[pct-l] Wall map
Jonathon Howry
jon.howry at gmail.com
Fri Oct 12 09:17:26 CDT 2012
Me and 2 friends are planning for our thru hike next year. We would love to
have a map of the trail to put up in a wall and pin in different bits of
info. Anyone know where I could find something like that?
On Oct 11, 2012 3:13 PM, "Janette Storer" <janettestorer at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Screen print attached from Mountain Biker Forum from our PCT-L list.
>
>
> Janette Storer
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "pct-l-request at backcountry.net" <pct-l-request at backcountry.net>
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:06 PM
> Subject: Pct-L Digest, Vol 58, Issue 14
>
> 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. Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT) (Paul Magnanti)
> 2. Re: bikes on the PCT (JPL)
> 3. Mountain Bikes and "Sharing" (Barry Teschlog)
> 4. Mountain bikes (Susan Alcorn)
> 5. Guns on the PCT? (Janette Storer)
> 6. Facts Matter, Part 2 (Dan Jacobs)
> 7. Wheeled Conveyances on the PCT (Robert E. Riess)
> 8. Re: Facts Matter, Part 2 (Timothy Nye)
> 9. Re: Facts Matter, Part 2 (Scott Bryce)
> 10. Re: Pacific Crest Trail Reassessment Initiative (Cat Nelson)
> 11. Re: Facts Matter, Part 2 (JPL)
> 12. Re: Facts Matter, Part 2 (Timothy Nye)
> 13. Re: Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> (Fred Walters)
> 14. Re: Wheeled Conveyances on the PCT (Ryan Christensen)
> 15. Mobility Assistance Conveyance (Robert E. Riess)
> 16. bikes on the PCT & the PCTA (Maxine Weyant)
> 17. bikes on the PCT & the PCTA (Maxine Weyant)
> 18. Re: Mountain Bikes and "Sharing" (Cat Nelson)
> 19. "Save The PCT" Facebook Page (Ryan Christensen)
> 20. Re: "Save The PCT" Facebook Page (Scott "Squatch" Herriott)
> 21. A letter (JoAnn)
> 22. bike impacts on trails (Ken Murray)
> 23. Re: bikes on the PCT (Craig Giffen)
> 24. Re: Facts Matter, Part 2 (Jim & Jane Moody)
> 25. Wilderness Act and bicycles (jimniedbalski at aol.com)
> 26. Re: Wilderness Act and bicycles (Ryan Christensen)
> 27. Re: Wilderness Act and bicycles (Timothy Nye)
> 28. Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video form
> (Craig Giffen)
> 29. Re: Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video form
> (Timothy Nye)
> 30. Re: Wilderness Act and bicycles (ambery-80243 at mypacks.net)
> 31. Re: Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video form
> (Lindsey Sommer)
> 32. Re: Wilderness Act and bicycles (Timothy Nye)
> 33. Re: bikes on the PCT (David Thibault)
> 34. Re: Giving way to Mtn Bikes on the PCT (Cat Nelson)
> 35. Re: "Save The PCT" Facebook Page (Anony Muse)
> 36. Bikes on PCT - current information! (Edward Anderson)
> 37. QUOTE (Edward Anderson)
> 38. Mtn bikes- I don't get it (Jane Overton)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Paul Magnanti <pmags at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Facts matter (Bicycles on the PCT)
> To: PCT MailingList <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349888613.11218.YahooMailNeo at web112108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>
> ?>>Now we are seeing the same thing here.?
> >>Hikers don't want a National Scenic Trail with mountain bikes on it.
>
>
> MTBikes are allowed on the CDT, Potomac Heritage Trail, ?Arizona Trail,
> PNT and the New England National Scenic Trail
> (outside of wilderness areas and/or places with other restrictions).
>
> I kinda like my time on the CDT and the Arizona Trails. ?:)
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------
> 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: 2
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:13:34 -0400
> From: "JPL" <jplynch at crosslink.net>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: "shon mcganty" <smcganty at yahoo.com>, "Bob Bankhead"
> <wandering_bob at comcast.net>, "PCT List Forum" <
> pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <BEBCF48583B441AB81469B5AD2D44366 at jpl3PC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Have you tried not stepping off the trail? Hikers are supposed to have the
> right away over bikes right? Make them go around you. I realize that
> logic
> and common sense have to come into play, but what we're learning through
> this thread is that its very difficult for bikes and hikers to co-exist.
> If
> for no other reason than the speed at which they travel. Where they do
> seem
> to play together nicely (e.g. the CT example below) it appears to take a
> lot
> of effort on the park of the bikers; which is a good thing. I still think
> that for the most part the solution is separate trails.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shon mcganty
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:16 PM
> To: Bob Bankhead ; PCT List Forum
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Barry Teschlog <tokencivilian at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Mountain Bikes and "Sharing"
> To: PCTL <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349889332.96039.YahooMailNeo at web124504.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> It's not sharing when a potential new user method would displace the
> existing users.? That's a hostile take over.
>
> Wheels displace foot / hoof users, period.
>
> Any assertion to the contrary is either childish naivety or a filthy lie
> (a falsehood knowingly told with intent to deceive).
>
> MTBers (the people) are more than welcome on the PCT....so long as they
> leave their bikes at home and join us on the trail on foot or
> horseback.? No one says that people who also happen to MTB aren't welcome
> on the PCT....they are, under the conditions of use of the trail as it is.?
