MTB ban in PA State Gamelands?

[dds]

I was looking at trail reviews over on mtbr.com and came across one:

"Used to ride this trail constantly.
Unfortunately because of the state wide ban of mountain biking on PA state game lands , the game commission is waiting in their jeeps and itching to give you a hard time. Wait until the evenings to ride and you should be ok. Contact your local bike club to see what you can do about this ridiculous law."

Is this true? It was posted Aug 03. I haven't lived in PA for about 6 years so I'm not up to date.

[jhl99]

The statement you found on the other forum may or may not be correct.

ATBing on PA Gamelands is now limited to 'designated routes', so if the trail referenced is not a designated route, it is illegal, if it is a designated route, the trail is legal.

Many mountain bikers have not grasped the concept of 'designated routes'.

Here are some threads on the topic:

http://www.dirtragmag.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1588

http://www.dirtragmag.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1739

Also, check the PA State Gamelands website for the latest info on designated routes.

Jeff

[American_Lesion]

Ugh. I'm once again embarassed by my state legislature and its bureaucratic executive-branch thugs. Let me get this straight--you can go b;ast critters on gamelands (which, surprise, surprise, I'm not totally against) and dangle plastic worms in front of bass, but you can't ride your mountain bike? What the f#@&, Chuck? The folks managing the state game lands make less sense than Wazu! And let me tell you...that's no small feat. I suppose I'll ask around about this anal nonsense, too. I could always go bug Representative Peterson ( a bisexual conservative Republican--a walking contradiction!) until he either has me arrested (again) or looks into the issue.

Fanks for tipping me off to this silliness.

[dds]

I could see reasons for closing off certain ones (conservation efforts, etc) but from the sound of the post I saw it was like all trails were closed. Glad to hear that's not the case.

A_L let us know if you find out anything.

[model3224]

Originally posted by American_Lesion
Ugh. I'm once again embarassed by my state legislature and its bureaucratic executive-branch thugs. Let me get this straight--you can go b;ast critters on gamelands (which, surprise, surprise, I'm not totally against) and dangle plastic worms in front of bass, but you can't ride your mountain bike? What the f#@&, Chuck?

well, do you really want to be riding in an area where drunk people are using firearms and waving pointy hooks attached to long strings around?

[jhl99]

Before everyone goes off half-cocked, try to assemble the facts and the history of the matter...

1. The 'designated route' law was implemented in Feb 2003.
No amount of ranting is going to change this.
2. The Game Commission had public input sessions around the state to explain the situation and the proposed changes to the Gamelands regulations. I attended the meeting in Ligoner (sp). There were a handful of other ATBers present. The session was informative and gave some perspective on the situation. Here are some of the highlights I can recall:
a) The Game Commission is funded from hunting licenses and the Federal Gov. (Pittman Robertson (?) Can't remember the exact name). The Game Commission does not get any funds from the PA general revenues.
b) The Fed Regs say that to get their money, the overriding objective must be directed at wildlife... not at various other outdoor recreations... (ie equestrians and ATBers). If the Fed thinks you are not spending the money consistant with the Fed Regs, they cut the offending state off (evidently, this is a real possibility). I can't remember the exact number, but a large percentage of the Game Commission budget comes from the Fed program.
c) At the presentation there were poster board presentation illustrating misuse of gamelands.... trail damage, and tree cutting/stunt building. These acts were obviously conducted by ATBers. Also the was photos of horse damage to trails.
d) The Wildlife Conservation Officers (WCOs) were not out 'to get' any user group, they were explaining the facts.
e) The problem non-hunter user groups on gamelands seemed to be the worst in the SE part of the state.

I think that ATBers actually ended up with a pretty good outcome, considering the worst case could have been a outright ban (from the Game Commision perspective, an outright ban would have been the easist thing to do, from an administrative and resource perspectives).

Here are the positives:

A) There are designated routes
B) There probably is opportunity to increase the number of designated routes by working with the game commission.
C) I believe that there is a loop hole that if you are engaged in hunting, you can take a ATB into the gamelands.

Also, consider these other facts:
1. Hunting is declining in popularity, therefore Game Commission revenue through the sale of hunting licenses will also decline. Like it or not, this is not good for the hunters, or the outdoor community at large.
2. There is talk of consolodating the Fish and Boat Commision with the Game Commission. I'm not sure that this is good or bad, but it would probably mean reductions is staff.

Finally, I would like conclude with a rant.

I am not a hunter. I did take hunter's safety class a few years ago for personal knowledge and in anticipation of changes in gamelands regulations. Hunter's education offered for a nominal fee at various establishments around the state. I attended at a sportsman club. For the most part, the students are youngsters preparing for there first opportunity to hunt. The hunters education I attended was well done. It included sections on safe firearm handling, land use, hands on shooting on a target range (shotgun, rifle, archery). A section of trapping of small animals. The importance of the positive identificaton of the game and making a 'clean kill' was driven home. A WCO gave a presentation. I think the class was about 20 hours long.

