[pct-l] Dogs in National Parks/horses/mules/llamas

Thu Dec 15 14:06:00 CST 2011

I don't know for sure which does the most damage, but I do know that I hate
hiking on trails used heavily by horses more than on trails used by
anything else (although I love horses and think they're beautiful!). Maybe
that's because I have spent a bit of time hiking in the NW and they do
cause a bit of damage there, especially when it's raining (which is often).
They churn up mud, and yeah, although it's holes and not ditches they
leave, they still loosen the soil enough to move it downstream when it does
rain, causing erosion. They also kick out check steps and water bars
(mostly ones that are old and breaking down or not fortified properly).

But mostly it's because THEY POOP EVERYWHERE. And nobody ever picks it up!
I don't understand why it's not common practice to pick up horse poop. We
have to bury our human poop, and we have to bury or carry out our dog poop,
but it seems nobody gives a second thought about horse poop, even though it
is annoying to step around when fresh, and it eventually leaves a pile of
organic material in the trail which gathers and retains moisture, causing a
puddle and a muddy spot.

Seahorse

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Charles Doersch
<charles.doersch at gmail.com>wrote:

> On the Colorado Trail this summer we shared the trail with the occasional
> backcountry horsefolks, and with dozens of mountain bikers. What a rut the
> bikes make. And them zooming up on you around so many corners ... ick ...
> and while I understood how much fun they were clearly having, I wished them
> or me elsewhere. But, fair is fair: the Colorado Trail often allows bikes
> (more's the pity).
>
> But the horses here in Colorado don't really seem to impact the trail in a
> negative way. In fact, I'm can't help but be glad to see them. We also
> don't tend to have the big outfits -- and the gentleman/gentlewoman riders
> who courteously care for packer and wilderness are a delight.
>
> But with all the backpacking we've done where we've shared trails with
> horses in Canada and in the US, we've primarily noticed how horse traffic
> can change trails where there's significant precipitation. Then we had to
> slog through deep mud + horse poop churned up soft and blended by horses.
> Wow, that can get exhauasting. I wonder if that happens in Washington? But
> we've sort of considered our experience of that as being part of the normal
> "nuisances" or "inconveniences" of backpacking -- like when rain run-off
> just wants to come down the trail and you end up slogging in mud anyway. Or
> in New Zealand where no matter what trail you're on in the South Island,
> you're up to your nipples in mud. Can't blame horses there. And the
> penguins aren't having any of it.
>
> In Canada, the larger numbers of horse traffic deep in the backcountry of
> Jasper and Banff at times changed the wilderness experience -- big tents,
> huge campfires, steaks and wine served from pack horses (yes, I drooled,
> looking on), large paddocks and rifles (what the old timers called "butter
> and egg" men with their big-ticket large parties) ... sometimes that was a
> festive change, but it really did drive off the wildlife and "colonized"
> the area with nothing like Leave No Trace camping: chopping wood and
> digging poop ditch latrines, clearing brush, horses grazing down meadows of
> wildflowers, etc.. We hiked on and farther up -- and since Canada's
> National Parks are HUGE, there was always room to get away.
>
> I'm not worried about horses, I guess, on the PCT. But mountain bikes, dirt
> bikes, and ATVs where they're not allowed -- arrgghh. Those guys and gals
> are vandalizing a national scenic trail -- requiring volunteer and tax
> dollars to regularly repair it. I'm all for Yogi's suggestions about
> holding your ground when they zoom up, and we'll do it. Four of us abreast
> should make those hooligans a rough detour. Other possible remedies I've
> heard of I won't post online. :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> ~Charles and the guys
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Edward Anderson <mendoridered at yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Mark,
> >
> > I agree with Snowplow that stock are needed, indeed, necessary, to help
> > create and maintain the PCT.
> >
> > Horses are not a significant source of trail erosion, dogs even less.
> > WHEELS are the worst source of trail erosion. This is especially true
> when
> > mountain bikers and motorcycle riders brake while going down hill. The
> > groove created, when it rains, becomes a channel and, when it rains, a
> rut
> > for water to run down - and eventually a virtual ditch. The tracks made
> by
> > the hooves of horses and mules, are similar to hiker tracks. If the
> surface
> > is soft, holes are created. The holes can collect rainwater and allow for
> > the possibility of the water to percolate downward or evaporate.
> >
> > I sometimes work as a volunteer on PCT trail maintenance. In the past two
> > weeks I have spent four full days with other volunteers. We are working
> on
