Any of you guys or gals have sugestions to get into this. Is it easy to hook up with people to ride with. What kind of bike is good for entry into the sport.
This is a very easy sport to get into and to meet people. The hardest part is letting go of the preconception that dirt bikers are all rednecks who don't care about the environment. Very few of my skiing/ climbing/ kayaking/ biking friends have an open mind when it comes to dirt bikes. I do all those sports and also ride.I got into the sport when I bought a used dirt bike to access closed paved roads in the Aspen area to backcountry ski. My recomendation would be to buy an enduro/offroad model and stay away from motocross bikes. Offroad bikes have more supple suspension and a more tractable engine (better traction, less wheel spin). Motocross bikes have stiff suspension and brutal engines for the novice. When you want to jump or motocross race get a motocross bike. For all your other riding (trail, offroad, exploring )get an offroad or lighted enduro bike. I would stay away from the full dual sport bikes (lights,blinkers,horn, street legal tires) since they are porkers with no performance. I started with a four stroke because I did not want to mix gas. I now ride a KTM 300 two stroke which makes awesome power but also has good torque. You really cannot go wrong with any of the modern bikes. Buy a used bike, try it for a while, and see what you like. Good luck
Many, many, many, times I have said that if a motor bike or sled is going to ruin your entire day find a wilderness and recreate there..
If anyone out there is flat out too stupid to find said wilderness area pm me and I will shoot you out a list of every one in Colorado and Wyo..
Great part is that they are spread out over the entire states and you would have to be a total moron not to be able to find one..There is only like 5 million acres here in Colorado alone..
This is a great example of how these extreme nut job "outdoor purists" choose to work.. Log onto a sledneck and dirtbike forum.. Start a fight that was posted for STOKE... Then run and hide behind the man when confronted..
Cowardly flat out cowardly...
This is the reason that I will not support any new wilderness area's.. Some day the extremists will see that they are doing more harm for their cause than good..
Seems a lot of extremists choose to operate the this way.. Create a problem or do something that is way out of line in the BC... Then call the result a problem that needs solving.. Since these types seem incapable of anything other than creating problems they turn to big Govt for solution, add one more layer to the onion, then the bitch about the outcome..
So I guess if you want to SOLVE this problem and if you have the mental capacity find a wilderness area... Problem solved....
Like I said above if you cant seem to find a wilderness area you are too stupid to be in the BC anyway..
RDNECK - IMO your posts usually offer good insight and a balanced opinion, but I got some issues with this one.
"if a motor bike or sled is going to ruin your entire day find a wilderness and recreate there.."
good point
"Log onto a sledneck and dirtbike forum.. Start a fight that was posted for STOKE... Then run and hide behind the man when confronted.."
since when is the buzz a sledneck or dirtbike forum?
"This is the reason that I will not support any new wilderness area's"
Why, because someone has an opinion different than yours? Doesn't seem like a great reason to me.
"Seems a lot of extremists choose to operate the this way.. Create a problem or do something that is way out of line in the BC... Then call the result a problem that needs solving.."
Can you give some examples of this? Obviously you don't see use of public land for commercial gain, regardless of the impacts, a problem. But some folks do and they feel there needs to be regulation by a third party. Do you think if we left things to the raft companies and snowmobile tour operators they would self police and set aside land for other interests? I doubt it. Is it possible your outlook on this topic is biased?
Some people don't agree with types of recreation that negatively impact public land. I don't feel that is such a bad position. How do you balance public land use? Good question that would make for a good debate.
I know this was originally was a stoke post but since you put some of your views out there, I felt it was ok to respond.
since when is the buzz a sledneck or dirtbike forum?
Since they Added a Slednecks and Dirtbike subforum to the buzz
(on Wilderness) because someone has an opinion different than yours? Doesn't seem like a great reason to me.
The reason JV and I do not support new wilderness areas is because of the reason they are being proposed and by who. I do see valid points in establishing wild places, but not for the benefit of a few users. IE. BSA trying to limit snowmobile access in the National Forest. This is like taking the greatest good for the smallest user group. Now I do not like bandit trails, logging or oil wells. At the same time there needs to be a balance between recreation user groups that have a stake in these areas.
