Page 46


last page

opinion: MTB in Wilderness…Leadership Needed! By Kevin Loomis - President of SDMBA

“There are downstream negative and unintended consequences that make such an effort politically unviable. IMBA will not expend its hard earned political capital on such a politically risky and unnecessary endeavor.” The International Mountain Bicycling Association’s (IMBA) response to questions about NOT supporting cycling in Wilderness.  


s President of the San Diego Mountain Biking Association, I speak for the 900+ members of one of IMBA’s largest Chapters. We are fighting a massive battle for trail access. The problem: If you focus on downstream consequences, you lose sight of upstream opportunities! Southern California is ground zero for lost trail due to development, environmental mitigation restrictions, unfathomable bureaucratic hurdles, and even Wilderness! Wilderness is both awesome and awful. As riders, we cherish nature and want it protected – but at what cost?   IMBA proclaims that Wilderness is a meaningless distraction because “only 2% of federal land is Wilderness.”    IMBA is omitting important data! • Alaska holds 52% of all Federal Wilderness.   • Nearly half of the remaining Federal Wilderness is in CA (14%), OR (2%) and WA (4%).

• State Wilderness along with Wilderness Designated Lands are NOT even included in IMBA’s vastly understated 2%.

According to a February 17, 2016 survey of 4,334 riders at singletracks. com, “96% of mountain bikers think Wilderness should be opened to mountain bikes…..Shockingly only 3.8% were opposed to bikes in Wilderness.” These numbers contradict the IMBA argument that a large percentage of riders don’t support bikes in Wilderness.  IMBA is attacking the singletracks survey.

cut off because they are in ‘designated’ state/federal Wildernesses. Designated Wilderness is land being considered for Wilderness – but oftentimes bikes are shut out immediately!

At least IMBA will be taking a proac- San Diego Mountain Biking Associative Wilderness stance in some areas: tion would like IMBA to take the following actions: • IMBA will focus on Advocacy efforts with their Chapters, 1. Conduct an IMBA member offering IMBA resources, staff, survey. “Should bikes be allowed time, money, and partnership in ALL, SOME, or NO Wilderness experience. areas?” • IMBA will pursue legislative and legal efforts (case-by-case) to redraw Wilderness boundaries to regain lost mountain bike trail or address Wilderness designations – where feasible and when a local chapter is involved.

Is this enough?

Ted Stroll, from the Sustainable Trail Coalition (STC), doesn’t think so.  STC’s mission is to overturn the Wilderness ban on cycling.  Since June 2015, STC has raised $107,357 – go Ted!  IMBA defends itself by stating that they can’t lobby due to being a 501(c)(3) non-profit. This is not true as this non-profit status does allow a percentage of funds for lobbying.  STC has hired a lobbying firm to work towards a bill in Congress. IMBA’s response? They are fighting STC due to ‘potential downstream consequences’ and weaknesses in the STC bill. Amazing.

2. Think different. Be willing to lose a little, but potentially gain a lot, by looking upstream for opportunities.  Losing a few relationships can make way for many new ones. 3. Stop fighting and start embracing other advocates.  Your members are demanding action!

4. Potential change in leadership. This could be difficult because IMBA’s senior leaders are pillars of the bicycling industry. If IMBA does not listen to members, it is time for transition leaders.

As a united community, we can achieve much. A few months ago, Mike Van Abel said IMBA would consider pushing for bikes in New Wilderness areas. IMBA has since dismissed what would have been a step in the right direction. Instead of downstream consequences, let’s start working together on upstream opportunities. Like this one!

What are other community leaders Kevin Loomis is the President of the saying about IMBA’s stance? Former San Diego Mountain Bike Association. IMBA Chair John Bliss recently joined STC’s Board and publicly chided IMBA in an open letter for lack of leadership on the Wilderness cycling ban.  IMBA dismissed Bliss’s letter as out of touch, stating that his service was too long ago. On January 7, the 5,000 member Available in Print APRIL 2016 New England Mountain Bike Association (NEMBA) wrote a public letter to Mike Van Abel (president of IMBA) reCLUBS & COMMUNITY questing that IMBA support STC.  IMBA Find your future peloton responded that NEMBA was not associated with IMBA, not a Chapter, and HANDBUILT BIKES did not understand ‘downstream conNAHBS comes to California sequences.’

San Diego Mountain Biking AssociIt has become so bad that many IMBA ation intimately understands “downChapter Presidents report seeing trails stream consequences versus upstream


opportunities” reasoning. It’s the reason to NOT do something.  This is where leadership is required – something in which IMBA is apparently deficient.  

Next issue


Don’t Miss A Single Issue

Print subscriptions available at   

Southern California Bicyclist - #130  

For over 20 years, Southern California Bicyclist has been THE source for comprehensive lists of events, clubs and news of interest to Southe...

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you