> Come and hike on the PCT, MTB elsewhere.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Susan Alcorn <backpack45 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Mountain bikes
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <1349889685.42909.YahooMailRC at web182205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Just putting in my .02 again in response to or to reiterate, some
> statements I
> have seen here.
> I/we are not "anti-mountain bike," I/we are against mountain bikes on the
> PCT.
> Most of us are looking for a wilderness experience at 2-3 miles per hour
> and
> don't want to have to be worried that a bicyclist is going to be
> approaching at
> a considerably faster speed.
> To echo another comment, even though horses may have a larger impact on the
> trail per mile traveled, the number of equestrians is far smaller than the
> potential number of bicyclists.
> Many/most mountain bikers are looking for some excitement while
> riding--they are
> not likely to be leisurely pedaling along the trail, they are more likely
> to be
> zipping along and enjoying the challenge of some rough terrain because it
> adds
> to the adrenaline rush.
> As a taxpayer, I pay for freeways that I can not hike on; bridges I am not
> allowed to either walk or bike across, and schools that I no longer
> attend. To
> me, this is part of being a citizen and I expect to do this within reason.
> One of my sons is an avid bicyclist and I definitely have a soft spot for
> bicyclists, but to me it is only common sense that sometimes the two
> activities
> do not mix.
> Happy trails,
> Susan Alcorn
> Shepherd Canyon Books, Oakland, CA
> www.backpack45.com and backpack45.blogspot.com
> http://www.examiner.com/hiking-in-san-francisco/susan-alcorn
> Publishers of two award-winning books: Camino Chronicle: Walking to
> Santiago and
> We're in the Mountains Not over the Hill: Tales and Tips from Seasoned
> Women
> Backpackers.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Janette Storer <janettestorer at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Guns on the PCT?
> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349890086.53179.YahooMailNeo at web160205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Not to start a riot, but it seems as though I missed out on a discussion
> thread here?
>
>
> Janette Storer
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 10:37:12 -0700
> From: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CA+-77MW-W7_0OWST9o91SBey9b=DF_sXJFxcBDsuKZa3Bx6Vrw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Facts matter.
>
> In looking for more information, I discovered this language regarding
> national scenic trails (SEC. 7. [16USC1246])
>
> "(c) National scenic or national historic trails may contain
> campsites, shelters, and related-public-use facilities. Other uses
> along the trail, which will not substantially interfere with the
> nature and purposes of the trail, may be permitted by the Secretary
> charged with the administration of the trail. Reasonable efforts shall
> be made to provide sufficient access opportunities to such trails and,
> to the extent practicable, efforts shall be made to avoid activities
> incompatible with the purposes for which such trails were
> established."
>
> This could be used in favor of hikers and equestrians on the PCT, as
> that was the purpose for the establishment of the PCT, and MTB'ers
> could be shown to "substantially interfere with the nature and
> purposes of the trail", especially it's history.
>
> Dan Jacobs
> Washougal
> --
> "Loud motorcycle stereos save lives"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:07:27 -0700
> From: "Robert E. Riess" <robert.riess at cox.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Wheeled Conveyances on the PCT
> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <DFA01F9F5A084A78933F0275FE654C13 at RobertERiessPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Starting with the 2013 hiking season, all of the hikers I host in San
> Diego will be politely requested to send me photographs of trail damage
> caused by wheels, bike riders in violation of regulations, and incident
> reports of all encounters, good and bad. Of course, this invitation
> extends to all PCT day hikers, section hikers and thru hikers who want to
> share their hiker/biker experiences. Maybe somebody with more talent than
> I possess would produce a 2013 PCT video exclusively presenting a
> pictorial/video record of trail conditions as they presently exist. Video
> of hiker/biker confrontations would seem to me to be particularly
> convincing. 2 or 3 bikers whizzing by at 25 mph would convince me of the
> inherent danger of mixed use of the PCT.
>
> Data needed with each photo or incident report would be date, time,
> location, direction of travel, distance to trailhead, description (caption)
> for each photo, names, if available of bikers, and name of person
> submitting the data.
>
> Hike on!! Good Luck to the Class of 2013. Only a little over 6 months
> till ADZPCTKO 2013. Bob Riess, San Diego.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:30:18 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com>
> Cc: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <1FB4E644-EB68-426D-81D5-44309811288D at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Again:
>
> To the extent mountain bikers would disrupt equestrian use of the trail,
> and the danger to horses and their riders is manifestly greater than to
> hikers, then the vast majority of the population who are not physically fit
> to the degree of distance hikers and mountain bikers, will be excluded.
> This may well constitute a violation of the ADA. The disabled, the very
> young, the very old, etc...will suffer a disparate impact from such a
> policy change. The commercial outfitters and their insurers will be unable
> to continue under such a scenario. To benefit a much smaller proportion of
> the population, mountain bikers would exclude the opportunities now
> available to the citizenry as a whole to enjoy those portions they wish to
> "share" in the name of "fairness".
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Dan Jacobs <youroldpaldan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Facts matter.
