Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 227
  1. #51
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,730
    Found this blog: Going Long | Ryan's Cycling Blog

    Loved this piece:
    From a litigation standpoint, however, some knuckle-headed hikers adhere so completely to hiker-biker-horse-circle-of-life-on-the-trail signs that I could scream. The sign gives a stubborn hiker license to plod along in front of a biker at a walking pace instead of taking a quick step off the trail to let the biker pass. The vast majority of hikers travel sensibly, but a few follow the sign like a religion. I say, get rid of the signs and replace it with a disclaimer that says: “If you get hurt while acting like an a$$hole, it’s on you!”
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  2. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_Beer View Post
    So what went down in 1988 that resulted in the "Order" to ban bicycles on the PCT? Was there any sort of public comment, hearing, etc., or did some people freak out about these new things called "mountain bikes" and quickly write up the "Order" without due process?

    Based on this article I found from '88, it seems like recreation via bicycle fits in with their vision of the future... especially since their children's children are riding mountain bikes now
    Hi, Empty Beer — First, thanks for posting this article. This kind of material is valuable and could end up in our eventual comments to the Forest Service (or yours if you are inclined to submit one!)

    The 1988 closure order was the kind of thing that's usually issued when a campground facility is out of order or a wasp's nest makes it hazardous to use it. It is not meant for wholesale long-term policy decisions. No public notice or comment accompanied its issuance and, if I recall correctly, it was supposed to revisited every 90 days, but it hasn't been revisited since 1988. This is why the Forest Service has to undertake this rulemaking process now, which will include the notice and comment opportunity it did not offer before. It agrees that the closure order is defective.

  3. #53
    100% Recycled
    Reputation: Sworksrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by zorg View Post
    Same argument all the anti bikers use all the time: you got plenty of trails to ride, so leave the PCT/Wilderness/"whatever trail they want to excludes us from" alone. Stats just don't support this. Cyclists have access to maybe 20%-30% of the trails that hikers do. And the PCT has used the best route in many spots. Do you know that the PCTA would not even let a new multi use trail cross the PCT? That's right! How amazing is that? When we have exclusive access to 2600 mile of bike only trail, then maybe we can consider leaving the PCT alone, but until then we should argue for sharing.

    Really.... Not a anti biker, in fact far from it .. sharing ? you can ride the road every day and ask that question.....it will not happen EVER but I deal with it.
    I enjoy hiking without my bike and most of the PCT trail I would be pushing my bike anyway. I will fight for better battles and leave the PCT alone. So many people have fought very hard for that route and I am OK with that.

    Cheers
    Richard
    Monterey Bay Cycling

  4. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    That's fine, Richard. Let a hundred flowers bloom, as the saying goes. Not every mountain biker will support this effort, and not every PCT through-hiker will oppose it.

    One thought occurred to me, however. I can't remember when the PCT came into being, but I know it was by 1981, because I backpacked 125 miles of it in Oregon that year. The closure order came into being in 1988. I haven't heard of any complaints from the time that bicycles were allowed on the trail, which must have been the case for a decade or longer.

  5. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    255
    The bigger issue is the maintenance and upkeep of the trail, especially in remote areas. I come across sections that do not have any use at all and are being lost. Who will do the upkeep? Cyclists.

  6. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Fill the void, what section(s) are those? All information is useful for when the time comes to present an argument to the government.

    Diesel~ (previous page) mentioned that PCT section O in California is disappearing for lack of use. That's in and/or near Shasta County. Is that the same area you're mentioning?

  7. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    240
    I noticed that the Pacific Crest Trail Association's official stance is very anti-MTB. They claim that bikes are more damaging to trails than horses and talk about the damage done by illegal bike use. I checked their website recently and was unable to find the article. Unfortunately, the official nature of their organization gives some credibility to their claims.

  8. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    We've created a Facebook page for this effort. I invite everyone to "like" it.

    Currently we have six mtbr.com pages going, and we'll continue to post information on them. The Facebook page, however, will make it possible to post information in one place that people will receive quickly.

    Here's the link: https://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

  9. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mbmattcor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    255
    "Liked"

    Is the cover picture on the facebook page, a rider on the PCT, politically, that may be unwise? IMO

  10. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    No, not the PCT. I think it's the fabled 401 trail near Crested Butte, Colo. But others have pointed this out too. Originally I thought about it and decided it wasn't worth worrying about—it's just a cyclist on a trail. But I wonder if I should change it to include a caption. FB doesn't allow a caption AFAIK, but I could edit the photo with a program like Microsoft Paint (yes, I know it's primitive, but it works) to point that out. Any suggestions welcome.

