[pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED

[Kevin Cook]

Can I volunteer? I'm willing to patrol the entire trail from Mexico to
Canada next year ;)
All I need is some tickets! LOL

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:16 PM, AsABat <asabat at 4jeffrey.net> wrote:

> There are unpaid rangers in the Sierra as well. One is on this list. On San
> Gorgonio a thruhiker from the 70s volunteers.
>
> Uniforms and even some equipment is usually purchased by the volumteer.
> Insurance is fairly easy. Training takes some time but when a program has
> been running long enough often becomes a volunteer task as well. Often the
> biggest problem is fear by the pros that volunteers can't do a good job or
> will take their job. This usually becomes a nonissue as they get comfortable
> with each other.
>
> -----Original message-----
> From: Donna Saufley <dsaufley at sprynet.com>
> To: 'AsABat' <asabat at 4jeffrey.net>, 'Timothy Nye' <timpnye at gmail.com>,
> moodyjj at comcast.net
> Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 19:07:08 GMT+00:00
> Subject: RE: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED
>
> AsABat, I completely agree with what you’re saying.  I’ve heard about the
> Ridge Runners on the AT, though I am not at all certain how that program
> works.  There are the backcountry rangers in the Sierras as an example
> closer to home (they get paid but it’s mostly a labor of love).   On the
> other side of the argument, I’ve become aware of how much paid staff time
> can go towards operating volunteer programs.  There are dollars involved in
> training volunteers and supervising them in the field, as well as providing
> materials and uniforms.  No doubt there has to be liability coverage, etc.
>  And, you can’t fire them because they are volunteers!  Devil’s advocacy
> aside, I personally believe there should be programs like you describe.
>  Though we as hikers tend to hate the reality, it all takes funding.
>
>
>
> I also agree with Tortoise, cuts in government spending has had a huge
> effect on agency resources, and lack of law enforcement.  This is one of the
> threats to the PCT.  Even though that is true, the PCTA has managed to lobby
> Congress successfully  for increased funding from the USFS for trail
> maintenance (this is part of AHS’ “Hike the Hill” event, and is entirely
> volunteer self-funded).  The PCTA has gained much respect on all levels for
> their programs and contributions toward maintenance of the trail.  They’ve
> defied the odds and grown  the budget number.  But politics are fickle, who
> knows where the economy is going, and the threat to funding remains.
>
>
>
> L-Rod
>
>
>
> From: AsABat [mailto:asabat at 4jeffrey.net]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:32 AM
> To: dsaufley at sprynet.com; 'Timothy Nye'; moodyjj at comcast.net
> Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED
>
>
>
> Donna et al,
>
> While the PCTA does not have enforcement authority, there are many cases
> where the forest service uses volunteers to provide a public contact in the
> field. Into and San Gorgonio both come to mind. A volunteer in uniform has
> some power even if they can't write citations. A volunteer at a popular
> trailhead can provide info and educate users about the rules. A radio can be
> used to call LE when needed with description and license number. The
> challenge as you notes is the many jurisdictions.
>
> AsABat
>
>
>
> -----Original message-----
>
> From: Donna Saufley <dsaufley at sprynet.com>
> To: &apos;Timothy Nye&apos; <timpnye at gmail.com>, &apos;Jim & Jane
> Moody&apos; <moodyjj at comcast.net>
> Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 16:36:08 GMT+00:00
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED
>
> Timothy,
>
> I think that the PCTA as enforcer is a common misconception that people
> have
> about the organization's purpose and scope. The PCTA is not the "authority
> having jurisdiction" over policing activities the trail. The organization
> is a private partner to the public agencies that manage the trail. Their
> mission is to protect, preserve, and promote the trail by education and
> private support for the trails needs.
>
> The US Forest Service is the lead agency for the PCT, on point for the
> myriad of other agencies that the trail passes through: Bureau of Land
> Management, National Parks, state and county parks in three states, Bureau
> of Indian Affairs, and privately held lands. Each agency the trail passes
> through has different definitions of the "authority having jurisdiction"
> for
> that stretch. Some have law enforcement capabilities, others do not. They
> all have different concepts of what "wilderness" is, and what you can do
> within it. All of them, even within the different districts of the USFS,
> have differing focus and priorities. Because of this it is a gargantuan
> task
> to maintain relationships with disparate group given agency staff changes
> and have different mandates coming down from their leadership.
>
> The Memorandum of Understanding that prescribes the relationship between
> the
> agencies and the PCTA does not pass any enforcement authority to the PCTA,
> only standards for trail maintenance and permission to affiliate the
> organization with the trail (i.e., have membership, trail maintenance
> projects, and solicit private funding in the name of the PCT). Therefore,
> the PCTA cannot by itself change the purpose and uses of the PCT; that is
> defined by law in the federal National Trails System Act of 1968. The PCTA
> cannot unilaterally decide that it wants mountain bikers on the trail, nor
> can they cite violators or enforce the law. My experience is that folks at
> the PCTA VEHEMENTLY DO NOT want bikes on the PCT.
>
> The PCTA's regional representative role is our best resource. This position
> was created in part to have a presence and relationship with all of the
> agency offices to keep the trail on the agencies' radar. They are on the
> ground and meeting face-to-face with the agencies, building relationships.