> >
> > In looking for more information, I discovered this language regarding
> > national scenic trails (SEC. 7. [16USC1246])
> >
> > "(c) National scenic or national historic trails may contain
> > campsites, shelters, and related-public-use facilities. Other uses
> > along the trail, which will not substantially interfere with the
> > nature and purposes of the trail, may be permitted by the Secretary
> > charged with the administration of the trail. Reasonable efforts shall
> > be made to provide sufficient access opportunities to such trails and,
> > to the extent practicable, efforts shall be made to avoid activities
> > incompatible with the purposes for which such trails were
> > established."
> >
> > This could be used in favor of hikers and equestrians on the PCT, as
> > that was the purpose for the establishment of the PCT, and MTB'ers
> > could be shown to "substantially interfere with the nature and
> > purposes of the trail", especially it's history.
> >
> > 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: 9
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:53:33 -0600
> From: Scott Bryce <sbryce at scottbryce.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <5075C42D.60506 at scottbryce.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 10/10/2012 12:30 PM, Timothy Nye wrote:
> > This may well constitute a violation of the ADA. The disabled, the
> > very young, the very old, etc...will suffer a disparate impact from
> > such a policy change.
>
> Does this mean that the PCT needs to be made wheel chair accessible?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:54:53 -0700
> From: Cat Nelson <sagegirl51 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Pacific Crest Trail Reassessment Initiative
> To: Brick Robbins <brick at brickrobbins.com>
> Cc: PCT <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <CAH9fG23JodXYBMxXFanjYEEpWe7MjgCf6L6uO4AZ48e-vEhWMA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> This is not good and it will not just go away, it will be an on going
> issue.
> On Oct 10, 2012 2:31 AM, "Brick Robbins" <brick at brickrobbins.com> wrote:
>
> > 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 11
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:01:30 -0400
> From: "JPL" <jplynch at crosslink.net>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: "Scott Bryce" <sbryce at scottbryce.com>, <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <BCF9F88B826841D1801BFD268823B2B8 at jpl3PC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> No, but my understanding of what that means is that you can't prohibit
> mobility assist conveyances from trails that are there.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Bryce
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:53 PM
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
>
> On 10/10/2012 12:30 PM, Timothy Nye wrote:
> > This may well constitute a violation of the ADA. The disabled, the
> > very young, the very old, etc...will suffer a disparate impact from
> > such a policy change.
>
> Does this mean that the PCT needs to be made wheel chair accessible?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:13:18 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: JPL <jplynch at crosslink.net>
> Cc: "<pct-l at backcountry.net>" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <703D13BF-62D3-4775-ABD6-86EAC5D71D44 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Read horses.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 12:01 PM, "JPL" <jplynch at crosslink.net> wrote:
>
> > No, but my understanding of what that means is that you can't prohibit
> > mobility assist conveyances from trails that are there.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Bryce
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:53 PM
> > To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> >
> > On 10/10/2012 12:30 PM, Timothy Nye wrote:
> >> This may well constitute a violation of the ADA. The disabled, the
> >> very young, the very old, etc...will suffer a disparate impact from
> >> such a policy change.
> >
> > Does this mean that the PCT needs to be made wheel chair accessible?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 13
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:10:59 +0100
> From: Fred Walters <fredwalters2 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Forest Service to consider allowing Mtn Bikes on
> the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CAOMa4nC6v9ZDOx=-E9WQPU7A4yg-Ca2RsvehSOHufzuWqH4LuQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Presumably there would be a formal consultation, inviting submissions from
> all interested parties, etc., after which there would be a review, etc. (at
> least that is UK type of thing). All submissions being published and open
> to public scrutiny.
>
> Loads and loads of excellent points being made. I thought the "question"
> was not really starting until spring. If correct, everybody needs to make
> sure they don't "run out of steam" and feels just as strongly when it is
> time for the formal submissions. Not saying do nothing now but don't do
> something now and think you've had your say if there is a formal procedure
> later. But I am not familiar with US procedures here - in the UK letters
> received before a formal proposal has been opened to public consultation
> are NOT included in that consultation.
>
> I don't know people here but, often when something angers you you let of
> steam and the strong feeling then subside over time. And you can bet that
> the mountain bikers will only be getting every stronger momentum.
>
> Fred
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net> wrote:
>
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 14
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Wheeled Conveyances on the PCT
> To: "Robert E. Riess" <robert.riess at cox.net>, "pct-l at backcountry.net"
> <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349896277.32980.YahooMailNeo at web111413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Bob,
>
>
> I think a video is in order! It is a powerful way to educate, motivate and
> show vs. tell. My 'wheels' are turning, and I have some video ideas that I
> would like develop further.
>
>
> ProDeal
>
> ?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Robert E. Riess <robert.riess at cox.net>
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 11:07 AM
> Subject: [pct-l] Wheeled Conveyances on the PCT
>
> Starting with the 2013 hiking season, all of the hikers I host in San
> Diego will be politely requested to send me photographs of trail damage
> caused by wheels, bike riders in violation of regulations, and incident
> reports of all encounters, good and bad.? Of course, this invitation
> extends to all PCT day hikers, section hikers and thru hikers who want to
> share their hiker/biker experiences.? Maybe somebody with more talent than
> I possess would produce a 2013 PCT video exclusively presenting a
> pictorial/video record of trail conditions as they presently exist.? Video
> of hiker/biker confrontations would seem to me to be particularly
> convincing.? 2 or 3 bikers whizzing by at 25 mph would convince me of the
> inherent danger of mixed use of the PCT.?