  11. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mbmattcor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    255
    I grabbed shot from FB page, but it's probably not the original resolution that you submitted.
    If you want to send it to me in higher res, I can add the caption of your choice.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  12. #62
    mtb'er
    Reputation: Empty_Beer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by bpressnall View Post
    I noticed that the Pacific Crest Trail Association's official stance is very anti-MTB. They claim that bikes are more damaging to trails than horses and talk about the damage done by illegal bike use. I checked their website recently and was unable to find the article. Unfortunately, the official nature of their organization gives some credibility to their claims.
    99% of "earth" damage was committed by those who built the trail. After that, it's pretty much negligible in terms of further impacts

  13. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmattcor View Post
    I grabbed shot from FB page, but it's probably not the original resolution that you submitted.
    If you want to send it to me in higher res, I can add the caption of your choice.
    I can do it also. I'll attend to it. I appreciate your showing it as an example.

  14. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Done, thanks, using your image. It's not great, but it'll do for now. I have discovered that every single photo editing program I have (all rather basic except for Microsoft Picture Manager) either won't allow me to add text in white (I can only do it in black) or won't allow me to add text at all! Ridiculous. Were it otherwise, I have a ton of photos from my own mountain biking in Colorado that I could use. But again, I think this will do for now.

  15. #65
    100% Recycled
    Reputation: Sworksrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_Beer View Post
    99% of "earth" damage was committed by those who built the trail. After that, it's pretty much negligible in terms of further impacts
    Great Statement Those who Built the Trail. Not worth the fight for us Mtn bikers to ride the PCT..
    The PCT Association for the most part has always been anti-bikes...anti a lot of things but this trail is one of the best hiking trails in the country for that reason.

    RP

  16. #66
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,730
    Quote Originally Posted by Jfloren View Post
    But the PCT is over 2,600 miles long. Most of the high-pressure sections you mention are in Wilderness or national parks and would not be considered for bike access anyhow.

    Those who believe that "liberal tree huggers" or enviro-wackos are the enemy and cause of the restricted access problem -- just because some of them are hostile and the hostile ones sometimes have a lot of power and influence -- are really showing small-minded thinking. It is the same kind of shallow reasoning and convenient use of broad-brush labels that leads some misguided hikers to think that mountain bikers are dangerous, trail-destroying maniacs.

    Well, so far the reaction from members on the PCT-L is less than enthusiastic!
    The level of hysteria is pretty funny. It ranges from bikers tear the trail, mow us down, assault your mom (okay I made that one up) to "I own a road bike, so why should they be on trails?".

    This is going to be quite interesting.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  17. #67
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Sworksrider View Post
    Great Statement Those who Built the Trail. Not worth the fight for us Mtn bikers to ride the PCT..
    The PCT Association for the most part has always been anti-bikes...anti a lot of things but this trail is one of the best hiking trails in the country for that reason.

    RP
    Hmmmm...perhaps the point is, rather, one of the best trails thus far reserved for hikers.
    I don't rattle.

  18. #68
    mtb'er
    Reputation: Empty_Beer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Some interesting tid-bits on the origin of the PCT and the original plan...

    President Lyndon Johnson's original quote from a speech in 1965, that ultimately gave "birth" to the PCT, as part of the National Trails System Act of 1968:

    "TRAILS: The forgotten outdoorsmen of today are those who like to walk, hike, ride horseback or bicycle. For them we must have trails as well as highways. Nor should motor vehicles be permitted to tyrannize the more leisurely human traffic.

    Old and young alike can participate. Our doctors recommend and encourage such activity for fitness and fun.

    I am requesting, therefore, that the Secretary of the Interior work with his colleagues in the federal government and with state and local leaders and recommend to me a cooperative program to encourage a national system of trails, building up the more than hundred thousand miles of trails in our National Forests and Parks.

    As with so much of our quest for beauty and quality, each community has opportunities for action. We can and should have an abundance of trails for walking, cycling and horseback riding, in and close to our cities. In the back country we need to copy the great Appalachian Trail in all parts of America, and to make full use of rights of way and other public paths."
    -LBJ - 2/8/1965



    The original PCT plan: Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail - Comprehensive Plan

    While mt. biking as we know it didn't exist when all this work was being done, I have to believe the overall vision of the PCT (and President LBJ) supports enjoying the trail on a human powered bicycle.


