[Cdt-l] Cdt-l Digest, Vol 63, Issue 10

Wed Dec 5 06:39:27 CST 2012

Well, it looks like I sent you "3" copies of the same email.....sorry but it never showed having been sent!  
Later!

Susan

www.woodswitch.com home to my Pacific Crest Trail Journal
www.travelswithissy.com home to my Continental Divide Trail Journal
www.groomelite.com education for horsemen by horsemen, Founded by Susan Bates

 > From: cdt-l-request at backcountry.net
> Subject: Cdt-l Digest, Vol 63, Issue 10
> To: cdt-l at backcountry.net
> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 19:39:43 -0600
> 
> Send Cdt-l mailing list submissions to
> 	cdt-l at backcountry.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	cdt-l-request at backcountry.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	cdt-l-owner at backcountry.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Cdt-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation (Tony Mason)
>    2. Re: Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation (Steven Camp)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 17:50:43 -0700
> From: Tony Mason <tony at greyrock.org>
> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation
> To: Steven Camp <wingnut.hiker at gmail.com>
> Cc: cdt-l at backcountry.net, Jim Wolf <mail at cdtsociety.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CACDsJbDgg2HWp+auqSkZ6voLhnh+F72Ou3FLQ7kyFWzrpS6cnA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> I have to agree with Camp. I too have thru-hiked and thru-biked this
> section and saw no bikes besides myself.
> This is a very remote area that gets virtually no use other than hikers and
> bikers on the CT/CDT.
> In fact I would argue that it should be left as is and the resources be
> spent on other areas that get more traffic and have higher potential for
> user conflict. Monarch Crest would be an obvious choice.
> Tony
> 
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Steven Camp <wingnut.hiker at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > As a lifelong resident of Colorado, I have to say that comparing the
> > potential for this new piece of trail to get overused by bicyclists as in
> > the Monarch Crest is extremely misleading.
> >
> > The Monarch Crest bike ride is a travesty and a environmental disaster.  It
> > is a commercially supported downhill bike ride with 3800' feet of descent
> > and of moderate difficulty. (A somewhat effortless downhill thrill ride.)
> > It
> > is easy to access, being within two hours driving time of 3 million people.
> > A commercial shuttle operation takes cyclists to the top and they come
> > screaming down, day after day.
> >
> > By contrast, the area where this 32 miles of trail is going to be built is
> > very remote, much further away, and much less accessible.  The nearest
> > towns
> > are Saguache and Gunnison, which are tiny population centers.  The proposed
> > new trail is not a downhill ride, but typical up and down trail terrain.
> > There are numerous rides of the same caliber much closer to Denver.  There
> > is really no reason whatsoever to think people would travel 450 miles or
> > more for a day ride that can be found in one's backyard.
> >
> > It this is built it will be part of the Colorado Trail. CT people will
> > build
> > it. They will adopt it. They will maintain it. It has always been the norm
> > for the CT and other trails in Colorado to be open to bicycles except in
> > wilderness areas. There are probably fewer than 100 or so people who ride
> > the CT end to end every year. That number is a realistic one for how much
> > use this new trail might get. A hiker might see a bicycle or two in this
> > area, but probably won't. The two times I have been through here I never
> > saw
> > a cyclist other than myself.
> >
> > As someone who has both thru-hiked, thru-biked and been on trail crews
> > building and maintaining the CT, I can tell you emphatically that it is the
> > best built, best maintained trail in Colorado. The road walk that this new
> > trail will replace consists of some nasty jeep trails which are just as
> > unpleasant to mountain bikers as they are to hikers.
> >
> >
> > Yours for non motorized multi-use, and sharing...
> >
> > Camp
> > (PCT 2005  CT 2007, 2009  GET 2008, CDT 2010)
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> > On Behalf Of Jim Wolf
> > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 8:38 PM
> > To: cdt-l at backcountry.net
> > Subject: [Cdt-l] Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation
> >
> > The Forest Service has proposed to relocate the CDT for 32 miles in
> > southern
> > Colorado -- from Lujan Creek to the La Garita Wilderness. (This is in the
> > Cochetopa Hills, south of Monarch Pass.)
> >
> > The new alignment would be a nonroaded route close to the Continental
> > Divide
> > and off the roads that have been used to date. Under the preferred
> > alternative, travel would be restricted to foot and equestrian use, and
> > mountain biking would not be allowed.
> >
> > Although we have some concerns about water access and details of the
> > location, we generally endorse the Forest Service's proposal.
> >
> > Mountain biking organizations are urging the Forest Service to open the
> > trail to mechanized users. With the nearby example of the bike freeway
> > between Monarch Pass and Marshall Pass in mind, we are urging the Forest
> > Service to hold to its understanding that mountain biking in this unspoiled
> > and scenic setting would not be consistent with the nature and purposes of
> > the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail.
