[pct-l] Mtn bikes- I don't get it
Jane Overton
neoaflander at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 22:00:53 CDT 2012
Mtn bike trails require a different sort of hardening off than hiking
trails. Bikes make continuous ruts in soft wet soils. Water bars need to be
built differently. Basically, the engineering requirements and maintenance
for hiking vs biking are different. What would mtn bikers say to re
engineering the parts if the pct that that want full access to?
Cheers
Jane
On Oct 10, 2012 10:00 AM, <pct-l-request at backcountry.net> wrote:
> Send Pct-L mailing list submissions to
> pct-l at backcountry.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> pct-l-request at backcountry.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> pct-l-owner at backcountry.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Pct-L digest..."
>
>
> Please DELETE the copy of the complete digest from your reply. ONLY
> include stuff that applies to your reply
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: bikes on the PCT (Craig Giffen)
> 2. Re: bikes on the PCT (Fred Walters)
> 3. Re: Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn bikes on the PCT
> (randall welch)
> 4. Re: Giving way to Mtn Bikes on the PCT (Dennis Phelan)
> 5. Re: bikes on the PCT (Zorglub)
> 6. Pacific Crest Trail Reassessment Initiative (Brick Robbins)
> 7. Re: Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT
> (Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes)
> 8. Bikes on the PCT (Paul Magnanti)
> 9. Re: bikes on the PCT (A.C. Scott)
> 10. Mountain Bikes on the PCT? (lorna at ptera.net)
> 11. Re: bikes on the PCT (ambery-80243 at mypacks.net)
> 12. Re: bikes on the PCT & the PCTA (ambery-80243 at mypacks.net)
> 13. Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (Dan Jacobs)
> 14. Re: Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT (Dan Jacobs)
> 15. Re: bikes on the PCT & the PCTA (Dan Jacobs)
> 16. Re: Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT (Austin Greavette)
> 17. Bikes on the PCT (Ken Murray)
> 18. Bikes on the PCT (Ken Murray)
> 19. Re: Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (Timothy Nye)
> 20. Bikes on the PCT (Ken Murray)
> 21. Re: bikes on the PCT & the PCTA (Bob Bankhead)
> 22. Re: bikes on the PCT (shon mcganty)
> 23. Bikes on the PCT (Ken Murray)
> 24. Re: Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (Dan Jacobs)
> 25. Re: Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (James Vesely)
> 26. Re: Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> (shon mcganty)
> 27. Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (CJ & Cristy Miller)
> 28. Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> (Ken Murray)
> 29. Re: Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (Scott Bryce)
> 30. Re: Bikes on the PCT (Ken Powers)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 20:44:56 -1000
> From: Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <7E9D51A2-8EC7-41D0-8A8A-8B48F40B0542 at lunky.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> um, I have been mountain biking since the late 1980's. I've ridden all
> over Washington and Oregon, but never once have I ridden on a trail that
> was closed to mountain bikes. I have no anti mountain bike bias...I own a
> few 2.35in tires myself. Riding downhill on singletrack through the woods
> is incredibly fun. I just think the mountain bike lobby needs to focus
> their energy on getting their own trails built rather than leeching off the
> decades of hard work that hikers and equestrians have done.
>
> Rather than complaining on message boards about the lack of mountain bike
> only trails, there are actually people out there in the mountain bike
> community who "do the work" to make them happen:
>
> http://www.oregonlive.com/north-of-26/index.ssf/2012/06/stub_stewart_state_park_opens.html
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903999904576469960615061074.html
>
> The last comment here sums it all up for me that I wish a lot of other
> fellow mountain bikers shared:
>
> http://forums.mtbr.com/pennsylvania/appalachian-trail-can-i-ride-291174.html
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> > Commuting by bike is great, but that does not really address the anti
> mountain bike bias I see on this board. ?It seems to me, and I'm sure all
> will disagree here, that the issue has to do with sharing more than
> anything else. ?Hikers, and the few horse riders left over (from what I
> read earlier on another post) are used now to have the PCT to themselves
> and are not interesting in sharing.
> >
> > I'd like to remind everyone that the PCT is funded by the taxpayer and
> should be therefore not meant to be the exclusive use of any given group.
> ?I don't see the USFS creating new trails exclusively for mountain bikers,
> so I really don't see why the PCT should be the exclusive use of hikers.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:41:57 +0100
> From: Fred Walters <fredwalters2 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAOMa4nBis0LMwi8wECF47OmAUdnzrbgSV89eBziqEBKkBB+c2A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Maybe a poll across existing trail volunteers. Question would have to be
> sensible so, "Would you be prepared to spend your time repairing all the
> trail damage from mountain bike use ?" would probably not help. But a
> balanced question passed round each trail volunteer group the results then
> submitted to PCTA (and Forrest Service) so those with significant input to
> any decision can gauge the impact on the trail (i.e. will it still exist in
> 5 years with no maintenance).
>
> I don't know if relevant to US decision making but in the UK with e.g.
> planning and development the authorities cannot really consider what might
> happen outside the scope of their decision. i.e. were they to allow
> non-wilderness trail access then considerations about bikes also using
> wilderness sections cannot be considered. Their regulations would ban
> wilderness bike access and that people might break those rules are not
> relevant to the non-wilderness decision. That is UK, I don't know about
> US.
>
> That mountain bikes already use sections illegally might actually help the
> Mountain Bikers case. Because they can respond that "OK, we should not be
> using it but, without any guidelines there have been no accidents so there
> is clearly no danger ... and existing use shows we can happily coexist".
> It sounds to me like the danger and potential injury aspect is something
> that would concern the authorities. A few years ago the Forrest Service
> were found largely liable when a child was killed by a bear (there were
> points both sides and I understand child had food in his tent). If the
> authorities take inadequate steps to protect other users I would expect
> they may also liable for legal damages. So who is going to post the vast
> numbers of "Warning Fast Moving Mountain Bikes" signs along the trail -
> trail volunteers who it would seem are anti the bike use ? How are the
> authorities going to protect other users (to avoid legal liability) ?