    Overview: "-Provides for a diversity of appropriate outdoor recreation opportunities limited principally by the carrying capacity of the area and the Congressional restriction on motorized use. - 5/16/80"
    -- "diversity"... not "limited". And "motorized"... not "mechanized".

    Page 2:"Each National Scenic Trail should stand out, in its own right, as a recreation resource of superlative quality and physical challenge."

    Page 2: "The Pacific Crest Trail traditionally has served horseback and foot traveler. This use pattern, accepted by most visitors to the trail, should be continued."
    -- this was 1982. Many, many visitors to the trail today do not accept these as the only 2 means of recreation, fitness and fun.

    Page 3: "The routes of national scenic trails should be so located as to provide for maximum outdoor recreation potential and for the conservation and enjoyment of the nationally significant scenic, historic, natural, or cultural qualities of the areas through which such trails may pass."
    -- "maximum"... not "limited"

    Page 12 (regarding Management of the trail, circa late '70's-early '80's): "Complaints were received from users regarding conflicts between equestrian and foot traffic."
    -- before hikers had mountain bikers to whine about, they whined about equestrians

    Page 18 (regarding the more remote/primitive portions of the PCT): "The user will enjoy maximum opportunity for solitude and testing of outdoor skills. Feelings of regulation will be minimized to the greatest extent possible. Feelings of physical achievement will be an important part of the experience offered."
    -- sounds like an ideal bike ride to me!

  19. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    255
    Nice Empty Beer!

  20. #70
    100% Recycled
    Reputation: Sworksrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Hmmmm...perhaps the point is, rather, one of the best trails thus far reserved for hikers.
    YES... Great Point
    We as Mtn Bikers need to work on other solutions then try to battle the PCT and its politics. The population growth and overcrowding has caused many conflicts on the trails,roads, etc. with no answers.
    We could try to build and maintain trails in heavy hiking areas that are BIKE only trails. Sounds impossible but with some time and great community support it can be done. There is a perfect example of a great trail locally in a County Park that is dedicated to MTN Bikes Only..

    Cheers
    RP

  21. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,531
    Hopefully the outcome in the end will be left to the individual land mangers which are many to decide if sections should be opened up or not. I do not think the PCTA has any authority what so ever to decide if the trail is closed or opened to bikes, although there opinion may weigh heavily with the feds.

    Of course Wilderness areas will be off limit, but there are many sections of trail that just opening short section to bike use opens up amazing links for larger rides (These happen to be the most poached sections because of this).

    Saying that the trail was not built to sustain bike traffic is ridiculous, if it was built to sustain horse traffic it fine for bikes. A buddy of mine who builds lots of trails was explaining how much longer it takes to build trails to support horse traffic, not only the trail bed, but clearing a large swath both horizontally & vertically allow a horse with panniers to pass.

    Getting bikers involvement with the trail will only improve the trail as MUCH more maintenance will occur on sections being overgrown and with tree removal. Not to mention the monetary effect of people joining the PCTA.

    Some how 1000 of miles of trails are shared between Hikers / Horses / Bikers, for the most part without indecent, and guess what the trails seem to hold up ok.

    Ideally some sections will open up. Possibly with an odd/even day thing, or something seasonal, like Sept 1st till the first snowfall when the though hikers are done.

    There's one example of a 1/4 miles section of PCT blocks the connection of 100's of miles of trails, do we really need to create another parallel trial in the forest, just because this 1/4 mile section that runs next to a major freeway cannot be shared? pretty unbelievable.
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  22. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by hurtssogood View Post
    You, sir, are a moron. You are so wrong on so many levels here I don't know where to begin. This has nothing to do with what "side" anyone is on. Both sides are a bunch of ******bags, and neither is looking out for the best interests of the vast majority of Americans, on any issue. Do you think ANY of the people making decisions regarding the PCT have ever even been on the trail?
    And FYI, being "liberal", in the sense of being an open minded, free thinking, generous person, does not equal Democrat. Just as being "conservative" should not equate to a Republican party that advocates people being allowed to do whatever the hell they want, so long as they don't have differing religious moral values.
    You are simply wrong and calling me silly names does not prove your argument. I will stand by my statement as a citizen who has been involved intimately with this issue in this state for longer than many on this board have been alive.

