Originally posted by nathank
if the authorities are really interested in trail protection, wouldn't their efforts be more productive trying to educate MTBers than just trying to keep them from riding? (fact is people will still ride the trails, although admittedly fewer) i have noticed that Euro rides are less protective of trails and are less likely to do on-the-spot trail maintenance (like clear a fallen tree). mostly this is b/c here the mentality is that the taxes pay for that and it is the government's job...
I 100% agree with you with one caveat. I think the mtbers should make an effort to work with the gov't to produce trails and produce good conduct on those trails. I personally think and believe three sets of people need to be involved in order for good success
1 - riders - small group or club willing to work to keep trails clean and working. This may require donations etc...but in the end is really required for success.
2 - landowners - hopefully they ride. If they don't be very honest about what could happen to the trail and the work that group will do to maintain the trails.
3 - gov't - makes them feel useful from the start and then if enviro-geeks start freaking you have already achieved a little clout.
With a good proposal and some degree of support and a willingness to work the trails will be there for a long time. With or without manmade stuff which BTW is actually a GREAT way to protect the environment and was in fact the original purpose of the shore. It just so happens that the protection offered by manmade riding also creates some of the sickest riding available.
I am quite pleased that I live in an area where the gov't, riders and landowners as well as the environmentalists can generally work hand in hand. I just wish more areas could get to this type of harmony.