Example of users creating problems for personal gain... Cross Country Kim... takes off for the day to her favorite mountain trail with her dogs. Along comes Sledder Stew. He uses good trail etiquette and slows for Kim and the dogs. The dogs hate loud noise and kinda freak out. So Kim freaks out and waves her arms in manic motions so Stew will see her. Stew gives Kim a wave and rides on. Now Kim thinks Stew is rude and obnoxious just because he chooses to recreate in a different way. She goes home and complains to her other and then complains to her elected officials and then joins a group that would put her favorite trail into a protected area status.
WE NOW HAVE A PROBLEM FOR OTHER USERS OTHER THAN KIM.
Aspen Times: New wilderness would close bike trails
__________________ I guess now we know why they call them rapids and not slowpids. - N. Flanders
Yeah, I'm an idiot on that forum question. I usually go in through the main portal and just never look at the forum the post is in. Didn't even realize there was sledneck forum.
As far as your other point. I don't know for sure but I think it is highly unlikely that legislation is being passed only because of the voices of a few misguided backcountry users. A few people changing political will usually only happens when the few represent serious amounts of campaign finance dollars (probably not the case for non-motorized backcountry users). So when more wilderness areas are being proposed I have to assume its because many people (aka votes) are voicing their preferences.
What am I missing here? What is your proposal for shared use of public lands?
First this is a Dirtbike and sledneck forum in which this was posted.. For STOKE... Cant see how you did not see that one.. This post is also 2 years old..
Second... I think the balence is achieved, in this area anyway, with wilderness vs non wilderness area's.. Some places have dual use and some do not.. If I am hunting and have to be away from the trails I can go to any one of the 3 wilderness area's with in a 10 min drive.. If I am peddlin up in 4 mile I know that I may see other people in jeeps, 4 wheelers, or dirt bikes. Having both areas so close makes it easy to find the right type of area to hang out in.. I also realize that if I am hunting 4 mile someone might come along..
I did support and talked with many people supporting the browns canyon wilderness area. After talking and dealing with what might have been some of the more hard core opiniated folks on the wilderness side.. Well I had to walk away for a long list of reasons.. The main one is that many people are not looking for balence rather the opposite and are willing to do anything to achieve this.. Like I said before balence is what is needed not one extreme view or the other.. I think the best part is that we have quite a few good people in the BLM, NFS, and State Parks that do a great job of managing these very different views and have herd enough BS from both extreme sides to make a independent judgement that is best for the area/public..
Third now for attacking me on a business level... You know nothing of my businesses or multiple corporations that I either own or run.. My reputation and my families reputation not only in Buena Vista area but in all of Colorado speaks for its self. If you want to attack me, my family, or my business practices further I dont believe this is the place.. If you want to meet PM me and I would be happy to meet face to face to talk about things..
Now that I think about it I am sure we will get a chance to talk face to face one day and I look foward to it.. Maybe then you will see that guys like me and ran are not all that different and our respective groups will have to get along if we want to get something done about well for instance the oil well problem that is bad for us all.. But our respective groups will be happy spending our time fightin over some 3 mile long section of trail while 200 miles of new road are hammered in by oil companies.. Kinda funny..
That is it for me on this topic as I am out for a 2 day long, sledneck, snow cave, BC ski mission.. I will try and post a TR as soon as we get back!!
you people do not know what a true wilderness area is. you have a railroad track next to the river in browns canyon how can that ever be wilderness again. and oilwell problem haha that's funny. how many people own cars in denver? how many miles do they drive? +
i bet the amount of oil used in colorado is greater than the supply coming out of colorado. so that means you would rather ride your dirtbike around tearing shit up but you mind if oilwell contracters come in and drill some holes? thats the biggest oxymoron if i have heard one.
you can ride the bike but you are against drilling? you can use fuel to put in the bike and you still are against drilling?
colorado already has roads over the entire country ruining it so its not like a couple more will hurt.
Linear Mode