>
> I've not yet hiked the PCT. I plan to when a few current responsibilities
> allow (maybe a few years time). I watch the list to gain knowledge of the
> trail. If mountain bikes are allowed I will not be making a thru hike
> (I'll find another trail - Te Araoa [sic] also appeals). Not a threat
> (because most people here are against the bike use anyway), just that it
> would be such a shame were this change of use to be allowed (and I believe
> it would be a change as hikers would quickly fade to a few section/day
> hikers).
>
> Fred
> (Sorry, I always go on and on writing long messages)
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Jim Banks <jbanks4 at socal.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > The PCTA does receive some taxpayer money from the Forest Service and BLM
> > for maintenance of the trail, but it is a very, very small part of the
> > overall cost of maintaining the trail. The vast majority of the expense
> of
> > maintaining the PCT is the sweat equity put in by the hikers and
> > equestrians
> > that volunteer to do the trail work. If there were no volunteers, the
> > taxpayer money would not be enough to maintain 100 miles of the trail.
> As
> > one of those volunteers, I can tell you that if mountain bikes are ever
> > allowed on the PCT, a majority (maybe a super majority) of the people
> > willing to give up their time and put in the hard work maintaining the
> > trail
> > will quit.
> >
> > The trails that allow mountain bikes are also partially funded by the
> > taxpayer. Following your line of thinking, motorcycles, quads, and jeeps
> > should be allowed on those trails as well since those trails "are not
> meant
> > to be for the exclusive use of any group." You see it cuts both ways.
> >
> > I-Beam
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:
> pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> > On Behalf Of Zorglub
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 5:42 PM
> > To: PCT
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> > Commuting by bike is great, but that does not really address the anti
> > mountain bike bias I see on this board. It seems to me, and I'm sure all
> > will disagree here, that the issue has to do with sharing more than
> > anything
> > else. Hikers, and the few horse riders left over (from what I read
> earlier
> > on another post) are used now to have the PCT to themselves and are not
> > interesting in sharing.
> >
> > I'd like to remind everyone that the PCT is funded by the taxpayer and
> > should be therefore not meant to be the exclusive use of any given group.
> > I
> > don't see the USFS creating new trails exclusively for mountain bikers,
> so
> > I
> > really don't see why the PCT should be the exclusive use of hikers.
> >
> > In 12 + years of riding all over, I've never had one bad encounter with
> > anybody.
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> > To: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 5:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com> wrote:
> > >During my hike of the PCT in the mid 90's, I saw more illegal mountain
> > >bikes on the trail than I did horses...and no, they did not yield. One
> > >came around a blind corner so fast he nearly hit me head on. He
> > >apologized but I told him other hikers might not be as nice as I was.<
> >
> > And FWIW, I would like to point out that Craig exclusivity commutes by
> > bicycle and does not own a car. I own a car, but only drive 1 day a week.
> >
> > If you look at Craigs website www.lunky.com you will see his "ride
> around
> > Australia"
> >
> > Both of us are fiercely pro-bicycle, just not on the PCT
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 20:23:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: randall welch <rwelch5 at att.net>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn bikes on
> the PCT
> To: Marion Davison <mardav at charter.net>
> Cc: Pct-L at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <1349839407.73847.YahooMailRC at web180903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I was hit by a mtb'er in this section. It happened along Holcomb Creek
> between
> the 3N16 crossing and Deep Creek. I didn't even know?what hit me until the
> dust
> cleared. I played football in high school and can tell you I have NEVER
> suffered
> an impact like I did that day. I had huge a impact crater/divot in my shin
> and a
> deep laceration in the pulp of?my thumb. My two-month old ULA Catalyst
> suffered
> a torn waist belt and the initial impact completely blew my right foot
> through
> the side of my Cascadias. The entire heel cup was severed from the rest of
> the
> shoes uppers. That foot was in tons o' pain but somehow avoided?permanent
> damage/sprain. There were three riders in this group and?as soon as I had
> taken
> a personal inventory of the damage and determined I was "OK", one of the
> riders
> who was obviously tense nodded for the others to?run for it......and they
> did.
> Essentially, a hit and run. Did they run because they were illegally using
> the
> trail? Would they have stopped if they were legal users?
>
> Most of these MTB'ers are weekend warriors. They'll be section-impactors.
> In
> most cases their impact will be localised in short sections. These
> sections will
> experience very heavy/concentrated impact and the resultant damages. The
> MTB'ers?have NO CONCEPT of thru-hiking or thru-travel on this trail. So it
> would
> stand to reason they would have little respect for the fact that
> indidviduals
> might have planned for years, sacrificed years of work/income and
> committed to
> months away from family in order to fulfill a dream. To this point, I'm
> just a
> section hiker...but, if I had been a thru-hiker that day...an MTB'er
> would've
> ended my hike.
> Can you guess my position on this issue?
> Randy (Sage)
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Marion Davison <mardav at charter.net>
> To: Pct-L at backcountry.net
> Sent: Tue, October 9, 2012 7:41:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn bikes on the
> PCT
>
> Do horses really think we (bicycle riders)want to eat them?
> Yes, horses are complete ninnies.? They also think llamas want to eat
> them.? The truth is that any horse could kill a llama with one swift
> kick.? But the horses don't know that.
>
> I also don't want to see Mt. bikes on the PCT.? I agree that it is a
> sacred place that should be reserved for foot travel.? We do a lot of
> maintenance in Section C and have encountered bike wheel marks on every
> inch of that section over the years.? We have met bicycles head on, on
> many occasions (also motorcycles).? We refuse to yield to bikes.? I
> stand in front of my llamas with poles planted firmly in front of me and
> refuse to move.? I tell them firmly that they are breaking the law and
> need to turn around and exit the trail at the first opportunity.? I have
> been cursed at and threatened with physical harm.? I have taken
> pictures.? Some bikers have simply moved into the woods, waited for us
> to pass, and ridden on.? Others have apologized and turned back.? One
> memorable encounter was with a doctor I had seen recently.? We
> recognized each other.? I told him he was breaking the law.? He said,
> the trail should be open to bikes, so I am going to ride it.? He went
> around us and kept going.? Section C is riddled with trails and fire
> roads and dirt roads that are open to Mt. bikes and motorcycles so I see
> no reason why they must have the PCT as well.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 21:28:48 -0700
> From: Dennis Phelan <dennis.phelan at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Giving way to Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> To: JPL <jplynch at crosslink.net>
> Cc: Fred Walters <fredwalters2 at gmail.com>, pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAE1UnwTY2cfo0gKStocko-BtpLCFXbUuaMPYC+WhKmam27oJPQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Regardless of who has the right away, the laws of physics still apply: a
> person traveling 25 mph with helmet and pads hits another (unprotected)
> person moving 3 mph - who's coming out on top?
