NEMBA and IMBA need a little help from mountain bikers around the country in our efforts to protect mountain bike access in New Hampshire's White Mountain National Forest.  Comments from out-of-state visitors or potential visitors are important to the US Forest Service as they finalize their management plan.  We've even made it super-easy by providing a cut-and-paste comment that can be send via email or snail mail. I'd really appreicate some help from advocates around the country!  Thanks!

Here's the scoop:

Friday, December 17th is the last day to submit comments about the proposed White Mountain National Forest Plan. After this point, there will be little opportunity in helping to shape the policies that affect mountain biking in this National Forest.

There are two areas that NEMBA and IMBA are primarily concerned about.

**The Forest Service is proposing to limit cycling only to trails that are posted open, and we are concerned that this will dramatically limit cyclists' ability to recreate and enjoy the forest.

**Secondly, there are a few key trails that would be closed to bikes if the Wilderness designation is expanded. We urge you to refer to these specific trails so that they can be removed from the Wilderness plan.

Even if you do not regularly ride in the White Mountain National Forest, we hope that you'll take a couple of minutes and send in your comments. Numbers count! To make it as easy as possible for you, we've created a sample letter. In the best of all worlds, please try to personalize it into your own voice. However, if you don't have the time, simply pass it along as is. Don't forget to include your name and address.

For more info, please go to www.nemba.org

Mail your comments to:

Forest Planner
WMNF
719 N Main St.
Laconia, NH 03246.

You may email comments directly to : wmnfplan@...

==========================

[Your Name
Your Address
Your Town, State, Zip]

Dear Forest Service Planner

I am writing with regard to the U.S. Forest Service's White Mountain National Forest Plan Revision. Overall, I believe the preferred alternative, Alternative 2, is the most balanced option and I commend the USFS for its selection. However, I have serious concerns about two aspects of the preferred alternative.

I am concerned about the proposed change from an open-unless-closed to a closed-unless-open policy for mountain bicycling within the White Mountain National Forest. Many local trail networks utilize abandoned hiking trails and skid paths that are not part of the USFS trail system. The proposed change would ban bicycles while still allowing hikers and equestrians to use these existing travelways. Besides unfairly targeting bicycles, this makes no sense from an environmental standpoint. Studies have shown the impacts of mountain biking to be about the same as hiking, and less than equestrian use. Additionally, this policy would be confusing and hard to enforce. Please retain the current open-unless-closed policy for mountain biking in the Forest.

Also, while I support permanent protection of natural areas, designated Wilderness areas do not allow use of human-powered mechanical transportation such as bicycles. I urge you to designate these areas as "Management Area 6.2 Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Recreation" or incorporate the "Primitive Backcountry" classification used in the Chattahoochie National Forest of Georgia. At a minimum, please adjust boundaries to exclude trails suitable for mountain biking from the proposed Wilderness areas. These trails include the Highwater, Wild River, eastern Black Angel, and Basin Trails in the proposed Wild River Wilderness area.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Forest Plan Revision.


Sincerely,

[Your Name]