#1
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
SBT GRVL Runs Afoul of Local Ranchers & Residents in Colorado
NSFW image in the article, selected quotes below.
https://coloradosun.com/2024/01/07/s...anchers-clash/ Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
These are the same sort of issues that killed off many mass charity rides and proto-fondos back 20-30 years ago where it was common to have thousands of road cyclists at a single event of many in the state or region per year. I visited with the Chamber of Commerce in a relatively close but very rural metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia county about a mixed terrain race last year. One of the petitioners told everyone how terrible the bicyclists behaved at a large charity ride in the 1990s that they had for a few years before canceling the permit. This stuff sticks and is hard to shake. The balance between rural living and event promotion has been strained for a long time but has generally stayed out of the spotlight. This is another reminder that almost every gravel cyclist is a guest in someone else's home and needs to act like it. The promoter, the participant, as well as their support people need to be an ambassador for the sport - sentiment that seemed more common several years ago before the gravel boom in 2019. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
- If the roads are public, they arent the rancher's roads. Them complaining that there is 'too much' traffic is weak.
- Sucks that cows got loose because they freaked out over seeing cyclists coming. If the cyclists were on permitted roads, then livestock freaking out isnt a good reason to not allow the event to continue. - Spectators driving on roads is fine, even if someone dislikes the traffic. - People coming into the county a few days before the event is the weakest complaint I have heard in a long time. Oh waah waah, people are taking time off work and spending money while visiting the area where you live! - Cyclists littering garbage or clothing is wrong and needs to stop. - Spectators parking where they shouldnt is wrong and needs to stop. - Organizers not letting an ambulance thru is insane. I am guessing there is more to that claim than what is mentioned. Hope so, at least. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I've done SBT GRVL twice, and I'd hate to see it go away.
That said, after living at ground-zero of Ironman and other triathlons for several years, I have a lot of sympathy for the ranchers. These events are very disruptive if you live in the area, and I don't blame them for trying to get it shut down. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Classic NIMBY conflict. Similar forces helped destroy road stage racing in tbe US (see Tour of California). I guess it’s coming for “gravel” now with the increased popularity.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Actually, part of the SBT GRVL route is on private roads.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
But, if the above is the case, then the "easy" answer is to move the event on the calendar. I say this having cycled and hiked in Scotland, where there's a "right to roam", but part of that right is the responsibility not to disrupt active farming operations. Seems like the same should apply here (even if the roads are public). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"peak ranching season" is absolutely hilarious.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
We should be careful in thumbing our nose at others behind a sense of mass ownership of common spaces.
Quote:
Someone who lives in Weschester County New York doesn't have primacy of access to gravel roads owned and maintained by the county in Routt County Colorado. In many areas, rural roads are at the pleasure of the landowner who has agreed to an easement with the county, city, or state. Obviously, this would be very specific, but "ownership" often isn't as clear as we like to imagine. Locally in Georgia, residents have successfully lobbied the county or state to take unpaved roads private, buy out easements, or cancel contracts for bridge renewal/replacement to reduce access to vehicles, horses, OHV, and bicyclists/hikers. Quote:
There's a fine balance here and while it's fun to be glib online, the reality is a lot more complicated and full of pitfalls that can kill an event dead instantly. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
How so? The article states the race is during one of the busiest periods for the local ranchers. Is that not actually true? I don't have a clue about ranching - closest I know anything about is sheep (UK), which has some very seasonal workloads (and I only know this due to advice for trekking/cycling across estates during certain seasons - similar advice relates to deer stalking).
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
How many people do you think you would have to poll in the general public before you found someone happy and accommodating to a stranger going to the bathroom in their yard and leaving behind soiled garments? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
It's either calving season or gathering/weaning/selling season I'd guess but why not just say so. I've ranched(own cattle) and cycled my whole life so with no pun intended I guess I'm "on the fence" on this one.
Rural people are no different from urban folks in the sense that no one wants to be bothered in daily life and we as, IMO, spoiled Americans are all so quick to cry foul when life goes a little astray. The littering and damage caused by vehicles is a real thing and I feel the county should bear the brunt of fixing these issues, after all it is their job! Sorry for the long rant but I can see both sides of this argument clearly. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The usual NIMBY attitude. Mostly NIMBY, with a sprinkle of legit concerns because of course nothing is black or white.
Ranchers, for how fiercly independent they like to say they are, are right up there some of the most entitled whiny folks on the planet. Their concept of property ownership is warped. Many still believe they have some sort of ownership over the public lands their cattle enjoy thanks to taxpayers. After having spent time in Montana, yikes. I realize there's more to it than a oversimplified negative view of ranchers, but my point is to at least consider the source of the gripes. Last edited by earlfoss; 01-08-2024 at 11:28 AM. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Understood. I was commenting on the public roads part. As in, if those complaining are citing examples that take place on public roads, then thats lame.
Any private access roads/paths should 100% be the decision of the person that owns the land. Absolutely, they should be able to say 'nope, your event is too disruptive for me to continue to allow access to my land'. |
|
|