>
> Dennis
> On Oct 9, 2012 6:16 PM, "JPL" <jplynch at crosslink.net> wrote:
>
> > Every multi-use trail I've been on hikers have the right of way over
> bikes.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Lee
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 4:52 PM
> > To: 'Fred Walters' ; pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] Giving way to Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> >
> > Fred wrote:
> > >
> > Which does raise the question, is the trail wide enough for walkers and
> > bikers to share ?
> > >
> >
> > Absolutely not. In most places the trail tread is single-track only and
> > there's no room for a biker to pass a walker without the biker going off
> > the
> > trail or having the walker step aside.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 20:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Zorglub <azorglub at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: 'PCT' <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349838893.51972.YahooMailNeo at web39402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> The whole OHV argument is a slippery slope that I don't buy and is a
> distraction from the main issue that one historical group is trying to keep
> another human powered group of recreationists out.
>
> Again, nobody's asking access to 100% of the PCT, but being kept out
> completely is unfair. ?That might be why so many cyclists are not obeying
> the current rules. ?Rules that are blatantly unfair are rarely followed. ?
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jim Banks <jbanks4 at socal.rr.com>
> To: 'PCT' <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
>
> The PCTA does receive some taxpayer money from the Forest Service and BLM
> for maintenance of the trail, but it is a very, very small part of the
> overall cost of maintaining the trail.? The vast majority of the expense of
> maintaining the PCT is the sweat equity put in by the hikers and
> equestrians
> that volunteer to do the trail work.? If there were no volunteers, the
> taxpayer money would not be enough to maintain 100 miles of the trail.? As
> one of those volunteers, I can tell you that if mountain bikes are ever
> allowed on the PCT, a majority (maybe a super majority) of the people
> willing to give up their time and put in the hard work maintaining the
> trail
> will quit.
>
> The trails that allow mountain bikes are also partially funded by the
> taxpayer.? Following your line of thinking, motorcycles, quads, and jeeps
> should be allowed on those trails as well since those trails "are not meant
> to be for the exclusive use of any group."? You see it cuts both ways.
>
> I-Beam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> On Behalf Of Zorglub
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 5:42 PM
> To: PCT
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
>
> Commuting by bike is great, but that does not really address the anti
> mountain bike bias I see on this board. ?It seems to me, and I'm sure all
> will disagree here, that the issue has to do with sharing more than
> anything
> else. ?Hikers, and the few horse riders left over (from what I read earlier
> on another post) are used now to have the PCT to themselves and are not
> interesting in sharing.
>
> I'd like to remind everyone that the PCT is funded by the taxpayer and
> should be therefore not meant to be the exclusive use of any given group.
> ?I
> don't see the USFS creating new trails exclusively for mountain bikers, so
> I
> really don't see why the PCT should be the exclusive use of hikers.
>
> In 12 + years of riding all over, I've never had one bad encounter with
> anybody. ?
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> To: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 5:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com> wrote:
> >During my hike of the PCT in the mid 90's, I saw more illegal mountain
> >bikes on the trail than I did horses...and no, they did not yield.? One
> >came around a blind corner so fast he nearly hit me head on.? He
> >apologized but I told him other hikers might not be as nice as I was.<
>
> And FWIW, I would like to point out that Craig exclusivity commutes by
> bicycle and does not own a car. I own a car, but only drive 1 day a week.
>
> If you look at Craigs website www.lunky.com you will see his "ride around
> Australia"
>
> Both of us are fiercely pro-bicycle, just not on the PCT
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:31:13 -0700
> From: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Pacific Crest Trail Reassessment Initiative
> To: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <CALV1Nzm4u_gzdAU6DZ97fC3D=+
> Hz_cs7+bU+0E2ccEEX9EO42A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> They exist, they are organized.
> People who love the PCT as a hiker/equestrian trail better be too
>
> They call it "sharing"
>
> https://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct
>
> http://forums.mtbr.com/washington/big-news-feds-consider-allowing-bikes-pct-816288.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 06:47:15 -0700
> From: Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes <diane at santabarbarahikes.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <7C0D00F7-400E-4D05-BCF1-06B164957B4C at santabarbarahikes.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
>
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:43 PM, pct-l-request at backcountry.net wrote:
>
> > From: Zorglub <azorglub at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT
> >
> > This is taking paranoia to a whole new level. ?:)
>
> Do you really think that we were born yesterday? We don't only hike
> on the PCT. Many of us hike where we live as well. We've already seen
> all this before where we live. We know exactly what you are doing.
> We've seen the entire process start to finish and know the entire
> play by heart. We could recite all the lines.
>
> My suggestion would be to drop all new memberships to this list that
> happened since the original mountain bike email was published. Don't
> allow any new memberships for a while.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:03:22 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Paul Magnanti <pmags at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: PCT MailingList <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349877802.29724.YahooMailNeo at web112102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> As with Bob, I've had a different experience than what you all have had.
>
> Perhaps because Colorado has a mountain bike culture, think there is more
> education of the users.
>
> On the CT and other areas, I've only encountered polite mtbikers who were
> courteous.?
>
> Furthermore, I've done trailwork with mountain bikers. Not just people who
> happen to mountain bike, but actual mountain bike
> org who have adopted a trail or even have built the entire open space
> trail over several seasons. ?One memorable trailwork project
> was sponsored by a mountain bike group for their section, had the tools
> carted in by horses and was worked on by people who
> hiked OR biked in to the worksite. ?Multi-trail use at its finest! :)
>
>
> I don't doubt you've all encountered less-than-stellar ?mtn bikers on the
> PCT because anyone who would break the rules to begin
> is probably not exactly a good trail steward. ;)
>
> Personally, I think limited sections of the PCT can be open to mtbikers
> esp ones outside of wilderness areas that get limited use and are
> not overly erosion prone (I saw much flatish single track when I did the
> PCT for example.