> >
> > We have submitted comments to the Forest Service.
> >
> > Our comments, with links to related information, have been posted in the
> > What's New section of our website, www.cdtsociety.org .
> >
> > Please take a look at the materials we have posted. You can submit comments
> > (address posted on our site) by December 17.
> >
> > We would appreciate your sending us your submissions or other thoughts on
> > this matter.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cdt-l mailing list
> > Cdt-l at backcountry.net
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cdt-l mailing list
> > Cdt-l at backcountry.net
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Robert Anthony Mason MD
> Windsor Family Clinic PC
> 4630 Royal Vista 7
> Windsor, CO 80521
> 970-530-0575
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20121204/5e30ab00/attachment-0001.html 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:37:33 -0700
> From: "Steven Camp" <wingnut.hiker at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation
> To: "'Dan Bedore'" <mr_dan_bedore at yahoo.com>,	"'Steven Camp'"
> 	<wingnut.hiker at gmail.com>
> Cc: 'Cdt Ring' <cdt-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <50bea5de.64cb320a.2c0b.ffff80a0 at mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Hmmm?
> 
>  
> 
> ?Several times I saw all the wildlife run out of a valley in response to the whine of motorcycles. ?
> 
>  
> 
> So we should not allow the residents of Colorado to ride bicycles?????   
> 
>  
> 
> It?s wonderful having all these east coast superstars helping us out.  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of Dan Bedore
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 4:09 PM
> To: Steven Camp
> Cc: Cdt Ring
> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation
> 
>  
> 
> For the record, I have not confused motorcycles with bicycles. I quote Jim Wolf's note:
> 
> "Mountain biking organizations are urging the Forest Service to open the 
> 
> trail to mechanized users."
> 
> While you may personally not be proposing the use of motorized vehicles, I can assure you there is no shortage of motorcycles and giant 4 wheel drive vehicles or of people who would like to drive them on or off trails in Colorado. I hiked the CDT across Colorado just a few months ago and I saw them, jumped out of their way, and observed their damage. This being  a democracy, they too can propose whatever they like. And I'm sure they have. 
> 
>  
> 
> I'm also not confusing the damage cause by bicycles with that caused by other means. I have 15,000 miles of hiking and observations to draw on, and I've personally watched bicyclists riding out of tread, skidding, churning mud, and doing all sorts of other things that the riders know very well damage trail. I've personally hiked on these damaged trails, and I've personally repaired them. A great deal of damage has been done to the CDT by bicycles. 
> 
>  
> 
> I welcome you to state your opinion on this forum. But I reserve the right to state my opinion. My concerns are based on fact, and spring from my love of wilderness and hiking, and I stand by my previous comments. 
> 
>  
> 
> Dan Bedore
> 
> www.bedore.org
> 
> 
> On Dec 4, 2012, at 1:59 PM, "Steven Camp" <wingnut.hiker at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> You seem to have motorcycles and bicycles confused.  There is no proposal to put motorcycles on the trail.  The places you describe as rutted were damaged by motor vehicles and motorcycles, not mountain bikes.    
> 
>  
> 
> From: cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:cdt-l-bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of Dan Bedore
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 2:43 PM
> To: Cdt Ring
> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] Lujan to La Garita CDNST Relocation
> 
>  
> 
> I'm more inclined to agree with Jim Wolf, the route should be closed to bikes, and I've submitted that opinion to the forest service. 
> 
>  
> 
> Let's make my opinion clear. I'm not opposed to bikes and other vehicles. I drive and ride myself where it is appropriate to do so. And there are plenty of roads and trails in the vicinity of the Cochetopa Hills where people can ride, so there is no negative impact to the bike riding population if one route is set aside for serene, quiet hikes where one is able to think and to see wildlife. 
> 
>  
> 
> But in my hike across Colorado this last summer, there were many times I had to jump off the trail for speeding bikes. Several times I saw all the wildlife run out of a valley in response to the whine of motorcycles. Miles of trail were 5 feet wide, eroded 2 feet deep, and nothing but loose rocks and roots, all due to wheeled traffic. And as I looked at the various routes I crossed, I realized that all routes were like this. So why not have one route through Colorado which is decent, enjoyable hiking?
> 
>  
> 
> Are the bikers complaining that they don't like to ride through the kind of damage that bikes wreak? Giving them access to the new route will only cure that problem for a few months, when the new route will become just as bike damaged as the old. 
> 
>  
> 
> I'm for having a nice walking trail across Colorado. 
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20121204/0bd1c308/attachment.html 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cdt-l mailing list
> Cdt-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
> 
> 
> End of Cdt-l Digest, Vol 63, Issue 10
> *************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20121205/8ef5fa78/attachment.html 