Also stressed was the public opinion of hunters. It was stressed that hunters must make a good impression on the public--otherwise hunting opportunites could become more limited. (Kinda of sounds like mountain biking, doesn't it?)
-----
I think I spend more time in the woods than most people, hiking, backpacking atbing, XC skiing etc. I've encountered hunters in parking lots, while hiking on the trail and while biking on forest roads and trails.

NEVER ONCE have I encountered a drunk hunter.
NEVER ONCE have I felt threatened by a hunter.
NEVER ONCE has a hunter verbally abused me. (unlike the many motorists that have over the years. The motorists on the road are a much bigger threat to cyclists than the hunters in the woods)

When circumstances permit, I've learned quite a bit from a brief conversations with a hunters.

I don't like the drunk, red-neck, shoot 'em up hunter stereotype. It doesn't match up with my real-world experiences. I tend to think that people who use that stereotype adopted that image from the mass media. This is unfortunate.

I think people either do not recognize, or fail to overlook the hunter groups and their contributions to the environment. Hunters probably like to have successful hunts (one would think), to this end, they have advocacy and volunteer groups to improve habititat, raise game, lobby the government. They realize they are not held in high esteem by the public. I think that this is a shame--because much of the negative attitude is not deserved.

Sure there are less than stellar hunters that give the sport a black eye. There are participants in any sport or hobby (including mountain biking) that give their respective sports black eyes.

Mountain bikers should realize that many of our needs are consistant with the needs of hunters and that respecting hunters and their sport will be more constructive than bashing it.

Rant over.

Jeff

[American_Lesion]

Did I bash hunting? I think I was the one who posted about "shaking furry critters out of trees so that yhey can be breaded and deep fried"....I also mentioned (in PETA aggressions) that herds need to be culled (by hunting and trapping) or we suffer disease, over-population, and critters descending upon urban centers in order to survive. I don't think a Glock-19 is necessarily a "sportsmans tool", but that's another debate. Also, I have been to MANY gamelands here in western PA. During peak cycling season (summer), next to NOBODY is using these lands ('cept for the occassional bass fisherman). I find "designated routes" in these parcels to be OVER-REGULATION. I lived in Alaska. I've seen over-regulation. I know what it looks like.

I also know what game commission employees look like around here. They're gonna need something with a STRONG motor to catch up with an offending cyclist & to haul these beefcakes around.

[Slacker]

I have to weigh in here:

I don't like the drunk, red-neck, shoot 'em up hunter stereotype. It doesn't match up with my real-world experiences...
It does match up with my experiences, in one particular situation, ... when a group of them all get together back at the hunting club cabin in the evening. Ok, ok, scratch red-neck, shoot 'em up, but add in gambling, card playing, cigar smoking, cussing, farting, and it's all very accurate.


And a second point, that I may recall incorrectly, from when this all came into being a year or two ago: Weren't there some time limits on when the game lands were off limits? I seem to recall 'From the last sunday in ______ (fill in the month here) to the first full moon in _______ (some month)...'. And since all hunting, even on game lands, in prohibited on sundays, can't you ride GLs on sundays? Or am I recalling this all wrong?


P.S: I'd much rather ride around and near where the fishermen go, as opposed to the hunters. The fishermen have a much stronger environmental ethic than the hunters, -- they are much more in tune with what pollution does to their waterways, they practice catch and release (not all, but lots of 'em), they're opposed to development and sprawl, whereas the hunters just want to go out and kill some animals for the sport of it. That's kind of an over simplification, but it makes the point.

[riderx]

Originally posted by Slacker
The fishermen have a much stronger environmental ethic than the hunters I have to disagree with that one. Around our local reservoir (trail riding area) the litter is unbelievable and it is mostly in the form of empty bait containers. I mean, if you carry it in full you can't carry it out empty?!! On the other hand, the areas I've biked that allow hunting are generally pretty clean with the occasional shotgun shell found.

Just food for thought.

[Slacker]

Around our local reservoir (trail riding area) the litter is unbelievable and it is mostly in the form of empty bait containers.

Yes, I've seen that type and I know what you are talking about. It's depressing to see.

In retrospect, I was referring to the more elitist type of fishermen who go the clean streams for 'fly hatches', they get all mad if there's any hint of pollution in the headwaters, and rally against any kind of development that will affect their favorite watershed. In the mountains of northcentral PA, there's a large group that falls into this demographic.

Then there's the local guy who fishes along the banks of the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, and when he leaves, the crushed beer cans, bait boxes, candy-bar wrappers and cigatetts butts do not leave with him. YMMV.