[at-l] The "Right" to Solitude (was: ATC ad policy)

[yumitori@montana.com (Ron Martino)]

> (3) Equestrians, mountain bikers, and hikers should have their own trails.

> The reason for (3) is that while there is nothing wrong with any of the
> three uses (they all look like fun to me), they just aren't compatible with
> each other.  Horse trails need to be built like roads in order to hold up, I
> can't imagine that horses like mountain bikes wizzing by, and mountain bikes
> are just too fast and jarring to share the trail with hikers.

> -- Jim

	I imagine this would depend a great deal on local factors, such as use
density in your area, and the fragility of the local terrain. For
example, in Montana most all Forest Service trails are multi-use.
there's little need to overbuild them in most areas, since the soil is
as capable of withstanding horse use as it is foot travel. It's not as
if we have an excess of moisture to contend with, after all. There are
certainly areas near streams and other riparian zones in which horses
churn up the ground too much, but the same happens when hikers use them
- it's the trail placement that's at fault.

	As for conflicts between users, the numbers are just not that great on
most paths. Some popular trails, especially those near outfitters that
cater to the tourist trade, do have restrictions on horse use, but it's
just not necessary in many areas. As for mountain bikers, my experiences
have been that the vast majority are aware and considerate of other
users. Certainly, there have been a couple of jerks, but then every
group has to contend with a few of those among their number.

	Ron 
-- 

yumitori(AT)montana(DOT)com