[pct-l] Sec. N (and tax cuts!)

[goforth at cio.net (Joanne Lennox)]

. 
> 
> On the subject of trail maintenance and smart spending. I agree trails
need to be maintained, but I
> 
> think this needs to be done sensibly. When I hike a trail that has a 8
foot wide swath cut through
> 
> the brush I have to wonder, do these trails really need to be
"maintained" to this extent and who is
> 
> the intended user. The brush is has been cut is thrown in unnatural heaps
on the side of the trail
> 
> where it dries and becomes a fire hazard. Trails maintained in this manor
take away from the
> 
> wilderness experience, are ugly, and cost us all more than they should. I
even think some of the
> 
> blow downs need to be left in place. It would keep the mountain bikers
off the trails. Hikers can
> 
> go over most blow downs. Having to get off a bike and carry it over
obstacles several times
> 
> would probably discourage most mountain bikers. 
> 
> 
When I read these kind of statements griping about how wide the brush was
cut on each side of the trail,  I know that the person has never really
done any serious brush cutting along the trail.   And doesn't have any idea
of how often or how much effort is applied to such trail maintenance or how
fast brush grows in different areas.

His wilderness standards do not seem to include  people who are not as fit
as he or who ride horses etc.
A trail standard that is aimed at keeping people off the trail , or
fulfilling his wilderness ethics seems amiss.  Who does the maintenance???

There are plenty of trails that are not maintained.  Why not choode to hike
on those, rather than hiking on the National Scenic trail and complaining
that it just is not primitive enough.  Seems kind of like taking an
interstate highway and then complaining that it  isn't a two land road and
is visually offensive what with the  shoulder, signs, fences and a grassy
right of way.

Joanne