>
> As human-powered outdoor recreation users, I think we should try to fight
> for the common good and not divide ourselves.?
>
> Lastly, and I know this will be shocking, but it is possible to be a
> Mountain Biker AND a backpacker (and a backcountry skier?
> and a climber). Many people do more than one activity.?
>
> Mind you, I don't mtn bike at all. Haven't tried mtn biking since
> 1999...nor do I tend to. :)
>
> Guess if sharing the trail can work in Colorado most of the time, think it
> is possible in other areas too.
> ?
> ----------------------------
> Paul "Mags" Magnanti
> http://www.pmags.com
> http://www.twitter.com/pmagsco
> http://www.facebook.com/pmags
> -------------------------------
> The true harvest of my life is intangible.... a little stardust
> caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched
> --Thoreau
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:29:37 -0700
> From: "A.C. Scott" <acscottthefirst at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: kathi at pctwalker.com, pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <n1chhd2gx9edb3d3cyjevwnq.1349879377382 at email.android.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> While I know it is true that mountain bikers and. Hikers. Can coexist on
> the same trail.bikes are not allowed on the pct and. That's the way I like
> IR.
>
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
>
> Kathi <pogo at pctwalker.com> wrote:
>
> >DITTO!
> >
> >On 10/9/12 6:02 PM, Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes wrote:
> >> Well, if the PCT becomes a mountain biking trail, I won't be renewing
> >> my membership with the PCTA or donating any money. The mountain
> >> bikers took over our local trails and turned them into war zones and
> >> annoying places to be, cut down all the shade and made the trails
> >> flat, smooth and boring. I'm sure the PCTA wouldn't care if all the
> >> hikers left since there are way more mountain bikers, or at least it
> >> seems like there are. Plus think of all that money they can get from
> >> IMBA and from the motorcycle manufacturers that are really who
> >> supports all this mountain biking stuff. Since everybody hates
> >> mountain bikers, they have to make themselves look like stellar trail
> >> workers with tons of phony photo-ops of fake trail maintenance and
> >> lots of logged hours that count for nothing in reality. Fortunately,
> >> despite all their noise, there do seem to be a lot fewer of them than
> >> in the past, at least locally.
> >>
> >> On Oct 9, 2012, at 10:00 AM, pct-l-request at backcountry.net wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> >>> Subject: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >>>
> >>> In contacting Liz Bergeron, Ex Dir of the PCTA about the issue, and
> >>> giving her a head's up that bikers might be contacting their Board
> >>> members to pursuade them, she informs me that Board members have
> >>> already been contacted.
> >>>
> >>> So, the bikers are taking this seriously, and already taking
> >>> supportive action.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/
> >> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/
> >All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:43:25 -0700
> From: <lorna at ptera.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Mountain Bikes on the PCT?
> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <9BE32A9FB772473D82B75A63D870C0E8 at LornaHP>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
>
>
> I hiked the CT this summer. Mountain biking is allowed on that trail,
> except for in the wilderness sections. (There are designated mountain bike
> routes around the Wilderness Areas.) Some parts were very popular with the
> mountain bikers, and it was NOT a relaxing hike. Only one couple stopped,
> and yielded to me, the hiker, as the signs said they should. All of the
> rest did not. They really did act like they ruled the trail. I might be
> getting old and cranky, but I was starting to be really irritated by having
> to step off the trail all of the time. I KNOW it was easier for me to step
> off, but still! Plus, I was surprised, and the adrenaline shot through me,
> several times by bicycles sneaking up from behind. I was a mountain biker
> for a few years. It's a blast. However, you constantly have to pay
> attention to the trail and you're whizzing by so fast and you don't see
> much
> scenery until you stop. I know without a doubt that they DO erode the
> trail, and make it dustier, especially around the corners. The tires
> create
> gullies so much faster than feet do. If I was doing more trail work, I
> would be discouraged if I knew mountain bikers would soon be ruining the
> trail that we just fixed.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:13:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
> From: ambery-80243 at mypacks.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1671357.1349881982083.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
> If you are going to bring up the historical group, I think you have
> overlooked the historical facts: this trail was set up and designated as a
> footpath for the use of hikers and equestrians.
>
> I get the appeal of mountain biking. But it still doesn't justify to me
> why we can't have this one long distance trail experience without the
> distractions and issues involved with allowing bikes.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Zorglub <azorglub at yahoo.com>
> >Sent: Oct 9, 2012 8:14 PM
> >To: 'PCT' <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> >Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> >The whole OHV argument is a slippery slope that I don't buy and is a
> distraction from the main issue that one historical group is trying to keep
> another human powered group of recreationists out.
> >
> >Again, nobody's asking access to 100% of the PCT, but being kept out
> completely is unfair. ?That might be why so many cyclists are not obeying
> the current rules. ?Rules that are blatantly unfair are rarely followed. ?
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> > From: Jim Banks <jbanks4 at socal.rr.com>
> >To: 'PCT' <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> >Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:09 PM
> >Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> >The PCTA does receive some taxpayer money from the Forest Service and BLM
> >for maintenance of the trail, but it is a very, very small part of the
> >overall cost of maintaining the trail.? The vast majority of the expense
> of
> >maintaining the PCT is the sweat equity put in by the hikers and
> equestrians
> >that volunteer to do the trail work.? If there were no volunteers, the
> >taxpayer money would not be enough to maintain 100 miles of the trail.? As
> >one of those volunteers, I can tell you that if mountain bikes are ever
> >allowed on the PCT, a majority (maybe a super majority) of the people
> >willing to give up their time and put in the hard work maintaining the
> trail
> >will quit.
> >
> >The trails that allow mountain bikes are also partially funded by the
> >taxpayer.? Following your line of thinking, motorcycles, quads, and jeeps
> >should be allowed on those trails as well since those trails "are not
> meant
> >to be for the exclusive use of any group."? You see it cuts both ways.
> >
> >I-Beam
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net
> ]
> >On Behalf Of Zorglub
> >Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 5:42 PM
> >To: PCT
> >Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> >Commuting by bike is great, but that does not really address the anti
> >mountain bike bias I see on this board. ?It seems to me, and I'm sure all
> >will disagree here, that the issue has to do with sharing more than
> anything
> >else. ?Hikers, and the few horse riders left over (from what I read
> earlier
> >on another post) are used now to have the PCT to themselves and are not
> >interesting in sharing.