> > a slippery and sometimes dangerous rock area on Section D. The
> > heavy equipment needed was brought in by mules and horses. This kind of
> > trail work goes on all along the PCT that we all use. Llama Lady and her
> > husband do it with their llamas.
> >
> > During my 2008 PCT ride I camped with a volunteer Backcountry Horsemen
> > Group (I am a BCH) on Section O in Northern California. They were
> spending
> > about two weeks supporting (packing in equipment,food and water) to over
> 50
> > volunteer Boy Scouts who were doing volunteer PCT trail work. I recall
> > riding through the large Boy Scout Camp and also through several areas
> > where they were working. God bless the volunteers, including their stock
> -
> > without them we would not have a PCT.
> >
> > MendoRider-Hiker
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: "rcluster at comcast.net" <rcluster at comcast.net>
> > To: mark utzman <blackbelthiker at gmail.com>
> > Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 1:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] Dogs in National Parks
> >
> > Mark,
> > You also need to research the history of the building and maintaining of
> > the PCT.
> >
> > Those "horses, pack mules and llamas" do not destroy the trail, they
> BUILT
> > and MAINTAIN the trail. Without them and their owners/handlers, there
> would
> > not be a PCT for the rest of us to enjoy.
> >
> >
> > Snowplow
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "mark utzman" <blackbelthiker at gmail.com>
> > To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 1:46:38 PM
> > Subject: [pct-l] Dogs in National Parks
> >
> > A post I read today about whether or not hikers are dog friendly on the
> > trail prompted me to send this reply. Why do we always let the
> proverbial "
> > bad apple " ruin it for the rest of us who are responsible and do want to
> > abide by the rules, but some of the rules have gotten so stringent and
> out
> > of hand it borders on the ridiculous. To say since we as hikers don't
> want
> > off road vehicles on the trails and make it illegal to do so, then we as
> > hikers should just accept all the other rules imposed on us by the
> > government, including dogs in state and national parks, doesn't hold
> water.
> > I know by first hand experience that horses, pack mules and llamas have a
> > MUCH MORE detrimental impact on trails and the back country than do dogs,
> > and horses and pack mules are permitted on state and national park back
> > country trails, while dogs are not. Please don't misunderstand me, I love
> > horses and have ridden horses in the mountains and it is a wonderful way
> to
> > travel: I am just trying to make a point. Horses destroy the trail.
> Period.
> > Dogs do not. After about 2 years of investigating, researching and
> > contacting state and federal agencies and speaking with a dozen or so
> > employees about the rules and regulations concerning dogs in national
> > parks, I finally spoke with a park superintendent that did some research
> > and later contacted me ( I was intending to wing it and risk taking my
> dog
> > through national parks, thinking a fine would be minimal ). She told me
> > that the penalty for taking a dog in the back country of Sequoia/Kings
> > Canyon National Park and Yosemite National Park is a $5000 fine and a
> > potential 6 months in jail! WHAT?? Some felonies are not even so severe.
> > California is bankrupt. It's revenue for the state. Here's an idea of
> mine;
> > Why not implement a permit system for dogs, that if a hiker is going to
> > take a dog through a state or national park they must apply for a permit
> to
> > do so, charging a fee ( revenue ) and explaining some basic rules that
> will
> > be enforced, such as dog must be on leash at all times, bury or pack out
> > poop, etc.Just as a hiker must obtain a back country permit, and also in
> > California a campfire permit (if you build a campfire ), why not allow
> dog
> > owners to get a permit for their dog? I know it is not a perfect idea or
> > solution, and there seems to always be a loophole someone finds. OK,
> punish
> > the bad dog owners, but don't punish the responsible dog owners. Just a
> > thought. Mark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pct-L mailing list
> > Pct-L at backcountry.net
> > To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> >
> > List Archives:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is is prohibited without express permission.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pct-L mailing list
> > Pct-L at backcountry.net
> > To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> >
> > List Archives:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is is prohibited without express permission.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pct-L mailing list
> > Pct-L at backcountry.net
> > To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> >
> > List Archives:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is is prohibited without express permission.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is is prohibited without express permission.
>