  23. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by Diesel~ View Post
    If only it were so simple. The traditional "conservative" view seems to be heavy on blanket (non-selective) extraction. There are many parts of the PCT in NorCal and Oregon where the clear cutting has left the trail corridor looking like a war zone. Compare that to the surgical removal of timber in the Sierra City area, which demonstrates that issues are rarely so black and white.

    -D
    Trail access and logging are separate issues entirely. I have had 50 yo legacy trails that had mega hours of volunteer work destroyed by USFS allowing the logging activities you show there. Hey it sucks, but logging is a necessary and essential activity for the forest as important as any other for economic survival in the areas we like to ride. Until you stop living or using anything made of wood, your argument against has little validity. As it will be done here or in other areas any way you look at it.
    I will take the pro resource extraction conservative and argue the USFS logging policy any day over a "lock it all up and patrol it " Liberal Democrat any day of the week.

  24. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    I see that the thread is moving away a bit from the narrower question of comments about the PCT (and what we all can do to facilitate gaining access to it when the public comment process starts), and toward a general debate about people's stubborn views on the left and the right, broadly speaking.

    I'd like to say, to reassure any skeptic who thinks we're in for a big surprise when we find out how stubborn and unyielding our opponents are, that we know what we are doing. We have, collectively, many years of mountain bike access advocacy experience. We are aware that people and groups often do filter this issue through ideological lenses that inform their views on a wide range of issues.

    So there's a kernel of truth to the stereotypes about people and groups who are firmly embedded with the "left" or the "right," to oversimplify, and who approach this narrow issue of increased mountain bike access to trails from that perspective. There are people who sincerely feel the U.S. is far too restrained in extracting its resources—they would prefer we be more like Australia or Canada—and support increased mtb access because they wish to bring us into their fold or use us to disadvantage their conservation-minded opponents. And there are other people for whom any mode of transport in the wild, even the most environmentally benign human-powered travel, that wasn't available to John Muir is sinful, and who adhere to their purist vision with a kind of religiosity that mirrors the intensity of religious fundamentalism in the Bible Belt. Or, on a more practical level, there are hikers and equestrians who are selfish and who believe the roadless public lands belong only to them; and there are commercial dude ranch interests who want to keep bicycles off trails so they can continue to sell as many luxury packstock and horse "expeditions" as possible, without complaints from nervous clients about bicycles.

    Our task, as we work to get the PCT made available to cyclists, is to worm our way through these ideological and financial-interest currents and try to get to the finish line with something to show for it. We welcome everyone's help, as I've said before.

  25. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    533
    Imtnbike, I think we met in my office a few weeks ago...

    So hopefully this is an addition to the discussion rather than just prattling on, but most of what I hear about the Bikes on the PCT discussion from "the other side" has nothing to do with bikes on the PCT. There is concern that with the limited management tools in the public land manager's toolbox, opening the door to allow bikes on the PCT (or wilderness for that matter) could only be done by removing the door from it's hinges basically, removing the ability for land managers to make decisions regarding land management. I.E. once the horses head is in the barn, the whole horse is coming in.

    I don't know to what extent this is the case, but addressing it up front might be helpful in mitigating these concerns, if they are real and are mitigate-able.

  26. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Hi, John — Yes, we did, along with a third person who's posting on this thread. Thanks for giving us your time and perspective.

    We're sensitive to the need to do what you propose. The concerns you mention should be unfounded, because if the Forest Service allows mountain biking and a problem crops up on any particular stretch of the PCT, the Forest Service can issue another closure order for that area and then, as it's supposed to do, review it again in a year. By which time, of course, I hope we'd have worked out any problem; there'd be a huge incentive for the local mountain bikers to do so. I bet no problem would arise that cannot be resolved.

    Frankly, I would be worried if anything in our initiative caused the Forest Service to lose authority to manage the PCT as fully as it does now. We haven't asked for anything of the kind. In fact, I hear that in the past the Forest Service has deferred rather extensively to the Pacific Crest Trail Association and allowed it to govern the PCT de facto. We'd prefer that a public agency assume full authority over the trail rather than delegating de facto authority to any interest group, be it us, the PCTA, or any other entity.

  27. #77
    Medium?
    Reputation: Fast Eddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,723
    x-posted to the FB page.

  28. #78
    Don't Tread on Me
    Reputation: Lopaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    673
    A true believer wishing to teach others how to save the planet has one choice:...kill yourself.
    Consciousness, that annoying time between bike rides.

