[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[pct-l] RE: Bikes on the PCT

Ben Sabraw wrote:
>I am sincere and this isn't random trolling meant to illicit angry
>responses, but rather a realistic question.

Of course you're trolling.  Don't insult our intelligence.

>I still see nothing wrong with bikes on the PCT and the reason listed were
>totally inadequate.

They were more than adequate - your problem is you don't like them.  Denial
is a wonderful thing.

>Reason 1: "The horse people built the trail and continue to maintain it."
>So if those that cause the damage "attempt" to fully repair it, its okay? I
>believe that logic is flawed. I doubt you would be happy if horse usage was
>as high as hiker usage in some areas, but don't worry they are
>"maintaining" the trail.

Whether you like it or not, horses do a large part of the maintenance on the
PCT.  And the horse usage IS high in some areas - but I didn't see that
those areas were any more damaged or any less maintained than other sections
of the trail.  Maybe you should actually get out there and do some
maintenance - you might find out how much work is done by horse people and
how tough maintenance on the PCT would be without those horses.

Damn - I hate it when I find myself defending horses.

>Reason 2: "The 1964 wilderness act stipulates no wheeled vehicles of any
>kind....etc. etc."  Well, I completely agree. The government passed an act
>and because our omnipotent and ever-wise government wrote this into law, we
>shall no longer discuss said acts' merits. Good thinking, lets be selfish
>and keep the blinders on just like the stupid mules that trudge out of the
>valley every day all day from june till september.

No - you don't have to stop discussing it - but blowing off other peoples
reasons isn't discussion.

But you've got me confused - you say you agree to no wheeled vehicles, but
then you want to ride a mt bike on the PCT. When you make up your mind,
maybe there'll be something to talk about.  You can't have it both ways.

>Reason 3: "Bikes dont belong on the PCT for the same reasons that hikers
>dont belong on bike trails. Its not safe for the people on foot." Well this
>is utterly ridiculous. I have done a lot of hiking and biking on multi use
>trails and have had no unpleasant experiences with hikers or bikers, maybe
>because I am a hiker and a biker and know how to be courteous as well as
>informed of the local rules, but to assume this poses actual "danger" to
>the hiker is laughable.

Bullshit.  I've been nearly run down by mt bikers on trails from
Pennsylvania to California.  Your assumption that bikers are courteous and
follow the "rules" is "sometimes" true - and very often NOT. If you haven't
had "unpleasant experiences" then you haven't spent enough time on trail (as
a hiker).

>My hiking partner in 2001 was nearly run over by a train of mules outside
>of the muir hot springs when the handler lost control and the dumb animals
>spooked. The trail was waist high with brush and he was nearly trampled.
>Now that is dangerous. And the biggest joke is the folks who stand around
>and stonewall a biker headed downhill. Yeah, that's realistic. All you are
>proving is your ignorance and your stubborness. Do you want the biker to
>ride cross country right off the trail and tear up the flora and fauna?

I've done that - with mt bikes and with dirt bikes.  If they're going so
fast that they have to run off the trail then they're going too fast.  Too
bad - wonder how long it'll take the rescue people to get here and pull them
out of that canyon?

>Do you want him or her to turn around and peddle back where they came from
>even if they are on the tail end of a thirty mile stretch?

Yes.  Did it twice on the PCT in 2000.  And I'll do it again if the
situation arises.

>Do you want to make them feel really uncomfortable and send them away with
>head held in shame like a child in timeout? Give me a break! I hope no one
>would consider assaulting someone over something like this because that is
>seriously bad news for everyone involved.

Quite the reverse - I thought they were going to assault my wife and me.
That would have been a serious mistake on their part even given the
difference in age and numbers. As for shame - they should be ashamed - if
they're on the PCT they're breaking the law.  If you don't like that law
then get it changed if you can.  But don't bitch to me about how you don't
like it and won't abide by it - you won't get any sympathy.

>I will always support the PCT  physically and monetarily, but to assume
>that bikes have no place within the borders on this trail is shortsighted.
>I am not interested in riding the JMT or the Marbles or Jefferson Park, but
>I will ride the areas around Downieville, and who knows, maybe after the
>ADZPCTKO in April I'll do a short fifty miles of PCT after breakfast!
>Anyone want to come along?

In other words, you don't really "support the PCT  physically and
monetarily", you're just blowin' smoke to make excuses for your own selfish,
illegal and dangerous behavior.  Wanta bet on whether we can get a ranger to
be a mile or so uptrail from where you start?

"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart

Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.