>
> Data needed with each photo or incident report would be date, time,
> location, direction of travel, distance to trailhead, description (caption)
> for each photo, names, if available of bikers, and name of person
> submitting the data.?
>
> Hike on!! Good Luck to the Class of 2013.? Only a little over 6 months
> till ADZPCTKO 2013.? Bob Riess, San Diego.?
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 15
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:20:48 -0700
> From: "Robert E. Riess" <robert.riess at cox.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] Mobility Assistance Conveyance
> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <21F7F1F9E77F4C2D8B3AB8D280606BE6 at RobertERiessPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> When you buy a Segway, you are given a laminated card quoting the federal
> law which designates the Segway as a Mobility Assistance Conveyance. To
> prohibit the use of a Segway anywhere a wheelchair is allowed is a
> violation of federal law, whether the user is disabled or not. Regulatory
> personnel are prohibited from inquiring about disability status of the
> user. This takes precedence in all states. Prohibiting a Segway user from
> any facility is a violation of federal law. Asking about their disability
> status is a separate violation. Setting a reasonable speed limit is
> allowed. BR
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:03:21 -0700
> From: Maxine Weyant <weyantm at msn.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT & the PCTA
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP417F1C5C8AD67CBBA760456B88E0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> you forgot giardia, and water treatment. ;)
>
> Dys-feng shui-nal
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:19:41 -0700
> From: Maxine Weyant <weyantm at msn.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT & the PCTA
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP2690A7DCFB26AD241B84483B88E0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Whoops, I was responding to this post when I mentioned giardia and water
> treatment. My bad.
>
> Dys-feng shui-nal
>
> 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: 18
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:27:26 -0700
> From: Cat Nelson <sagegirl51 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Mountain Bikes and "Sharing"
> To: Barry Teschlog <tokencivilian at yahoo.com>
> Cc: PCTL <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <CAH9fG23o_pbs8HuFQ2S=wrkc6eKy_pKQ34Y7TepwUAwsnjUSyQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It seem to me to be a quality of life issue. Not the selfish quality of my
> hiking experience but the quality of life of all of the PCT. It is a unique
> living habitat with a delicate fragile living ecosystem, not a dirt path or
> a 2.5" tread.
> On Oct 10, 2012 10:15 AM, "Barry Teschlog" <tokencivilian at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It's not sharing when a potential new user method would displace the
> existing users. That's a hostile take over.
> >
> > Wheels displace foot / hoof users, period.
> >
> > Any assertion to the contrary is either childish naivety or a filthy lie
> (a falsehood knowingly told with intent to deceive).
> >
> > MTBers (the people) are more than welcome on the PCT....so long as they
> leave their bikes at home and join us on the trail on foot or
> > horseback. No one says that people who also happen to MTB aren't welcome
> on the PCT....they are, under the conditions of use of the trail as it is.
> Come and hike on the PCT, MTB elsewhere.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 19
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] "Save The PCT" Facebook Page
> To: "pct-l at backcountry net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349905563.50979.YahooMailNeo at web111410.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hello PCT'ers,
>
>
> I started a Facebook page dedicated to helping to combat the effort to
> open the PCT to bikes. It is there to help facilitate communication and
> collaboration amongst us PCT'ers.?
>
> We are going to need to be organized, focused and smart if we want to save
> the PCT from bikes.?
>
> Feel free to join.
>
>
> http://www.facebook.com/SavethePCT
>
> ProDeal
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:29:55 -0700
> From: "Scott \"Squatch\" Herriott" <yetifan7 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] "Save The PCT" Facebook Page
> To: Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "pct-l at backcountry net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <CAE+nFzJEvs_6TFre-Ec3WX3izx1_nWp5iCXubfjAHaONjSWMCQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I would suggest that anyone who's had a close encounter with a speeding
> mountain biker should, if possible, testify when the time comes.
>
> Also, anyone know of any erosion studies done pertaining to mountain bikes
> and trails?
>
>
>
> Squatch
> squatchfilms.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> > 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: 21
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:57:44 -0700
> From: "JoAnn" <jomike at cot.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] A letter
> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <D83D0A167A66465DA67C6F6332E89EB7 at JoAnnPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I wrote an e-mail to the PCTA; always a good way to go and I encourage
> EVERY single person on the list who is against bikes on the PCT, write them
> and say so. My letter was forwarded to Liz and she personally answered. I
> plan to write a real letter, not e-mail, to the Board also. They will be
> more willing to listen if there are a ton of us for keeping bikes off the
> trail. PLEASE do not make assumption about the Association. They are more
> of a bureaucracy than you think. In do not know to what pressure they might
> falter to.
>
> are we there yet
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:15:42 -0400
> From: Ken Murray <kmurray at pol.net>
> Subject: [pct-l] bike impacts on trails
> To: "." <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1907272011.13960701349910942025.JavaMail.root at zmcs03l-pol-08.portal.webmd.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> http://www.uvm.edu/~snrvtdc/trails/ComparingHikingMtnBikingHorseRidingImpacts.pdf
>
> Comparing hiking, mountain biking and horse riding impacts on vegetation
> and soils in Australia and the United States of America
> ==========================
> http://www.culturechange.org/mountain_biking_impacts.htm
>
> The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People
> A Review of the Literature
> ========================
>
> http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/openspace/pdf_gis/IndependentResearchReports/238_Carter_Anna_Relative.pdf
>
> RELATIVE IMPACT OF OFF-ROAD BICYCLE
> AND HIKER TRAFFIC ON TRAIL SOILS:
> AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY, BOULDER, COLORADO
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:29:16 -1000
> From: Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <3A20B8C3-EF9D-43BC-BEC5-A149E5AA8794 at lunky.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> > From: Zorglub <azorglub at yahoo.com>
> > 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.
