[pct-l] The bicycle-PCT conundrum

[Douglas Tow]

Good morning!

Please bear with me as I go through a somewhat tortuous thread of reasoning:

1.  Barring injury, a hiker can only hike.
2.  A horse and rider might be forced by circumstances to proceed at hiker
speed, which is not orders of magnitude slower than an a rider.
3.  Mountain bikers have the capacity, and expectation, to achieve long
daily trail distances on a trail like the PCT, which would reduce the time
between resupply, or even eliminate overnights (camping, cooking) along
most of the trail.
4.  If that is a mountain biker's expectation, only emergency food,
clothing, and shelter might be deemed necessary.

However, referencing (1) and (2) above, a cyclist with a breakdown becomes
a hiker, and the mind boggles about those places along the trail which are
days (walking) from a road or resupply.  What is a broken-down cyclist
going to do without food or shelter 60 miles away from anywhere?  It is
rare for a PCT hiker to need emergency rescue for other than illness or
injury - few if any need rescue because they are out of food, a way to
carry lots of water, or lack a way to stay warm overnight.  If a cyclist
thinks that he can get from Yosemite to Sonora Pass, or even Markleeville,
in a day, would he really carry a bear canister?

I am sure that there are cyclists who have gone days away from roads (CDT,
perhaps), and who carry sufficient emergency food and gear in case they are
stranded, and I respect them for that.  I am just as sure that unprepared
broken-down cyclists on the PCT would be a non-trivial problem.

Doug