Quantcast

Nisene Marks Reopens to Bikers

On the front page of todays Santa Cruz Sentinel:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/April/09/local/stories/01local.htm


Bicyclists will be allowed on the park's road again after a court settelement. (Shmuel Thaler / Sentinel)
Nisene Marks reopens to bikers
By GENEVIEVE BOOKWALTER
SENTINEL STAFF WRITER

APTOS — Mountain bikes are once again allowed on the fire road in the Forest of Nisene Marks State Park, after a settlement Friday ended the legal standoff between state officials and a group fighting to keep cyclists off hiking paths.

The announcement from the state Department of Parks and Recreation came early Friday evening, and avoids a courtroom showdown that either could have opened the entire park to bikers, or left most of it off limits to them.

The settlement basically maintains the status quo, letting cyclists continue riding the popular Aptos Creek fire road and lower 1,000 acres of the park, said Roy Stearns, spokesman for State Parks.

But it stops efforts to open single track trails to fat tires, an idea considered by some bikers and park officials as a way to reduce crowding in the park’s lower realm and expand riding terrain.

"We learned that there was opportunity for settlement, and it seemed like opportunity for settlement was a wiser action to save taxpayers money on appeal," Stearns said.

Bicycles are illegal on trails in the upper 9,000 acres of The Forest of Nisene Marks. When the property above the landmark steel bridge was sold by the Marks family to create a state park, it came with deeds allowing only hiking, nature study, camping and associated activities. Horses were specifically banned.

Bikes were not mentioned, but State Parks officials decided in the spirit of the deed, they would restrict pedalers from the trails. Cyclists would be allowed on the road, which was built to handle vehicular traffic.

The controversy arose around a new general plan, adopted in August 2003, that let parks officials study if bikes might be allowed on trails through the Marks’ former property.

Serenity-loving hikers rallied against the proposal. They sued, arguing it violated the original deed. A Sacramento Superior Court judge agreed, ruling that not only should cyclists be off the trails, they should be off the fire road too.

Some mountain bikers responded to yesterday’s announcement with mixed emotions.

"We’re grateful that they settled out and everything remains to the same standard that it was," said Eric Brecheen, owner of Mr. E’s Cyclery in Aptos.

The road closure could have hurt his business, Brecheen said, as most other popular mountain bike spots are on the north end of the county.

But Brecheen said he was disappointed more trails won’t open to bikes.

"When you confine everyone to the lower trails, then you have a population issue of a saturated trail with hikers and cyclists," he said.

"We as riders are willing to pedal the distance to upper trails to have access to it and would rather do that than ride in a populated area where there’s more risk of collision."

Sandy Henn of Aptos, spokeswoman for Citizens for the Preservation of The Forest of Nisene Marks State Parks, said she was thrilled with the result.

Most in her group never had a problem with bikes on the fire road, she said. They just didn’t want cyclists careening down trails now reserved for hikers.

"I’ve been smiling from ear to ear," Henn said. "I bet Herman Marks is just looking down on this and smiling. He has to be."
 

black noise

Turbo Monkey
Dec 31, 2004
1,032
0
Santa Cruz
That's sweet that the ban didn't stick. But the anti-bike people still did their damage, since now we're further away from getting more trails higher up the fire road. And what's up with them now? Why did they push for a complete ban if they didn't really care about the fire road?

Whatever, it's still nice to have it back.
 

HarryCallahan

Monkey
Sep 29, 2004
229
0
SC mtns
black noise said:
That's sweet that the ban didn't stick. But the anti-bike people still did their damage, since now we're further away from getting more trails higher up the fire road. And what's up with them now? Why did they push for a complete ban if they didn't really care about the fire road?

Whatever, it's still nice to have it back.
The anti-bike folks are a bunch of hypocrites. This settlement gives them almos exactly what they wanted. They pointed to trail damage and user conflicts in the lower park as to why there shouldn't be new trails in the upper park. Then they agree to a settlement that blocked a new park plan that would have considered trails in the upper park and fixed problems down below. I predict their next move will be to go after multi use trails in the lower part of the park.
 

black noise

Turbo Monkey
Dec 31, 2004
1,032
0
Santa Cruz
I love my "free the trail" shirt.

I would be ok with giving the lower trails to the hikers and then build new trails further up which would be high enough so only bikes could reach them (or crazy joggers). There is so much space that isn't being used up there, it's rediculous.