>
> Of course you don't buy it because it negates your whole argument for
> mountain bikes on the PCT.
>
> Hikers/Equestrians are at the bottom of the safety+trail damage chain so
> to speak, above them are mountain bikers, and above that are motocross/ATV
> riders. Mountain bikers asking ATV riders to "share" their trail is a lot
> different than mountain bikers asking hikers to "share" their trail.
> Asking to move up the chain generally only presents a greater risk to
> yourself rather than the existing users of said trail. However, asking to
> move down the chain gives you the safety advantage and puts the existing
> trail users at a greater risk.
>
> If you were wanting the PCT open to human-powered mechanical things like
> mountain unicycles (or pogo sticks for that matter) there would be a lot
> less opposition to "sharing" the PCT since you are not a safety threat.
> Perhaps you should go that route?
>
> This whole notion of allowing mountain bikers on the trail in order to
> have more maintenance crews is nonsense. Think of all the trail
> maintenance we could get if we renamed Forrester Pass to something like
> GlaxoSmithKline Pass. Heck, if things were dire enough for the trail, I
> would be happier to tell people I hiked the Campmor Trail (formerly the
> Pacific Crest Trail) over having to deal with mountain bikes.
>
> Regardless, I really think you need to be spending your energy into
> creating mountain bike only trails rather than piggybacking off other
> people's hard work. Give up the notion of having mountain bikes on the
> PCT. The Forest Service/BLM is already aware of the safety conflicts
> between hikers and mountain bikers. If they allow mountain bikes on the
> PCT, they know they are just one lawsuit away from a hiker with a GoPro
> camera who happened to be on the wrong blind corner at the wrong time.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 23:59:41 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Jim & Jane Moody <moodyjj at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <
> 346031337.323189.1349913581196.JavaMail.root at sz0094a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>
>
> Believe it or not, a privy at an AT shelter just south of the Shenandoah
> NP is wheelchair accessible, complete with ramp.? However, the side trail
> down to that shelter is steep and rocky.? We discussed this and came up
> with 2 possible explanations.? Either some bureaucrat insited on following
> the letter of the law in the face of logic, or somebody got a hold of a
> surplus hdcp privy and had it airlifted into the shelter.? This isn't as
> strange as it sounds.? Often Reserve or Natinal Guard units are looking for
> exercises that serve the public good and provide training / practice.
>
>
>
> Mango
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> From: "Scott Bryce" <sbryce at scottbryce.com>
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:53:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Facts Matter, Part 2
>
> On 10/10/2012 12:30 PM, Timothy Nye wrote:
> > This may well constitute a violation of the ADA. ?The disabled, the
> > very young, the very old, etc...will suffer a disparate impact from
> > such a policy change.
>
> Does this mean that the PCT needs to be made wheel chair accessible?
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 25
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:21:04 -0400 (EDT)
> From: jimniedbalski at aol.com
> Subject: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <8CF755D6F8A4ECE-F68-2E810 at webmail-m057.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I won't get into all the arguments of the potential troll as identified by
> Brick, but the statement below (bikes should be allowed in WIlderness as
> Congress intended) is interesting. Short of reading the full text of the
> Wilderness Act, does anyone know if bicycles are specifically banned from
> Wilderness areas? Certainly motorized vehicles are, as we know, but does it
> ban self-propelled wheeled vehicles? I want to say they are banned, but in
> thinking about it I'm not 100 percent sure. Naturally, what Congress
> intended, as opposed to what it actually passed, are two different things.
>
>
>
>
> ?- cyclists will use the PCT to go into Wilderness. ?Let me say that bikes
> hould be allowed into Wilderness (as Congress intended), but that's beyond
> the
> oint. ?Frankly, if a cyclist wants to go ride in Wilderness, that same
> person
> ill ride the PCT whether it's legal or not. ?So, legalizing the PCT will
> not
> hange whether cyclists go ride in the Wilderness.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
> To: "jimniedbalski at aol.com" <jimniedbalski at aol.com>,
> "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349915454.49506.YahooMailNeo at web111408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Yes- the Wilderness Act bans all mechanical transport in the Wilderness:
>
> "...there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized
> equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of
> mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such
> area."?
>
> http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=legisAct
>
>
> This has since been specifically interpreted to extend to bikes.
>
>
> The issue is not sections of the PCT inside designated Wilderness.
> Fortunately, they are permanently protected from the destruction bikes
> cause. The issue is the portions of the PCT outside of Wilderness.
>
>
> ProDeal
>
> ?
> http://www.facebook.com/SavethePCT
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "jimniedbalski at aol.com" <jimniedbalski at aol.com>
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:21 PM
> Subject: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
>
> I
> won't get into all the arguments of the potential troll as identified
> by Brick, but the statement below (bikes should be allowed in WIlderness
> as Congress intended) is interesting. Short of reading the full text of
> the Wilderness Act, does anyone know if bicycles are specifically
> banned from Wilderness areas? Certainly motorized vehicles are, as we
> know, but does it ban self-propelled wheeled vehicles? I want to say
> they are banned, but in thinking about it I'm not 100 percent sure.
