[pct-l] horses

Fri Dec 16 17:43:21 CST 2011

Well said Ed.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Edward Anderson
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:15 PM
To: Mike Yanasak ; pct-l at backcountry.net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] horses

You are obviously very ignorant of the reality, that, were it not for horses 
and mules, there would not BE a PCT for you to hike on. The trail that you 
are hiking on was probably, historically, a horse trail. Backpacking came 
later. The creation and ongoing maintenance of the trails is done by people 
(often volunteers) who need horses and mules to carry the required equipment 
and materials. Question: When did you last volunteer to help? Do you just 
hike on the PCT?  If you do, you can't help but sometimes seeing others 
working on the trail. Notice that they have horses and mules tied nearby. 
That's how the tools, equipment , materials and often also the food and 
water needed for the workers got there.
MendoRider-Hiker

________________________________
From: Mike Yanasak <amuddler2 at gmail.com>
To: shon mcganty <smcganty at yahoo.com>
Cc: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: [pct-l] horses

I look upon horses and mules as a pox on the trails--especially during
hunting season.  I hike mostly in the N. Cascades of Washington.  Some
trails have become essentially ditches at least two feet deep (check out
the area between Reflection Lake and White Pass as well as the trail,
although not PCT, between Holden and Lyman Lake.  I have also seen horses
tied to bushes 15' from the edge of the lake while their owners were
fishing).

I weigh 183 lbs. (plus my pack) and I wear relatively soft-soled shoes.  My
impact on the trail in most situations is relatively minor.  Now consider
the average hunter:  They sit on their asses atop a horse weighing maybe
1,000 lbs., and they often have two other horses in tow (one to carry all
their incredibly extensive gear, and one to haul out the carcass of a deer
or bear(!!!) that they might bag.  Each of the horses have 4 *STEEL
SHOD*feet (that's a lotta weight--and a lotta hard feet).  3,000 lbs.
and 12
feet!).  Is it maybe possible that one individual hunter might impact the
trail...oh, maybe 20 times more than I?  During hunting season (along about
September), most water sources are becoming somewhat scarce.  The horse
guys can haul in huge amounts of drinking water for themselves and then are
free to lead their stock to the tiny streams and seeps and allow them to
stand there drinking and urinating/crapping in the same water that I will
have to drink (check out the approved camping area at White Pass).
I have seen the Forest Service contractors frantically getting the trails
leading to the most popular hunting areas into shape in early September so
as to not inconvenience the hunters, and even stacking up firewood for
their use.  I don't know why.  When I mentioned this to a ranger, he
suggested I should write my congressman :-)

Horses are sort of like Mom and apple pie.  Inviolate, don't mess with
them.  And while I have sometimes envied the ability of horsemen to easily
travel such long distances in relative comfort, I don't think it's right.

Perhaps a very costly permit hanging from each horses tail would discourage
some of that overuse, while helping to pay for some of the mitigation...

Nader

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:30 AM, shon mcganty <smcganty at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'm so happy with the holiday season and my wonderful memories of the PCT,
> but thinking about the encounters I've had with horsemen and their effect
> on my wilderness exeriences will always get me down.
>
> Perhaps the horsemen on this list can correct any mis-information I have,
> and comments are welcome, but my general experience with horse riders has
> been largely negative.
>
> First, in my home state of Washington I'd guess the majority of horsemen
> are out there to hunt, or set up camps for the upcoming hunting season.
> Only a few are out there in the same manner as a hiker, that is the enjoy
> the wilderness as it is.  Horsemen, in my admittedly limited view, get out
> in the wood and try to change it to suit their needs and/or make it more
> like home.
>
> This includes building large small house-sized tarp camps, cutting down
> live trees to make structures and firewood, hauling up iron grills to 
> place
> over fires and leave them there, bring beer and carelessly discard them in
> the woods.
>
> I've had several times were I was treated bad by horsemen.  Almost broke
> out in a fight once.  I've gotten bad attitudes from them, and yes it feel
> like I'm looked down upon.  Once I over heard one talk about backpackers 
> as
> the enemy, we are what's wrong with the west, I recall him saying.  I'm
> making a guess that it's due to the lack of freedom they have in
> congress-designated wildernesses, where there are rules limiting group
> size, use of mechanized machines, ect.  They seem to look at backbackers
> has "liberals," with our desire for protection of the land and life being
> following by rules (from using life bait like frogs, limiting the number 
> of
> fish/game caught, or type of fish, or amound of land where trees can be
> harvested).
>
> Then there are times where a trail skirts the edge or goes through a
> meadow, and there are two or three sets of trail ruts.  If anyone knows 
> the
> answer as to if hikers play or role I'd love to know, but it's always 
> worse
> in areas frequented, not by hikers, but by horses.  The worst I've seen is
> six or seven parralel ruts, creating a 15 foot wide cut in the earth like 
> a
> three-lane jeep road, which looks horrible.  The two worse examples were 
> in
> Yosemite's valleys (crowed with both hikers and pack trains) and the
> central Pasayten Wilderness (remote area not heavily used by hikers but
> used lots by horsemen).  I'm just guessing it's not the hikers making 
> those
> (please correct me if I'm wrong here), but horses.  I know most hikers
> (I'll admit I do it sometimes) with skirt a wet trail to keep those feet
> dry, but why do horses do it?  I'm assuming there's a risk of a turned
> ankle because horses can't see under the water.  If that's the case, would
> the
>  horse be less likely to hurt an ankle if the horse lost 150+ lbs (ie. the
> rider got off)?
>
> I try to limit my frustration by saying the horsemen played a large role
> in creating these trails, and maintaining them, but I wonder about the
> accuracy of this sometimes.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Shon
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>

-- 
"I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."
(anon.)
“The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
(Voltaire)
_______________________________________________
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. 