  29. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,531
    The PCTl forum is getting interesting, as expected it's hit a raw nerve

    The Pct-L October 2012 Archive by thread
    Go get that KOM "You Deserve" - http://www.digitalepo.com/index.php

  30. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeBC View Post
    The PCTl forum is getting interesting, as expected it's hit a raw nerve

    The Pct-L October 2012 Archive by thread
    Even better (and easier to read): https://www.facebook.com/SavethePCT

  31. #81
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    The Official stance of the PCTA (as of today):

    The PCTA has issued this response:

    Pacific Crest Trail Association

    Response to inquiries about mountain bikes and the PCT

    10/11/12

    To our members and supporters:

    ...
    We are receiving many inquiries from you about information being posted online about mountain bikes and the PCT. We want to assure you that we are well aware of this growing campaign to open the PCT to bicycles. We are monitoring the decision-making process and we are working on a strategy to thoughtfully address this issue.

    The US Forest Service has been contacted by a group of citizens requesting a review of the bicycle prohibition but has not made a decision regarding a review process. Public notification and an environmental analysis would have to take place before any change in the bicycle prohibition would be considered.

    The Pacific Crest Trail Association opposes bicycle use on the trail. We will be reaching out to all of you when we know more about the process and what influence we, as hikers and equestrians, can have. We will keep you informed of our progress and your potential role in this important matter for the PCT.

    Thank you for your support of the PCTA and for all you do for the trail.

    - Liz Bergeron, PCTA Executive Director and CEO
    LBergeron@pcta.org
    Phone: 916-285-1846

    If you do contact please be civil/nice. Many of these people have it deeply ingrained that MTB'rs are bad, and riding is bad....based on nothing more than anecdotes and 'feelings'.

    If it is possible to change their views it would benefit all involved.
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  32. #82
    100% Recycled
    Reputation: Sworksrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by CHUM View Post
    The Official stance of the PCTA (as of today):


    LBergeron@pcta.org
    Phone: 916-285-1846

    If you do contact please be civil/nice. Many of these people have it deeply ingrained that MTB'rs are bad, and riding is bad....based on nothing more than anecdotes and 'feelings'.

    If it is possible to change their views it would benefit all involved.

    OK....one more time.. then it's time for me to move on from this !
    Not worth the BATTLE.. OH and my "feelings" got hurt.

    Richard

    AKA MTB'r,Roadie,Off Roader,Car Driver,Thru Hiker,MX,Golfer,Dog Owner, etc ,etc,
    Really ! I just don't have time to do any except take care of the dog poop.


    p.s. Also I'm joining the PCTA this w.e. You never know ?


    Cheers

  33. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Regarding both bikepacking and day rides: one thing that would be very helpful would be for people to post the opportunities in their area that would open up if access were legalized. What good rides would become available that weren't before? What out-and-back rides could become loops? And, if you feel like being candid, what problems could arise from mountain bike use on those trail miles, and how could any such problems be solved?

  34. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Quick followup to some recent posts:

    1. Sworksrider: I think you mentioned earlier that you lack the skills to ride the PCT, which is one reason you don't want anyone else legally riding it either. If you got off the road bike for a while and practiced more challenging trails (not that most of the PCT would be technically challenging), you might find that you're changing your mind! Just a thought.

    2. Someone mentioned a fear that the exclusion-minded might react by trying to get more Wilderness or more of the PCT included in Wilderness. That's conceivably true, but it is difficult to get Congress to create new Wilderness areas—something only Congress can do, and not the NPS, BLM or FS. That's because Wilderness is right up there with affirmative action, same-sex marriage, attacking Iran, abortion, and prayer in schools as a hot-button issue. IIRC, Yellowstone NP has no Wilderness, because it can't get through Congress.

  35. #85
    100% Recycled
    Reputation: Sworksrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by imtnbke View Post
    Quick followup to some recent posts:

    1. Sworksrider: I think you mentioned earlier that you lack the skills to ride the PCT, which is one reason you don't want anyone else legally riding it either. If you got off the road bike for a while and practiced more challenging trails (not that most of the PCT would be technically challenging), you might find that you're changing your mind! Just a thought.

