Roger is certainly very territorial with his "our intersection" comment. The road near his house is NOT his. It, as do all public roads, belongs to everyone. It was not paid for by him. It was paid for by federal gas taxes (18 cents/gal), state gas taxes (22 cents/gal), registration fees as well was state sales tax. While cyclists are not paying gas tax while they are riding their bicycles, most do own cars & do pay road fees. Perhaps Roger should be less angry about cyclists on "his" roads & be happy they are not causing more traffic & congestion with another car.

It is certainly true that not every bicycle comes to a complete stop at each intersection. Much of this is because they are trying to get through the intersection quickly to stay out of the motorists way. Roger should spend some time observing cars at the same intersection. Very few of them come to a complete stop either. They slow to a rolling stop & then proceed through the intersection. This seems to work well for them keeping the traffic flowing.

Motorists have no ability to take the "high road" with regards to traffic violations. A CDOT study several years ago noted that 100% of the motorists in a large sample were speeding. Most cars, including the police & sheriff, do rolling stops.

To gilpindan: The history of roads in the US is that they were initially envisioned for bicycles, NOT cars ("The Big Roads" by Earl Swift). It is true that that vision quickly changed & we have become a car society - and heavily funded by government intervention & taxes. However, our community's roads are now for everyone - cars, farm trucks, pedestrians, horses & even bicycles. Share the road does not mean "get out of my way".

The activists trying to ban the race from Flagstaff quote the open space charter section 176 though it seems they have not bothered to read it.

Sec. 176. Open space purposes - Open space land.
(c) Preservation of land for passive recreational use, such as hiking, photography or nature studies, and, if specifically designated, bicycling, horseback riding, or fishing;

First - this references open space "land" - not paved car roads accessing the land. It also specifically ALLOWS bicycling in designated areas. The Flagstaff road certainly is designated for bicycles.

If you were to take the approach of banning bicycles based on 176 section C, you will also have to close the road entirely to cars. I also do not see anything here that would allow weddings - a complaint the anti-bike zealots are posing as a problem in this article.

Mr. White's letter make no logical sense. He states that "Preservation should be the only goal" & then asks everyone to put on their boots & tromp all over this area that is to be preserved. What he really means is that taxpayers should buy land for his private playground. Anyone with any activity that he does not approve of needs to be excluded. Really, per Mr. Whites own admission, all hiking should be banned from the open space. Let's just close it to all activities & see how much public support that generates.

The sosboulder hikers argue that they must have access to 100% of trails & that anyone who disturbs their narrow view must be excluded. What a self serving, narrow minded, discriminatory & arrogant attitude.