> Naturally, what Congress
> intended, as opposed to what it actually passed, are two different
> things.
>
>
>
>
> ?- cyclists will use the PCT to go into Wilderness. ?Let me say that bikes
> hould be allowed into Wilderness (as Congress intended), but that's beyond
> the
> oint. ?Frankly, if a cyclist wants to go ride in Wilderness, that same
> person
> ill ride the PCT whether it's legal or not. ?So, legalizing the PCT will
> not
> hange whether cyclists go ride in the Wilderness.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 18:26:49 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
> To: "jimniedbalski at aol.com" <jimniedbalski at aol.com>
> Cc: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <B7072BE5-1D69-42FA-8867-8F31974B9D4E at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I'll make this point again for the third time today. The Wilderness Act
> was passed and signed into law in 1964. The first mountain bike was cobbled
> together in Northern California in the late 1970's. It is disingenuous to
> claim mountain bikes were intended to be included within the ambit of the
> Act before they were invented, became popular and entered popular
> consciousness and mass production. Up until 15 years after the Act
> bicycles were conceived as being limited to paved surfaces. How is it that
> Congress intended mountain bikes be included in the Act? Wait! I know! Time
> travel!! (Head slap)
>
> It should be obvious to all here that the disregard for any legal
> restriction by the mountain bike lobby should mean that legalization isn't
> necessary because they don't feel restricted regardless of the outcome.
> Similarly, of course, anyone who has encountered them on the trail knows
> that they don't adhere to any obligation involving other users with whom
> the wish to 'share'.
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:21 PM, jimniedbalski at aol.com wrote:
>
> > I won't get into all the arguments of the potential troll as identified
> by Brick, but the statement below (bikes should be allowed in WIlderness as
> Congress intended) is interesting. Short of reading the full text of the
> Wilderness Act, does anyone know if bicycles are specifically banned from
> Wilderness areas? Certainly motorized vehicles are, as we know, but does it
> ban self-propelled wheeled vehicles? I want to say they are banned, but in
> thinking about it I'm not 100 percent sure. Naturally, what Congress
> intended, as opposed to what it actually passed, are two different things.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ?- cyclists will use the PCT to go into Wilderness. ?Let me say that
> bikes
> > hould be allowed into Wilderness (as Congress intended), but that's
> beyond the
> > oint. ?Frankly, if a cyclist wants to go ride in Wilderness, that same
> person
> > ill ride the PCT whether it's legal or not. ?So, legalizing the PCT will
> not
> > hange whether cyclists go ride in the Wilderness.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 28
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:56:59 -1000
> From: Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video
> form
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID: <B133EE5B-464C-46A7-B0AA-96EB97D377DB at lunky.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> A few MTB riders have recorded their illegal PCT rides and put them on
> YouTube. Especially with the first two videos, they know what they are
> doing is illegal. If anyone contacting the authorites needs videos and
> finds the videos deleted, I have screenshots and hi-res downloads of each
> video too.
>
> BLT to Pioneer Mail (this one is blatant)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWe3NcmplE
>
> PCT Riding near Ashland:
> "A quick Sunday poach of the PCT"
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILEhluMbhPE
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujTVanzKrWg
>
> PCT Riding near Hesperia, CA:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpTt0Ij3c9A
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCmtJEG2Am4
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3SOSdD5T6I
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z0YIWyjohE
>
> PCT Between highway 173 and Silverwood:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUcdEee_70g
>
> Furthermore, although these are not on the PCT, you can see how ridiculous
> the notion of "multi-use" trails are:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhuhodTbUds
>
> (Although this one isn't the rider's fault obviously, this collision could
> have just as easily been a hiker on a blind corner or bottom of an incline)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTHUQlZrxBI
>
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:19:06 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video
> form
> To: Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com>
> Cc: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <6F5A7240-658D-46A5-91DF-4CF9B205A9F7 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Scout was very happy share with me a conviction that was obtained through
> the PCTA of a dirt bike rider who posed for pictures on the PCT for a
> magazine article. The pictures led to his conviction.
>
> I've worked on numerous criminal referrals to local District Attorney
> offices here in California that led to convictions when I had my own
> practice here. My license is still current. Provided they identify
> themselves, or their club if they belong to one may alone be sufficient to
> track them down, then we may be able to do something with this. They'll
> want it put together with a bow on it. You would likely have to be at least
> available to testify n order to establish the chain for custody of the
> evidence. This really like a stupid crook joke.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:56 PM, Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com> wrote:
>
> > A few MTB riders have recorded their illegal PCT rides and put them on
> YouTube. Especially with the first two videos, they know what they are
> doing is illegal. If anyone contacting the authorites needs videos and
> finds the videos deleted, I have screenshots and hi-res downloads of each
> video too.
