[pct-l] C-A-M-P-F-I-R-E-S / And the Mountain Bike problem

[Benjamin Grunbaum]

I have always found this discussion rather unproductive.  I mountain bike
now and then, hike frequently and would like to ride horses but have not
had more than a handful of opportunities.  The truth in this discussion is
that all hikers, bikers and horses all cause damage to the trail.  I have
helped with trail work, as many of you have, and have seen damage done by
all three.  I hiked 18.5 miles on the PCT by Idyllwild yesterday and saw
quite a few areas where people (most certainly hikers) had cut switchbacks.
 I saw areas where the narrow trail had collapsed on the downslope edge of
the footbed because of horses.  While I did not see any mountain bike
tracks yesterday, I can say that mountain bikers frequently ride up banks
that were not meant to be ridden up.  One thing that, I would venture to
say, almost everyone does is go around wet or muddy areas.  While the torn
up area is a sign that the trail could be improved, when you walk around
the areas you are creating more problems.  I must admit, I am guilty as
charged.  I have done less than ideal things for the trail in the process
of trying to enjoy myself and not getting unecessarily dirty.

More important than debating who causes the most damage, a argument which
will never end, is what we do, as individuals, about the damage that was
created?  There are many ways we can work to mitigate the negative effects
of the communities we consider ourselves a part of.  Donating time and
money being the main ways.
I will say that I have learned all three communities (hiking, biking and
equestrian) shed blood, sweat and tears and donate money to maintain trail.

Now, I must opine that, in general, allowing bikes on the PCT is a horrible
idea.  On the steep and narrow trail in areas such as the PCT around
Idyllwild, a very serious if not fatal injury would be likely should a fast
mountain biker come down such a trail.  It could only end badly.  Allowing
bikers on the PCT would be a very dangerous proposition.  While I do not
doubt members of the mountain biking community would help repair the PCT
were they aloud to ride on it, the negatives far outweigh the positives of
allowing Mountain bikes on the PCT.  There are plenty of other safer places
for mountain bikers to go where going so fast is unlikely to result in
grave injury or aggravating encounter for a hiker or equestrian.


On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM, jason povey <golobos_55 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Congress cares about what lobbyist tell them to care about.  SUWA is a
> great example of how to lobby congress to get them to give a crap about
> protecting trails and wilderness, check them out and the Red Rock Act they
> have been working on.  My intention was not to start an argument, I
> mountain bike and love touring so of course I would love to tour the PCT,
> it would be amazing.  That being said I do see how hikers feel
> uncomfortable with mnt bikes on the trail, i am not advocating motorbikes,
> but I have never in 18yrs of mnt biking seen a bike tear up a trail like a
> horse.  The conditions to cause significant damage are not conditions
> people typically choose to ride in and frankly muddy trails are nearly
> impossible to ride a bike...but not a horse not even getting into the
> damage caused by a 1000lb animal with four legs and a 200lb man on a 30 lb
> bike with 3in wide tires.  I am fine sticking with the Divide trail and
> maybe someday there will be a
>  sister trail to the PCT for bikers like has been developed on the divide,
> but then again you have to weigh the damage of a new trail.  Its a sticky
> subject and one that I dont think is important enough to spend time arguing
> over, there are much more pressing issues threatening our wilderness than
> my fat tires.  Jason
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 8:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] C-A-M-P-F-I-R-E-S / And the Mountain Bike problem
>
>
> I have one point to make about talking about bicycles on the PCT. It was
> tried here, and it was, looking back on it and including my participation
> in it, just plain awful. Of course that is just my opinion, but I am
> confident there are plenty of others that share it.
>
> Continuing to go over the same old points with the same people expecting a
> different outcome is possibly a good definition for insanity. That kind of
> insanity will do nothing good here, but hey, of that's what you want, go
> for it. It will work out just like the times before: doing nothing and
> getting nowhere. There's a moderator here that will (try to) end it when
> the time comes.
>
> As far as asking me what my "qualifications" are, they are everything, and
> they are nothing, just like everyone else. What kind of person wants to
> compare their worthiness to have an opinion to someone else? Someone that I
> don't care to be affiliated too closely with.
>
> Hike your own hike, Ed. Don't worry about me, I really don't matter.
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubscribe, 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 prohibited without express permission.
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubscribe, 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 prohibited without express permission.
>