Dear HCN,
I wanted to correct what
I perceived to be the inaccuracy of your Wayward West blurb about
the International Mountain Bicycling Association’s decision not to
join the Utah Wilderness Coalition (HCN, 7/6/98). First, you got
the group’s name wrong, calling it the International Mountain
Biking Association. While that may seem like a small difference,
“bicycle,” “bicycling” and “bicyclist” help differentiate the
machine, activity and practitioner from “motorcycle,”
“motorcycling” and “motorcyclist.”
Second, the
decision in no way “allied” IMBA with “drivers of motorized
vehicles.” I have been covering this issue in the bicycling press
and have interviewed both IMBA staff and board of directors. They
have all indicated to me in no uncertain terms that IMBA is an
environmental organization concerned with land
preservation.
The bicycling board has committed
to work with the wilderness coalition to protect all the lands in
their proposal – but not necessarily as wilderness. That the
bicycling group was invited to join the coalition attests to the
group’s standing in the environmental community. Furthermore,
during our interviews several of the staff and board vehemently
denied any possibility of IMBA joining the “Blue Ribbon Coalition
or any other Wise Use (sic) group.”
As much of
the New West shifts to a recreation-based economy, motorized and
nonmotorized recreationists are likely to square off more and more
often over land access. As a mechanized – but not motorized –
activity, mountain bicycling tends to fall somewhere in the middle.
Because of this, bicyclists are in a unique position to help build
consensus between the two
groups.
Delaine
Fragnoli
Altadena, California
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Bicycling and wilderness: It’s not a simple matter.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