> >
> > BLT to Pioneer Mail (this one is blatant)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWe3NcmplE
> >
> > PCT Riding near Ashland:
> > "A quick Sunday poach of the PCT"
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILEhluMbhPE
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujTVanzKrWg
> >
> > PCT Riding near Hesperia, CA:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpTt0Ij3c9A
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCmtJEG2Am4
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3SOSdD5T6I
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z0YIWyjohE
> >
> > PCT Between highway 173 and Silverwood:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUcdEee_70g
> >
> > Furthermore, although these are not on the PCT, you can see how
> ridiculous the notion of "multi-use" trails are:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhuhodTbUds
> >
> > (Although this one isn't the rider's fault obviously, this collision
> could have just as easily been a hiker on a blind corner or bottom of an
> incline)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTHUQlZrxBI
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 30
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:04:21 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
> From: ambery-80243 at mypacks.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
> To: pct-l <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 8897952.1349924661847.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Timothy Nye wrote:
> >
> >
> "I'll make this point again for the third time today. The Wilderness Act
> was passed and signed into law in 1964. The first mountain bike was cobbled
> together in Northern California in the late 1970's. It is disingenuous to
> claim mountain bikes were intended to be included within the ambit of the
> Act before they were invented, became popular and entered popular
> consciousness and mass production. Up until 15 years after the Act
> bicycles were conceived as being limited to paved surfaces. How is it that
> Congress intended mountain bikes be included in the Act? Wait! I know! Time
> travel!! (Head slap)"
> >
>
> The Code of Federal Regulations regarding wilderness was amended in 2000,
> and one of the amendments was to define the term "mechanical transport":
>
> CFR 6301.5 Definitions
> states:
>
> Mechanical transport means any vehicle, device, or contrivance for moving
> people or material in or over land, water, snow, or air that has moving
> parts. This includes, but is not limited to, sailboats, sailboards, hang
> gliders, parachutes, bicycles, game carriers, carts, and wagons. The term
> does not include wheelchairs, nor does it include horses or other pack
> stock, skis, snowshoes, non-motorized river craft including, but not
> limited to, drift boats, rafts, and canoes, or sleds, travois, or similar
> devices without moving parts.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 31
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:12:30 -0700
> From: Lindsey Sommer <lgsommer at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Illegal Mountain Biking on the PCT - Now in video
> form
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CAJmjT_kbH5xQ7SihDgysCHmsuHEHwuRrvvN1yYeYmR_sMPqM6Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Eek, some of these are freaky. I used to mountain bike, but came to the
> conclusion that flying down a rock covered dirt trail WHERE I MIGHT HIT
> PEOPLE went against my own logic. Plus, I like my collar bones to be
> intact.
>
> Good call on finding them! I'm all for mountain bikers enjoying themselves,
> just not where they can run me over.
>
> Cheers,
> Lindsey
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Craig Giffen <cg at lunky.com> wrote:
>
> > A few MTB riders have recorded their illegal PCT rides and put them on
> > YouTube. Especially with the first two videos, they know what they are
> > doing is illegal. If anyone contacting the authorites needs videos and
> > finds the videos deleted, I have screenshots and hi-res downloads of each
> > video too.
> >
> > BLT to Pioneer Mail (this one is blatant)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWe3NcmplE
> >
> > PCT Riding near Ashland:
> > "A quick Sunday poach of the PCT"
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILEhluMbhPE
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujTVanzKrWg
> >
> > PCT Riding near Hesperia, CA:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpTt0Ij3c9A
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCmtJEG2Am4
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3SOSdD5T6I
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z0YIWyjohE
> >
> > PCT Between highway 173 and Silverwood:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUcdEee_70g
> >
> > Furthermore, although these are not on the PCT, you can see how
> ridiculous
> > the notion of "multi-use" trails are:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhuhodTbUds
> >
> > (Although this one isn't the rider's fault obviously, this collision
> could
> > have just as easily been a hiker on a blind corner or bottom of an
> incline)
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTHUQlZrxBI
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 32
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:21:35 -0700
> From: Timothy Nye <timpnye at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Wilderness Act and bicycles
> To: "ambery-80243 at mypacks.net" <ambery-80243 at mypacks.net>
> Cc: pct-l <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID: <65484C76-E368-4980-87AC-330208D97591 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Equally, any regulation is a creature of the statute which it seeks to
> implement. If the regulation is contradicted and or inconsistent with the
> plain language of the statute, in this case the Act, then it is invalid and
> must be struck down. The signing statutes or other evidence of legislative
> intent may be examined in case of any ambiguity in the statute to ensure
> proper regulatory compliance is achieved.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 8:04 PM, ambery-80243 at mypacks.net wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Timothy Nye wrote:
> >>
> >>
> > "I'll make this point again for the third time today. The Wilderness Act
> was passed and signed into law in 1964. The first mountain bike was cobbled
> together in Northern California in the late 1970's. It is disingenuous to
> claim mountain bikes were intended to be included within the ambit of the
> Act before they were invented, became popular and entered popular
> consciousness and mass production. Up until 15 years after the Act
> bicycles were conceived as being limited to paved surfaces. How is it that
> Congress intended mountain bikes be included in the Act? Wait! I know! Time
> travel!! (Head slap)"
> >>
> >
> > The Code of Federal Regulations regarding wilderness was amended in
> 2000, and one of the amendments was to define the term "mechanical
> transport":
> >
> > CFR 6301.5 Definitions
> > states:
> >
> > Mechanical transport means any vehicle, device, or contrivance for
> moving people or material in or over land, water, snow, or air that has
> moving parts. This includes, but is not limited to, sailboats, sailboards,
> hang gliders, parachutes, bicycles, game carriers, carts, and wagons. The
> term does not include wheelchairs, nor does it include horses or other pack
> stock, skis, snowshoes, non-motorized river craft including, but not
> limited to, drift boats, rafts, and canoes, or sleds, travois, or similar
> devices without moving parts.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 33
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:29:49 -0700
> From: David Thibault <dthibaul07 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] bikes on the PCT
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CAD-wsevwhZ0jegyHwe2zh920ejYKr-2eU+h-D4jxGs+ppmx2Aw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> yeah it's a shame, i've hiked tons of the A.T. but as a biker who get
> pissed about motocycles and ATVs on our designated trails. i have to
> respect the rules of the backpackers who fought long and hard to have their
> special places too. NBB
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> For those that didn't click the link this comment is pretty poignant --
> >From a MTB'er discussing riding on the AT:
>
>
> "yeah it's a shame, i've hiked tons of the A.T. but as a biker who get
> pissed about motorcycles and ATVs on our designated trails. i have to
> respect the rules of the backpackers who fought long and hard to have their
> special places too."