> They coordinate and lead trail maintenance projects, train crew leaders and
> volunteers, and are a presence at meetings where issues and threats in
> their
> area are being discussed (like transmission lines, high speed rail, mining,
> logging, roads, etc.) They can also bring issues like mountain bike abuse
> to
> the attention of the agencies. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
> alone has created its own set of opportunities and challenges for our
> regional reps. The ARRA funds created (fortunate) three times the number of
> trail crew projects without a commensurate increase in administrative
> dollars (not so fortunate). The regional reps all have very full plates but
> are each inspiringly dedicated to protecting and preserving the trail.
> Donations to the PCTA's general fund helps keeps these reps on the ground
> with the tools that they need.
>
> When we began hosting hikers in 1997, the PCTA had two paid staff. Not much
> they could do, no matter how much they cared. Just issuing permits and
> answering the phone was a full plate. As the PCTA has grown, they have been
> able to have a greater presence in all the places they need to be, on all
> the issues they need to face. For example, until very recent history, there
> was no inventory of the easements and legal holdings of the parcels of land
> the trail passes through. Putting together this inventory was a major
> accomplishment of the PCTA. Since that was created, the PCTA adopted an
> ambitious land management plan that seeks to protect the more than 250
> miles
> of trail segments that have weak or non-existent legal easements, or are in
> danger of having view shed destroyed by (you name the threat, there are so
> many). Such a plan will take major dollars and big time donors to
> implement.
> The organization is committed to making it happen.
>
> If you care about protecting the trail, donate to the PCTA. They really
> need
> general funds to help run the organization and pay the staff including the
> regional reps, but your donations can be specified for land protection or
> trail maintenance projects. There will soon be a representative for every
> section of the trail because of support from donors like you.
>
> L-Rod
>
> p.s. the new office space the PCTA was lucky to move into does not
> represent a big increase in rent from what they were paying for a
> depressing
> hovel where there was simply not enough room for staff. The rent may be
> somewhat higher, but many costs like internet access, meeting rooms, and
> utilities are now included, in addition to the larger space that was
> inarguably needed. More importantly, their new location is in the
> Non-Profit
> Resource Center www.nprcenter.org. The NPR Center's site states "offering
> comprehensive resources, from a professionally-staffed library, access to a
> grant funder database, from fundraising workshops to management networking,
> the Center enables new and existing nonprofits to improve management,
> operations, fund development, marketing & public relations, board
> development and more." The NPR Center is brilliant concept and the
> opportunity to move there a truly valuable resource and location for the
> PCTA. And, it just happens to be located in the most beautiful place I've
> seen in Sacramento.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> On Behalf Of Timothy Nye
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 7:49 PM
> To: Jim & Jane Moody
> Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED
>
> I am a lawyer; or at least I was until I retired. This really is political
> problem rather than a legal problem, in my opinion. Even worse, it has it's
> antecedents with Mahatma Ghandi. It's called civil disobediance. This can
> allow the bikers, and possibly the general public, to discount and minimize
> our objections. The bikers view the restrictions on mountain biking as
> unfair. Yes, it's illegal behavior, but it's illegal behavior that there is
> no practical effective way to counter other than to take the high ground,
> as
> we already have the law on our side. We are discovering, as the British did
> in pre-partition India, that there are very few other responses that can be
> effective. We are caught in a posistion of weakness because of a lack of
> official enforcement. The mountain biking community is creating a new
> reality on the ground, such that,an amendment to the law so that mountain
> biking is permitted will no longer be viewed as a change but merely
> bringing
> the law in conformity with reality. In my opinion we are nearly at this
> point if not already there.
>
> Unfortunately, and I'm sure not all on the list will appreciate the
> analogy,
> we are in the same posistion as the state of Arizona with respect to
> illegal
> immigration. The powers that be will not enforce the "border" for the PCT
> as to mountain bikers. We really cannot do anything officially as the
> legal right to enforcement is arguably limited to the federal government.
> For a variety of reasons they have abdicated this responsibility. Some,
> such as the State of California Park Service at Castle Crags have adopted a
> policy welcoming and sanctioning mountain biking on the trail.
>
> Law enforcement would mean that the wilderness, that which we are seeking
> to
> maintain, would be that much less wild. Even assuming, which I doubt, that
> we could have bounty hunters / rangers prowling the wilderness looking for
> mountain biking scofflaws, and even if they were effective, we would have
> rangers / bounty hunters in the wilderness, but not just in wilderness
> areas. The trail could seem to get pretty crowded even if the bike
> suppression effort were successful; albeit the absence of bikers is clearly
> a net plus.
>
> What would it take to get to the point of enforcing the official
> prohibition?
>
> I see only two possibilities. First, the federal appointment of someone who
> is commited, first and foremeost, to enforcement and is in a sufficiently
> important posistion that they can make it happen. Think "tea party" for the
> PCT "Constitution"... a fanatic would be best absent the pejorative aspects
> of the term. Second, the PCTA. This would take political capital, and my
> impression is that they (not the Board, Donna!) are more concerned about
> fund raising.
>
> I've been waging an internal fight with myself about whether to post this
> next for the last six months as it may be viewed as a flame or
> inappropriate, but I really don't know what else I should do as I am
> concerned about the trail and this is the community. I know somw will take
> issue with what I say, but I am really concerned about what it may heral
> for
> the trail. I have serious reservations about the the direction the PCTA has
> taken over the last year and a half, from the abolition of trail fest ( for
> financial reasons-at the same time the PCTA signed an exorbitant lease on a
> class A building on the Sacramento River-I used to negotiate leases in
> Sacramento and know the termo to the most recent change banning members of
> the Board of Directors to be nominated by anyone but the Board internally.
> The executive is increasingly insulated from outside control and the
> community as a whole while raising dues this year by 20% and soliciting
> inherientences. The thing about this latter aspect, is that such bequests
> in
> California are able to be spent independent from any attempted strings
> placed on them by the one making the bequest. My gut feeling is that
> executive pay and benefits are likely to be the real goal here, but then
> who
> am I to say whether that is right or wrong and what is excessive and what
> is
> not excessive. This requires a lot of trust. I will say that I was going
> to make a large four figure donation to the PCTA this year, as it would be
> matched by my wife's employer. Given the above, and my gut feeling which I
> just can't shake, we passed on the donation.
>
> I think that the Board could direct the PCTA in this matter. I checked out
> the memebrship of the Board and was dissuaded from saying anything since
> the
> memebrship of the board is clearly impressive. Then the resyriction on new
> board memebers was passed and now a long time member of the PCTA left for
> ADZPCTKO decrying corporatization of the PCTA.
>
> We don't need trail police. We need this to made a priority with the
> existing enforcement mechanisms available with feedback so that we know
> that
> directives to enforce the ban are actually being implemented. This could
> validate the PCTA and enlarge it's role, while at the same time ridding the
> trail of the biker problem. ( I noted in an earlier post that I was afraid
> that the PCTA might view bikers as another source of dues...Donna assured
> that this would not be the case, but this is the source of my concern)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Jim & Jane Moody wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I'm not a lawyer, but I used to play one on TV (live City Council
> meetings,
> > actually). What you are referring to is "adverse possession", wherein
> > someone gains a right to land based on the unchallenged use of it for a
> long
> > time. A typical situation might be a driveway across someone else's
> > property that non-owners use to gain access to someplace else (say a lake
> or
> > park) for many years, and where the property is not posted as "private -
> no
> > trespassing". Since riding bikes on the PCT is illegal and signed thusly,
> I
> > can't imagine that simply violating a law without being caught somehow
> would
> > cause that law to become void. If I drive faster than the speed limit for
> a
> > year then get caught, I won't get far with the defense that "I've done it
> > for a full year and nobody made me stop."
> >
> >
> >
> > "Grandfather clause" describes an activity that was legal and ongoing,
> then
> > became nonconforming after passage of an amendment to a law or
> regulation.
> > Here's an example - your house is 10 ft from the rear property line,
> which
> > was the requirement when it was built. Years later the City Council
> decides
> > that the rear yard setback should be 20 ft and passes a zoning ordinance
> > amendment to that effect. Your house now does not conform to the Zoning
> > Code, but you are protected against having to tear down and rebuild.
> >
> >
> >
> > By the way, if anybody needs an overpriced planning & zoning consultant
> > before hiking starts back, let me know.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mango
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Edward Anderson"
> > To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2010 5:30:38 PM
> > Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT- enforcement NEEDED
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > We all agree that mountain bikes on the PCT are a serious safety hazard
> for
> > other users, that their wheel tracks create channels for water to run
> down
> > causing deepening ruts and erosion, and that, by law, they are not
> allowed
> > either on the PCT or in wilderness areas. We who use the PCT, even though
> > wheeled vehicles are unlawful, often meet them on the trail. There are
> > more of
> > these confrontations every year. Since there is no enforcement of the
> ban,
> > and
> > the word is getting out among mountain bikers (and motorcycle users) that
> > they
> > can go ahead and ride on the trail without consequence, we can expect
> that
> > this
> > problem will become greater each year. And, as we have now become aware,
> > they
> > will be pushing to see the law changed so that the PCT and wilderness
> areas
> > be
> > open to wheeled vehicles. So long as there is no enforcement, and all we
> > do is
> > deprecate their sometimes very rude, unsafe, and destructive behavior,
> > their
> > numbers will increase. Here is a question for the lawyers on this
> > forum: If
> > illegal trespassing on the PCT is tolerated and it goes on for long
> enough,
> > is
> > there a time when the "grandfather clause" might apply?
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>



-- 
~ Kevin
Soon To Be PCT Thru Hiker!
"The indoor life is the next best thing to premature burial." Edward Abbey