    2. Someone mentioned a fear that the exclusion-minded might react by trying to get more Wilderness or more of the PCT included in Wilderness. That's conceivably true, but it is difficult to get Congress to create new Wilderness areas—something only Congress can do, and not the NPS, BLM or FS. That's because Wilderness is right up there with affirmative action, same-sex marriage, attacking Iran, abortion, and prayer in schools as a hot-button issue. IIRC, Yellowstone NP has no Wilderness, because it can't get through Congress.
    imtnbike
    I. I think your missing my bigger picture.. maybe try hiking the entire PCT in Calif and you might change your mind. Just a thought, also there are way to many people that don't what us riding any part of it. Lack of skills it has nothing to do with my skills on a MTB. I feel very confident I can hold my myself upright on any trail after 25 years of riding.... just slowing down a bit.

    Once again it's to big a battle to waste all my energy. I'm OK with hiking it.


    Cheers

    RP

  36. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Sworksrider View Post
    imtnbike
    I. I think your missing my bigger picture.. maybe try hiking the entire PCT in Calif and you might change your mind.


    Cheers

    RP
    I have backpacked about 125 miles of it. It was great, but a different experience from riding a bike through a beautiful forest. Both types of human-powered travel can be fabulous

  37. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    255
    I still think the bigger picture is the actual trail itself and the lack of management to maintain it. Sections are being lost due to lack of use and lack of interest by the current user groups to maintain the trail. Some may argue that this is not true, well come to rural sections of the trail that only see the thru hikers.

    The mtb community has a devout following that truly cares about trails, advocay and stewardship. As mentioned before, it is a plausible scenario to open sections of the trail, perhaps only in the remote areas. At least these sections of trail will be maintained and tread not lost.

  38. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Wilderness Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    144
    Great discussion happening on the Facebook page - Sharing the PCT
    Always respect rangers, they are doing their job-Everyone else has no authority, so get out of the way of the of the ATrain!

  39. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtnbke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,040

  40. #90
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    Things are currently moving nicely

    There is a very vocal extremist type minority that continuously posts insane-O rhetoric...like bounty hunters, physically colliding with cyclists until death and sabotage...

    You can review updates on the Sharing the PCT FB page:
    https://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

    or go straight to the source:
    The Pct-L October 2012 Archive by date


    Again this is a very unique opportunity that will not happen again - It really is the Perfect Cycling trail.
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  41. #91
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  42. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    946
    Good work everyone. I will do whatever I can to help.

    It seems that the extreme reactions could be easily dismissed by logical people, at least I hope so.

    I just read on the PCT-L archive about a "separate but equal" trail for bikes. That sounds great, and we should also have separate drinking fountains, bathrooms, and we should sit at the back of the bus too. Hopefully these people treat other human beings better than some of their comments about mountain bikers may indicate.
    "It's just that nobody likes Cornfish." francois

  43. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    226
    Just hiked PCT from Echo Lake to Aloha Lake and couldn't help but think that it would've been such a beautiful ride.

  44. #94
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    Quote Originally Posted by cornfish View Post
    Good work everyone. I will do whatever I can to help.

    It seems that the extreme reactions could be easily dismissed by logical people, at least I hope so.

    I just read on the PCT-L archive about a "separate but equal" trail for bikes. That sounds great, and we should also have separate drinking fountains, bathrooms, and we should sit at the back of the bus too. Hopefully these people treat other human beings better than some of their comments about mountain bikers may indicate.
    The PCT-L is a joke...an entertaining one at that...The 'Sharing the PCT' facebook page has a lot of back and forth with PCT-L extremists...which can make for a good read

    The powers that be do not take into considerations groups like the PCT-L, or Facebook, or MTBR for that matter..

    Now the guy who runs PCT-L (Brick Robbins) removes pretty much any and all differing opinions so that the 15 or so fundamentalist types can participate in type of self fulfilling hate circle jerk...

    There's been discussion of hiring bounty hunters, not yielding until death, sabotage, intentionally injuring cyclists, etc..etc..etc...

    The only real problem I have with the guy is that he's the PCTA's webmaster (AFAIK)...and the PCTA has been a very strong and positive driving force behind the PCT. They are well deserving of respect...

    It would be sad if Brick played some muckity-muck with content/communications thru that site to twist his own views in. He has the PCT-L as the only forum link discussion area on the PCTA.

    I have little faith in his integrity and ethics....
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  45. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    946
    Quote Originally Posted by CHUM View Post
    The powers that be do not take into considerations groups like the PCT-L, or Facebook, or MTBR for that matter..
    Hopefully this(^^^) is true. In past dealings with the USFS and the BLM (not California) I have found the people in charge to be more or less reasonable. The issue that I have encountered in the past was confusion over how many users backed a particular idea in regards to trail management. Sort of like "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" the people in the USFS, etc. get bombarded by the opinions of a very small minority until they believe the minority speaks for the majority.

