The term “radical” is used a lot, so I looked it up and found synonyms such as “draconian, drastic, severe, and desperate.” A recent letter writer stated that “radical pro-wilderness advocates” need to realize that mountain biking is “100 percent compatible” with wilderness.
I enjoy mountain biking myself, but there are good reasons why the Wilderness Act prohibits any form of mechanized travel.
One is the exploding technology, such as “E-bikes.” These bikes have powerful batteries that enable a senior citizen like me to cover 70 miles and climb over 6,000 feet in a single day, as I recently did on a trip in Hawaii. Research has shown that bikers flying down trails have an adverse impact on wildlife and migration.
I would think that as our population and visitor use continue to mushroom in the national forests around Yellowstone, we would have the foresight to choose to protect wildlife habitat over designating a recreational playground for bikers. If we don’t preserve these lands as wilderness, what if a future forest manager decides to open it up for mineral extraction or motorized use?
So just what is a “radical” position? Our junior Sen. Steve Daines has used the term to describe conservationists who want to protect wild lands. I agree with biologist Carol Ruckdeschel who stated, “Trying to save the last 1 percent of wild places is not radical. Radical is wiping out half of the world’s species in less than a century.”
Bookmarks