mis-understood or misrepresented the proposed legislation, I didn't catch that.

No need to call names.
I'll echo that with WTF?
spinnaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-11, 01:17 PM   #11
dcrowell
Fat Guy Rolling
 
dcrowell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Louisville Kentucky
Bikes: Bacchetta Agio, 80s Raleigh Record single-speed, Surly Big Dummy
Posts: 2,439
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattotoole View Post
The essence of the issue is, Parkway management is trying to wall themselves off from having to interface with local communities and user groups, by closing side roads and feeder trails; then preserve their fifecom with National Historic Landmark status.

Cycling on the Parkway will probably always be “allowed,” but…

This is still devastating to road and mountain bikers, hikers, and equestrians who have had “out your backdoor” access for decades. Now they may have to go miles out of their way — probably in their cars — to access Parkway trails, or ride on the Parkway itself.

A convenient side effect would be fewer everyday cyclists, which management often views as being “in the way” of their preferred customer, The Motorist.

Mountain bikers especially are being sawed off at the knees.

We have an action alert on our blog, but the best analysis so far is from Anne Whisnant. We have links to her articles.

Also submit comments on the proposed closing of Roanoke Mountain Campground, an important stop for long distance bike tourists.
Okay, so it's a budgetary thing? They may close a campground and some trails and connector roads to not pay for maintaining them. This may be a bad thing for some cycling uses, but it's hardly a "war against cyclists" or "closing it to cycling" as originally posted.

I spent a week in April 2010 in a cabin just off the BRP near Spruce Pine NC. I did a fair amount of cycling. There were sections of the BRP closed due to downed trees that hadn't yet been cleaned up from winter ice storms. I think the budget problems have existed for a while.

The BRP is a park. It's not open year-round. It's not considered a necessary travel road. There are plenty of places to bypass it when necessary. The views from it are wonderful, but it was nice to get to the small surrounding towns also and enjoy the scenery from "down lower".

Just my $0.02 worth.
dcrowell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-11, 02:11 PM   #12
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
it's not a necessary travel road, it is a senic parkway, and one which should remain open to bicycle traffic. Travel on the Blue Ridge Parkway is as legitimate a pursuit for bicyclists as it is for motor vehicle operators.

'preserving' the parkway in perpetuity as a historic landmark would limit future possible changes to the parkway that would beneficial to bicycling. Historic Landmark status should be opposed.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:08 PM.