    If the idea is to get more people to use and experience the PCT, many of which have never set foot there, the last people you want to listen to are the handful of hardcore PCT hikers. Clearly that group is already familiar with the trail, using it frequently and closed minded to anything other than the status quo.
    "It's just that nobody likes Cornfish." francois

  46. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    197

    Latest from PCT public relation

    Latest News

    PCTA issues statement regarding mountain bikes

    10/11/12

    To our members and supporters:

    We are receiving many inquiries from you about information being posted online about mountain bikes and the PCT. We want to assure you that we are well aware of this growing campaign to open the PCT to bicycles. We are monitoring the decision-making process and we are working on a strategy to thoughtfully address this issue.

    The U.S. Forest Service has been contacted by a group of citizens requesting a review of the bicycle prohibition but has not made a decision regarding a review process. Public notification and an environmental analysis would have to take place before any change in the bicycle prohibition would be considered.

    The Pacific Crest Trail Association opposes bicycle use on the trail. We will be reaching out to all of you when we know more about the process and what influence we, as hikers and equestrians, can have. We will keep you informed of our progress and your potential role in this important matter for the PCT.

    Thank you for your support of the PCTA and for all you do for the trail.

  47. #97
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    Quote Originally Posted by yuba man View Post
    Latest News

    PCTA issues statement regarding mountain bikes

    10/11/12

    To our members and supporters:

    We are receiving many inquiries from you about information being posted online about mountain bikes and the PCT. We want to assure you that we are well aware of this growing campaign to open the PCT to bicycles. We are monitoring the decision-making process and we are working on a strategy to thoughtfully address this issue.

    The U.S. Forest Service has been contacted by a group of citizens requesting a review of the bicycle prohibition but has not made a decision regarding a review process. Public notification and an environmental analysis would have to take place before any change in the bicycle prohibition would be considered.

    The Pacific Crest Trail Association opposes bicycle use on the trail. We will be reaching out to all of you when we know more about the process and what influence we, as hikers and equestrians, can have. We will keep you informed of our progress and your potential role in this important matter for the PCT.

    Thank you for your support of the PCTA and for all you do for the trail.
    Yup - we are well aware of the PCTA's official stance.

    for more info you should check out:
    Sharing the Pacific Crest Trail

    and a lively discussion:
    http://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

    and for some serious WTF!?!?!:
    The Pct-L October 2012 Archive by subject


    it is all very, very interesting
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  48. #98
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,614
    Nice article just published:
    Advocates hope for reversal of Pacific Crest Trail bike ban

    Bike advocates say the 1988 ban was done too abruptly, without public comment or opportunity to appeal. The Oregon-based group, Disciples of Dirt, who fully supports the mission of Sharing the PCT, wrote on their website that the ban was "just fear and misunderstanding, mixed with a lot of well funded ignorance."

    In 2010, a group of citizen activists decided to probe further into the 1988 decision. They wrote a letter to the USFS on November 12, 2010 asking them to "put in place a process to examine the continuing usefulness of the 1988 closure order."

    click here to read more

    Sharing the Pacific Crest TrailHome » Sharing the Pacific Crest Trail
    Click Here for Forum Rules

  49. #99
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,979
    Quote Originally Posted by Jfloren View Post
    I am a member of the PCTA and enjoy hiking along many of the high Sierra stretches. Note that most of those would areas not be affected by this potential change because they are in Wilderness Areas that are off-limits to anything mechanical. And I think that is as it should be.
    Bollocks. I assume you hike naked on the trail? Do you take your gas stove with you? Backpack? GPS? Tent?

    Ban on bike travel in Wilderness is utterly idiotic. There is NO justification, but the exclusionary ideas of misguided people like you.

  50. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    Bollocks. I assume you hike naked on the trail? Do you take your gas stove with you? Backpack? GPS? Tent?

    Ban on bike travel in Wilderness is utterly idiotic. There is NO justification, but the exclusionary ideas of misguided people like you.
    Maybe if mountain bikers as a group acted more like backpackers with bikes and no backpacks it would work - the problem is too often they act like motocrossers without engines. This is utterly incompatible with the idea of wilderness.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •