[pct-l] bikers on trail - Alternatives; trail configuration

[Donna "L-Rod" Saufley]

Timothy Nye wrote: "the PCTA may now well view the potential addition of mountain bikers as a new and lucrative source of
additional income...."

Timothy, this is absolutely, positively NOT the case.  

L-Rod

-----Original Message-----
>From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 26, 2010 7:13 AM
>To: AsABat <asabat at 4jeffrey.net>
>Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net, Mary Davison <pastormaryd at msn.com>
>Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikers on trail - Alternatives; trail configuration
>
>After hiking from Sierra City to Belden last month I reached the same
>conclusion as to the effort by bikers to create their own reality.  The
>forest service, even when presented an opportunity for enforcement refused.
>(A group of four mountain bikers on section M up to the A tree and back,
>same jersy, pick-up vehicle decorated with decals of their club. I also
>believe that absent something being done in the very near future that the
>trail will legalized for mountain bikers.
>
>Moutain biking wasn't in existence when the trail was chartered.  Also,
>(subject for a much longer post in the future) the PCTA may now well view
>the potential addition of mountain bikers as a new and lucrative source of
>additional income....In fact, if the bikers got there act together and hired
>a lobbiest ... Rather than relying on outside enforcement from a
>disinterested or nonexistent agency in lean economic times self enforcement
>
>While hiking it occured to me that the constant trail maintance actually
>attracts bikers.  I passed a trail crew (Butte) after the A tree and they
>merely shrugged about the proliferation of bikers stating that it wasn't
>their concern and certainly they aren't an enforcement entity.  However,
>the portions of the trail where slides occur and aren't repaired, or are
>perceived as too dangerous appear immune to bike trespass.(Absence of
>tracks)
>
>It seems to me that changes could be made in trail maintenance that are
>consistent with equestrian and hiker use, but inconsistent with mountain
>bikes.  For example, increasing the depth and angle to the trail of drainage
>steps would be a good start; so that at a foot and a half high the bike
>rider would be forced to dismount and at such an angle to the trail that the
>step could not be approached on the perpendicular again fostering the
>necessity of a dismount. If such obstacles were every 50 feet or so for a
>half mile or so every so often where they can't be easily circumvented thy
>could be effective.  I noted that crews in section L from Donner to Sierra
>City had in some places apparently deliberatly left dead falls, but these
>were in places that tney were easily passed and new bike ways simply went
>around them.
>
>Sections L and M would be a good place for a demonstration project.  I live
>in sacramento and would be glad to participate.
>
>On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:34 AM, AsABat <asabat at 4jeffrey.net> wrote:
>
>> It was two solo bikers, he had a badge, a ticket book, and a cop's manner
>> of
>> speaking with an attitude that got your attention. He told me they both
>> laughed at him even until the judge hit them with the fine.
>>
>>  And, As A Bat, how does a single hiker give a ticket to 5-8 bikers? I
>> > certainly would have liked to have had the power to have done so and not
>> > just been an impotent old lady hiker.
>> >
>> >
>>  _______________________________________________
>> 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/