> >
> >I'd like to remind everyone that the PCT is funded by the taxpayer and
> >should be therefore not meant to be the exclusive use of any given group.
> ?I
> >don't see the USFS creating new trails exclusively for mountain bikers,
> so I
> >really don't see why the PCT should be the exclusive use of hikers.
> >
> >In 12 + years of riding all over, I've never had one bad encounter with
> >anybody. ?
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >From: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> >To: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> >Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 5:13 PM
> >Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >
> >On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com> wrote:
> >>During my hike of the PCT in the mid 90's, I saw more illegal mountain
> >>bikes on the trail than I did horses...and no, they did not yield.? One
> >>came around a blind corner so fast he nearly hit me head on.? He
> >>apologized but I told him other hikers might not be as nice as I was.<
> >
> >And FWIW, I would like to point out that Craig exclusivity commutes by
> >bicycle and does not own a car. I own a car, but only drive 1 day a week.
> >
> >If you look at Craigs website www.lunky.com you will see his "ride around
> >Australia"
> >
> >Both of us are fiercely pro-bicycle, just not on the PCT
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/
> >All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/
> >All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/
> >All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/
> >All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> >Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:23:45 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
> From: ambery-80243 at mypacks.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT & the PCTA
> To: pct-l <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 24366244.1349882625902.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
> I assume based upon their own mission statement, that the PCTA should be
> standing against this. There mission is to "preserve and promote the
> Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail as an internationally significant
> resource for the enjoyment of hikers and equestrians."
>
> Their 2010 to 2013 Strategic Plan has a Vision Statement for the PCT's
> future, which includes:
> "The entire Pacific Crest Trail corridor is permanently protected, well
> maintained and
> managed. It is well known both nationally and internationally, and is
> treasured by hikers
> and equestrians who appreciate its remote natural character"
>
> I agree that if this doesn't remain the focus, I will reconsider my
> donations.
> >
> >>On 10/9/12 6:02 PM, Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes wrote:
> >>> Well, if the PCT becomes a mountain biking trail, I won't be renewing
> >>> my membership with the PCTA or donating any money. The mountain
> >>> bikers took over our local trails and turned them into war zones and
> >>> annoying places to be, cut down all the shade and made the trails
> >>> flat, smooth and boring. I'm sure the PCTA wouldn't care if all the
> >>> hikers left since there are way more mountain bikers, or at least it
> >>> seems like there are. Plus think of all that money they can get from
> >>> IMBA and from the motorcycle manufacturers that are really who
> >>> supports all this mountain biking stuff. Since everybody hates
> >>> mountain bikers, they have to make themselves look like stellar trail
> >>> workers with tons of phony photo-ops of fake trail maintenance and
> >>> lots of logged hours that count for nothing in reality. Fortunately,
> >>> despite all their noise, there do seem to be a lot fewer of them than
> >>> in the past, at least locally.
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 9, 2012, at 10:00 AM, pct-l-request at backcountry.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> >>>> Subject: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> >>>>
> >>>> In contacting Liz Bergeron, Ex Dir of the PCTA about the issue, and
> >>>> giving her a head's up that bikers might be contacting their Board
> >>>> members to pursuade them, she informs me that Board members have
> >>>> already been contacted.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:43:02 -0700
> From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CA+-77MXgrQiraSW2NOKEECp4e-tAn1caDsJ-xpGAeoYRqX81gg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Facts matter.
>
> So I decided to try to find out some facts. I looked up the Act of
> Congress that designated the National Trails system. I found it here:
>
> http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/nts/legislation.html
>
> In case there are some that don't want to read through it, here is a
> pertinent part of the Act (SEC. 7. [16USC1246] (j)):
>
> "(j) Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the
> national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the
> following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian
> activities, jogging or similar fitness activities, trail biking,
> overnight and long-distance backpacking, snowmobiling, and surface
> water and underwater activities. Vehicles which may be permitted on
> certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles,
> bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off-road vehicles. In
> addition, trail access for handicapped individuals may be provided.
> The provisions of this subsection shall not supersede any other
> provisions of this Act or other Federal laws, or any State or local
> laws."
>
> So, the Act does not prohibit bicycles, in fact states they are a
> potential use of the National Trails System. You will also see that
> potential users include motorcycles and four wheel drive or
> all-terrain vehicles. If you're gonna fight something, you gotta know
> about it.
>
> My wish is that we can keep the negativity on this list to an absolute
> minimum. If we have a superior moral and ethical position on the
> matter, we don't show it well with name calling, biting on the shiny
> troll bait and lures, and fighting among ourselves. The timing was
> awful after the bickering about horses on the PCT. If this is the kind
> of "club" I joined, I am thinking twice about whether I want to be a
> member.
>
> I spend all day, four days a week with thousands of people that feel
> entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it, and react in
> utter shock, disbelief, and anger when they don't get things they way
> they want. I don't need any more of that from anywhere else.
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> --
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:44:53 -0700
> From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CA+-77MWmprFoo_0YiTFvgYOy9og+_J1E5La28rVUaVNO=Z=
> YeA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes
> <diane at santabarbarahikes.com> wrote:
> > My suggestion would be to drop all new memberships to this list that
> > happened since the original mountain bike email was published. Don't
> > allow any new memberships for a while.
>
> So the possibility of rejecting those that would quickly side with
> preventing bicycles from the PCT should be rejected before they even
> get the slightest chance to help? Brilliant!
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> --
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:58:17 -0700
> From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT & the PCTA
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CA+-77MXSA61rp7pLexnrCdAaOTkT8EW3CRsz4Jdix2hr5esNzQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:23 AM, <ambery-80243 at mypacks.net> wrote:
> >
> > I assume based upon their own mission statement, that the PCTA should be
> standing against this. There mission is to "preserve and promote the
> Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail as an internationally significant
> resource for the enjoyment of hikers and equestrians."
> >
> > Their 2010 to 2013 Strategic Plan has a Vision Statement for the PCT's
> future, which includes:
> > "The entire Pacific Crest Trail corridor is permanently protected, well
> maintained and
> > managed. It is well known both nationally and internationally, and is
> treasured by hikers
> > and equestrians who appreciate its remote natural character"
> >
> > I agree that if this doesn't remain the focus, I will reconsider my
> donations.
