Re: [pct-l] Banning Horses? Nah!

[reynolds@ilan.com]

RE: I'm glad to see you have recognized that horses actually do cause
*damage*.
Now that we can agree on that, let's then simply try to remove the greatest
cause of damage to these areas,

Actually, I think that we have to start further back and define *damage*.
If we are protecting the wilderness for future generations then *damage* is
something that detracts from their enjoyment. If we are protecting the
wilderness for a *wildlife habitat*, then *damage* is something else. [I
don't think the bear cares about horse shit on the trail] From the point of
view of nature, of course, there is no *damage*, only change.

In fourteen (14) years of backpacking in the Sierra, the number 1 culpret
is air pollution from Fresno It has wiped out the crisp, clear view of the
Great Western Divide. The trees also seem to be getting sick although I
don't know that this is due to air pollution.

Frankly, the Sierra seems to be doing quite well, thank you! The so-called
overused areas like Bullfrog Lake [old story] and Guitar Lake [new story]
look *zero trashed* to me. True, the *tent city* areas like Little Yosemite
Valley and Long Lake look like car campgrounds and the trails to Half Dome
and Mt. Whitney look like the Santa Monica Freeway  but it's O.K. with me
if most of the backpackers go there and leave the rest of the wilderness to
me.

So, my first question is: What's the problem? Why change anything? Let
everybody keep doing what they are. [From a geritol point of view a
thruhiker with two-week unwashed wool duds invading an all-you-can-eat
smorgesboard is serious pollution -- way past horse shit. It all depends on
your point of view]


* From the Pacific Crest Trail Email List |  http://www.backcountry.net   *

==============================================================================