>
> Kind of sums it up for me. I would like to keep our special places too.
>
> Day-Late
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 34
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:45:56 -0700
> From: Cat Nelson <sagegirl51 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Giving way to Mtn Bikes on the PCT
> To: Dennis Phelan <dennis.phelan at gmail.com>
> Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net, Fred Walters <fredwalters2 at gmail.com>
> Message-ID:
> <CAH9fG21OXGH5xN=2nkNxMath8Zr3aFYXsR+uAS6X0aW3Q3=PsA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> The pedestrian will be on the bottom of the pile, or on their bottom, one
> way or the other.
> On Oct 10, 2012 2:04 AM, "Dennis Phelan" <dennis.phelan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 35
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:49:50 -0600
> From: Anony Muse <anonymuse1966 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] "Save The PCT" Facebook Page
> To: Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com>, pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CAAydoTDmYHt5AMLtK24L1qPx+nJP26y+770fv3VEk9=LfZTiQA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Smart man Ryan!
>
> -Chuckie
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Ryan Christensen <yosemiteryan at yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hello PCT'ers,
> >
> > I started a Facebook page dedicated to helping to combat the effort to
> > open the PCT to bikes. It is there to help facilitate communication and
> > collaboration amongst us PCT'ers.
> >
> > We are going to need to be organized, focused and smart if we want to
> save
> > the PCT from bikes.
> >
> > Feel free to join.
> >
> > http://www.facebook.com/SavethePCT
> >
> > ProDeal
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 36
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Edward Anderson <mendoridered at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Bikes on PCT - current information!
> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349897656.99189.YahooMailNeo at web111612.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> This morning I had a long telephone conversation with Jerry Stone. He is a
> Back Country Horseman in my Unit (Antelope Valley) and is also the liaison
> between the BCH and the PCTA. Jerry and I have worked as volunteers on
> several PCT trail maintenance projects. This summer he spent about a month
> with BCH Bill Carter and about 20 others clearing thousands of down trees
> in the Mammoth area.
> ?
> We discussed the current "hot topic" of?Mountain Bikes?being allowed on
> the PCT.? Yesterday, Jerry had a?phone conversation with Liz Bergeron
> (Executive Director of the PCTA). They discussed the bike controversy at
> length. As I understand, the U.S. Forest Service had originally placed a
> "temporary ban" on bicycle use of the PCT as it passes through the lands
> under their jurisdiction.
> ?
> "Temporary" - having?agreed to review that ban once every two years -
> which they have done - always rejecting bicycle use. What is new, and
> current,?is that the Mountain Bikers are now DEMANDING that the next review
> should be a?PUBLIC review. Liz mentioned to Jerry that the Mountain Bikers
> will be present in force, with their lawyers.?She will need the support of
> Back Country Horsemen, other equestrians,?and hikers to make our case and
> keep the PCT free from?legal use by bikes.?
> ?
> This will be the time for all of us who use and love the PCT, and?the
> very?special and unique experience that it offers,?to give our much-needed
> support - and try to also be present at the proposed public review.
> ?
> I would like to mention that the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail was
> dedicated by the National Trails System Act of 1968. It is for foot traffic
> - reserved for hikers and equestrians. In those days, there were NO
> Mountain Bikes at all - they came much later.
> I, personally,?have no problem with the legal use by Mountain Bikers of
> the tens of thousands of miles of trails and dirt roads that they now use.?
> I just want to protect the precious?treasures that we still have, those few
> that still survive, - including the PCT and the Wilderness Areas. I welcome
> the Mountain Bikers to come and enjoy those areas - but either on foot or
> while riding a horse, as some of them already do.?
> ?
> MendoRider-Hiker
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 37
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Edward Anderson <mendoridered at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] QUOTE
> To: "pct-l at backcountry.net" <pct-l at backcountry.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1349898123.54178.YahooMailNeo at web111619.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> >From the U.S. Department of Agriculture:? " The trail (referring to the
> PCT) is open for foot and equestrian travel only; bicycles and motorized
> vehicles are not permitted".
> ?
> MendoRider-Hiker
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 38
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:00:53 -0700
> From: Jane Overton <neoaflander at gmail.com>
> Subject: [pct-l] Mtn bikes- I don't get it
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Message-ID:
> <CAH5oN+tBb-0r_=TsBj7gv-3E38SmLML9Qnb8c7cNUF7B6Yc9rQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 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 Oc
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> ...
More information about the Pct-L
mailing list