>
> I think it is a little early to start threatening the PCTA with
> cutting donations when the process and their official stance on this
> particular matter hasn't even been started.
>
> Please folks. Let's cool down a little. There is a lot of heat being
> genreated for something that seems to be not much more than very good
> internet rumor at this point.
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> --
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:58:30 -0400
> From: Austin Greavette <austin.greavette at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Important Message Re: bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CABsPoVixr6goR9RX9dpQzYGb7d_LZcVTzCO2JqjndhUp0PC88Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Why are we giving them any airtime? By bickering we are giving them the
> attention they want to raise the issue. Mtb on the PCT would have a
> devastating effect on not just the environment, or the hikers/riders but on
> it's history. We do not better our position by appeasing their arguments. I
> say we do what we have to do to support the trail, but do it not so
> loud....
>
> oz
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Diane Soini of Santa Barbara Hikes
> > <diane at santabarbarahikes.com> wrote:
> > > My suggestion would be to drop all new memberships to this list that
> > > happened since the original mountain bike email was published. Don't
> > > allow any new memberships for a while.
> >
> > So the possibility of rejecting those that would quickly side with
> > preventing bicycles from the PCT should be rejected before they even
> > get the slightest chance to help? Brilliant!
> >
> > Dan Jacobs
> > Washougal
> > --
> > "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:00:39 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 996677748.13838841349884839201.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Commuting by bike is great, but that does not really
> address the anti mountain bike bias I see on this
> board. It seems to me, and I'm sure all will
> disagree here, that the issue has to do with
> sharing more than anything else. Hikers, and the
> few horse riders left over (from what I read earlier
> on another post) are used now to have the PCT to
> themselves and are not interesting in sharing.
>
> I'd like to remind everyone that the PCT is funded
> by the taxpayer and should be therefore not meant
> to be the exclusive use of any given group. I don't
> see the USFS creating new trails exclusively for
> mountain bikers, so I really don't see why the PCT
> should be the exclusive use of hikers.
> ==============================================
>
> Zor,
>
> An interesting argument. Airports are funded by
> the taxpayer, and there are those who feel that
> parachuting is a fun and enjoyable sport.
>
> I suppose that an argument to allow those who like
> to jump out of planes without parachutes could be made,
> since they are taxpayers, too.
>
> Presumably, the parachutists might protest the move,
> as their landing zones will be made rather unpleasant
> with all the blood and gore strewn about.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:01:41 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 187833923.13839271349884901841.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Zor,
>
> You simply refuse to acknowledge the experience of many,
> that bikes on a trail fundamentally change the experience
> of hiking, in a negative way. Your arguments are
> repetitive and circular, and simply don't address
> the realities that hikers experience in real life.
>
> I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish via this
> trolling.....I suspect it is designed to siphon off time
> and energy of hikers, by having them post here, where
> convinced advocates of hiking are the only ones
> that will see the evidence and testimony.....and they are
> already convinced.....reducing the time and energy
> available to make arguments where they will convince
> undecided people.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:14:19 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Cc: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <1C519F11-41DB-4154-974C-E5104F6BB5D4 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> This is a misrepresentation by Mr. Jacobs; perhaps it is unintentional,
> but who knows? The language quoted by him is the regulatory, not
> statutory. I didn't bother to check to see if the statutes the regulations
> are purporting to enforce ( dating to 2009, by the way) actually involve
> the PCT as a national scenic trail.
>
> Apparently, "facts" matter only if they comport with his narrative. As I
> pointed out previously, the mountain bike was first devised in the late
> '70's. The trail preceded this development by roughly a decade. Therefore,
> asserting that mountain biking was originally viewed as a consistent use is
> false.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 8:43 AM, Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Facts matter.
> >
> > So I decided to try to find out some facts. I looked up the Act of
> > Congress that designated the National Trails system. I found it here:
> >
> > http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/nts/legislation.html
> >
> > In case there are some that don't want to read through it, here is a
> > pertinent part of the Act (SEC. 7. [16USC1246] (j)):
> >
> > "(j) Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the
> > national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the
> > following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian
> > activities, jogging or similar fitness activities, trail biking,
> > overnight and long-distance backpacking, snowmobiling, and surface
> > water and underwater activities. Vehicles which may be permitted on
> > certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles,
> > bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off-road vehicles. In
> > addition, trail access for handicapped individuals may be provided.
> > The provisions of this subsection shall not supersede any other
> > provisions of this Act or other Federal laws, or any State or local
> > laws."
> >
> > So, the Act does not prohibit bicycles, in fact states they are a
> > potential use of the National Trails System. You will also see that
> > potential users include motorcycles and four wheel drive or
> > all-terrain vehicles. If you're gonna fight something, you gotta know
> > about it.
> >
> > My wish is that we can keep the negativity on this list to an absolute
> > minimum. If we have a superior moral and ethical position on the
> > matter, we don't show it well with name calling, biting on the shiny
> > troll bait and lures, and fighting among ourselves. The timing was
> > awful after the bickering about horses on the PCT. If this is the kind
> > of "club" I joined, I am thinking twice about whether I want to be a
> > member.
> >
> > I spend all day, four days a week with thousands of people that feel
> > entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it, and react in
> > utter shock, disbelief, and anger when they don't get things they way
> > they want. I don't need any more of that from anywhere else.
> >
> > Dan Jacobs
> > Washougal
> > --
> > "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> > Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:12:23 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1951889336.13843431349885543242.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I have been a member of the PCTA
> since 1978, (before it was called
> the PCTA) and am a very generous
> donor. My donations will stop
> the day wheels hit the trail.Ursula
> ====================================
>
> Ursula, and others, be careful.
>
> The fact is, that wheels hit the trail,
> NOW, albeit illegally.
>
> Note that an excellent strategy would be
> for the biking community to get a very
> small section of non-wilderness trail
> designated multi-use, then the support
> for the only organization that exists
> to protect the trail will lose your and
> others' support, leaving the bikers as
> the only ones standing.
>
> You have fed into, and supported their
> strategy, to remove the only organizational
> support for keeping the trail non-bike.
>
> And then you'll wonder: "how did this happen?"
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:15:50 -0700
> From: "Bob Bankhead" <wandering_bob at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT & the PCTA
> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <000301cda702$83dfae20$8b9f0a60$@comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> WOW!
>
> Looks like we have a new addition to the short list of the most hotly
> debated "___ on the trail" topics.
>
>
> Mountain bikes
> Guns
> Dogs
>
> What's next?
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
> From: shon mcganty <smcganty at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: Bob Bankhead <wandering_bob at comcast.net>, PCT List Forum
> <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349885764.49606.YahooMailNeo at web112610.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I disagree.? Perhaps someplaces they can co-exist, but not on the PCT.
> ?
> This summer I spent a?week hiking in Oregon near Bend, where Mtn bikes are
> nearly?omnipresent.? I could not enjoy my hike while stepping off the trail
> 5,000 times!? I couldn't imagine doing this on the PCT too.
> ?
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bob Bankhead <wandering_bob at comcast.net>
> To: PCT List Forum <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:12 PM
> Subject: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
>
> Mountain bikers and hikers can co-exist on the same trail. Look at the
> Colorado Trail. With the exception of a few wilderness areas, non-motorized
> bikes are allowed anywhere along its length. Parts of the trail are
> included in the routings of the Leadville and Breckenridge 100 mile races,
> and there is even an annual bike race from Denver to Durango on the CT.
> There are designated biker CT road routes around those sensitive wilderness
> areas.
>
> How do they do it? Respect for each other. Bikers put in hundreds of
> manhours each year maintaining the CT. I've never met a disrespectful biker
> on the CT. Quite the contrary, they are a great resource for hikers, often
> sharing water, trail condition, and providing rides to/from remote
> trailheads. Yes, the bikes do cut ruts into the trail tread, but fixing
> that is where a lot of their maintenance hours go.
>
> The rules of the road are everyone yields to stock, and bikes yield to
> hikers. Courtesy modifies that a bit such that descending hikers routinely
> step off the trail for bikes pedaling uphill. It's a lot easier to get
> going again for the hiker. Bikers are well aware of the presence of hikers
> and make a concerted effort to avoid collisions on blind corners and
> sweeping curves, even during the races.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:16:45 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1122369236.13844691349885805527.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> The whole OHV argument is a slippery slope
> that I don't buy and is a distraction from
> the main issue that one historical group is
> trying to keep another human powered group of recreationists out.
>
> Again, nobody's asking access to 100% of
> the PCT, but being kept out completely is
> unfair. That might be why so many cyclists
> are not obeying the current rules.
> Rules that are blatantly unfair are rarely followed.
> ===========================
>
> I find myself in agreement with this logic.
>
> I will now be working to allow cars and motorcycles
> into bike lanes, nationwide (along with horses).
>
> It is unfair that one group should have use of
> paved streets that all of us have paid to construct!
>
> On weekends, those who have a desire should be allowed
> to land their small planes in the bike lanes, as well.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:20:15 -0700
> From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> CA+-77MWNGSXyQ8QD3Nz+M6FwQpjqXpXHRcu9GDrmEHrtMq4p2Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is a misrepresentation by Mr. Jacobs;
>
> It is a fact that bicycles are written into the act as potential users
> of the National Trails System. It is no misrepresentation.
>
> I have no desire to see bicycles on the PCT, but I will not make false
> claims in order to further my agenda. I value my integrity to much to
> do that. I will not tell others what to do with theirs. Sacrificing
> one's integrity does seem to be extremely popular.
>
> If anyone doesn't like what I say, create a mail filter, or hit the
> delete key. I won't change the facts to make you feel better.
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> --
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 25
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:26:43 -0700
> From: "James Vesely" <JVesely at edmsupply.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: "Dan Jacobs" <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>, <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1B64CE751A7DE74FB3673AA17F6A154E5CC43F at mail.local.edmsupply.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> The key word is "potential trail use" safety and logic would dictate
> that when there are two potential uses for a trail you should look at
> possible conflicts. Something moving at a potential speed in excess of
> 30 mph+ on a single lane trail would not go well with something moving
> at a speed of 2-3 mph on the same trail and this is why bicycles are
> banded from driving on city sidewalks. For the safety of the mountain
> biker and the pedestrian there has to be some separation. We are not
> talking about a single lane mountain road here this is a footpath
> designed for foot travel.
>
>
>
> I would like ask the mountain bike people if they would think it safe
> and prudent for a 60 mph+ motorcycle to use the same paths that mountain
> bikes use, the motorcycle is only going twice as fast not 10 times as
> fast as in the case of a bike/pedestrian.
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net
> [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of Dan Jacobs
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 8:43 AM
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
>
>
>
> Facts matter.
>
>
>
> So I decided to try to find out some facts. I looked up the Act of
>
> Congress that designated the National Trails system. I found it here:
>
>
>
> http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/nts/legislation.html
>
>
>
> In case there are some that don't want to read through it, here is a
>
> pertinent part of the Act (SEC. 7. [16USC1246] (j)):
>
>
>
> "(j) Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the
>
> national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the
>
> following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian
>
> activities, jogging or similar fitness activities, trail biking,
>
> overnight and long-distance backpacking, snowmobiling, and surface
>
> water and underwater activities. Vehicles which may be permitted on
>
> certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles,
>
> bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off-road vehicles. In
>
> addition, trail access for handicapped individuals may be provided.
>
> The provisions of this subsection shall not supersede any other
>
> provisions of this Act or other Federal laws, or any State or local
>
> laws."
>
>
>
> So, the Act does not prohibit bicycles, in fact states they are a
>
> potential use of the National Trails System. You will also see that
>
> potential users include motorcycles and four wheel drive or
>
> all-terrain vehicles. If you're gonna fight something, you gotta know
>
> about it.
>
>
>
> My wish is that we can keep the negativity on this list to an absolute
>
> minimum. If we have a superior moral and ethical position on the
>
> matter, we don't show it well with name calling, biting on the shiny
>
> troll bait and lures, and fighting among ourselves. The timing was
>
> awful after the bickering about horses on the PCT. If this is the kind
>
> of "club" I joined, I am thinking twice about whether I want to be a
>
> member.
>
>
>
> I spend all day, four days a week with thousands of people that feel
>
> entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it, and react in
>
> utter shock, disbelief, and anger when they don't get things they way
>
> they want. I don't need any more of that from anywhere else.
>
>
>
> Dan Jacobs
>
> Washougal
>
> --
>
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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/
>
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
> From: shon mcganty <smcganty at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on
> the PCT
> To: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>, PCT
> <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349886515.94555.YahooMailNeo at web112609.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Has everyone read the responses from the mtn bike users?given on?Brick's
> link?? If you do, you will find they are very excited about the possibility
> of mtn biking the PCT?and are already organizing.
> ?
> If we want to defeat this proposal, we also need to be organized.? Reading
> the mtn biker's posts will help understand our opponent's viewpoint and
> arguments.? We need to be clear, focused, and educated with our response to
> this threat.
> ?
> Does anyone know the best person/department within the FS to write a
> letter to?
> ?
> ?
> ?
> ?
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> To: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:03 PM
> Subject: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on the PCT
>
>
> http://forums.mtbr.com/passion/big-news-feds-consider-allowing-bikes-pct-816289.html
>
> As a result, the Forest Service is going to begin a rulemaking
> procedure, probably in March of 2013, to consider making the
> non-Wilderness parts of the PCT multiuse. This will involve public
> notice and comment.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: CJ & Cristy Miller <soggy2pair at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349886732.92012.YahooMailNeo at web162501.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> ?
> Dan - Thanks for digging up the NPS info, I had just started looking for
> the same.
> ?
> I'm not taking any specific?position and?I don't ride mountain bikes.? My
> most recent
> experience on a multi-day, multi-use trail in the Yacolt Burn State Forest
> was good
> when encountering bikers.? It certainly might be the exception rather than
> the rule
> but these fellas slowed, and were making ready to, what appeared to be
> giving us
> the right-of-way.? That allowed my wife and I time to strike up a
> conversation
> with them, to advise that the trail had tree-fall from a logging operation
> about 3miles
> ahead, unpassable unless you wanted to sling a mountain bike over your
> shoulder. They
> thanked us and rode on, only to return a short while later laughing with
> us at how
> bad the trail was blocked. We all agreed, sharing our frustrations with
> there not being
> any signage but, to the credit of the State Forest and local Parks, they
> replied
> to both phone calls and emails and advised they would send someone out and
> contact
> the contractor to place signs.
> ?
> In my opinion, as Dan states, get all the facts.
> It also has a much to do with education, and of course respect &
> compliance.
> ?
> Whether hikers are skipping out on tabs during resupply, etc
> Whether equestrians turn out in jousting gear to clear all trail obstacles
> ? (seriously, jousting gear - that right there is funny to think about)
> Whether mountain bikers "on your left" toss empty Rbull cans at you
> ...the few bad apples make it hard on the majority, I get it.
> ?
> I thought the BolderMountainBike site?has a down to earth, real world
> approach
> to trail etiquette.
> ?
> Here is a small copy/paste:
> "
> Most of the time, people are cool. Yes, some people are jerks. Some hikers
> are jerks. Some
> ?bikers are jerks. Some chickens are jerked (but that's another story).
> The thing is that two jerks
> ?don't make for a nice person. Two jerks make for a fight. Go home feeling
> like Gandhi instead
> of like Tyson in those vile ear-biting days and we'll all be the better
> for it."
> ?
> http://bouldermountainbike.org/content/trail-etiquette
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:33:58 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on the
> PCT
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 455513745.13849381349886838687.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Does anyone know the best person/department within the FS to write a
> letter to?
> ========================
>
> Beth Boyst is the person designated as responsible for the PCT:
>
> USDA-FS Pacific Southwest Regional Office (Region 5)
> Beth Boyst, Trail Manager
> 1323 Club Dr.
> Vallejo, CA 94592
> 707-562-8881
> 707-562-9055 (FAX)
> E-mail: (first intial)(last name)@fs.fed.us
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:35:58 -0600
> From: Scott Bryce <sbryce at scottbryce.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <5075A3EE.6080805 at scottbryce.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 10/10/2012 9:43 AM, Dan Jacobs wrote:
> > So, the Act does not prohibit bicycles, in fact states they are a
> > potential use of the National Trails System.
>
> Does this include National Scenic Trails? I suspect it does because.....
>
> > You will also see that potential users include motorcycles and four
> > wheel drive or all-terrain vehicles.
>
> ...when the organizers of the Great Western Trail applied for National
> Scenic Trail status, hikers stood opposed to it because sections of the
> trail are open to use by motorized vehicles. The did not want a National
> Scenic Trail with ATVs on it.
>
> Now we are seeing the same thing here. Hikers don't want a National
> Scenic Trail with mountain bikes on it.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 30
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:48:00 -0700
> From: Ken Powers <ken at gottawalk.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
> To: "Ken Murray" <kmurray at pol.net>, "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <F8980AA17FB04FDF99680131CB07C325 at Desktop2008>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Now there is a strategy for hikers to gain support for keeping bikers and
> hikers separated. I have MANY biking friends who would support keeping cars
> out of the bike lanes. And we could reduce road maintenance budgets by
> removing all those extra lines on our streets.
>
> Ken
> www.GottaWalk.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Murray" <kmurray at pol.net>
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:16 AM
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on the PCT
>
>
> The whole OHV argument is a slippery slope
> that I don't buy and is a distraction from
> the main issue that one historical group is
> trying to keep another human powered group of recreationists out.
>
> Again, nobody's asking access to 100% of
> the PCT, but being kept out completely is
> unfair. That might be why so many cyclists
> are not obeying the current rules.
> Rules that are blatantly unfair are rarely followed.
> ===========================
>
> I find myself in agreement with this logic.
>
> I will now be working to allow cars and motorcycles
> into bike lanes, nationwide (along with horses).
>
> It is unfair that one group should have use of
> paved streets that all of us have paid to construct!
>
> On weekends, those who have a desire should be allowed
> to land their small planes in the bike lanes, as well.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
>
> End of Pct-L Digest, Vol 58, Issue 13
> *************************************
>
More information about the Pct-L
mailing list