You are here

Sections of Pacific Crest Trail Poached by Mountain Bikers; Could Problems Arise in National Parks?

Share

Mountain bikers have been poaching sections of the Pacific Crest Trail in California. USFS photo.

The Pacific Crest Trail ranges from Canada to Mexico, running through Washington, Oregon, and California along the way, traversing not one but seven units of the National Park System in the process.

On its way north and south portions of the trail touch or run through parts of Yosemite National Park, Sequoia National Park, Devils Postpile National Monument, Crater Lake National Park, Mount Rainier National Park, Lassen Volcanic National Park, and North Cascades National Park.

While mountain bikers are not supposed to use the Pacific Crest Trail, recently some have been poaching sections in California. While the poaching did not occur in any national park sections, some have concerns that a rule currently pending in the Interior Department could open more national park trails to mountain bikes and, in the process, lead to the following scenario.

In its February issue, the PCT Communicator, the magazine of the Pacific Crest Trail Association, reported on trail damage committed by mountain bikes near the Parks Creek Trailhead in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in California.

From Big Bear to the Tehachapi Mountains in southern California, to Donner Summit and the Sierra Buttes north of Lake Tahoe, to Castle Crags and beyond, mountain bikes on the trail are causing damage and creating a number of "PCT Places in Need."

According to the trail association, "under U.S. Government regulation, bikes are prohibited in the PCT. The rationale for the prohibition of bicycles is based on the "nature and purpose" of the PCT, as dictated by the intent of Congress with the National Trails System Act and subsequent regulations designed to protect the experience of the primary users. The Code of Federal Regulations (36 CRF 212) directs that "The Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail as defined by the National Trails Systems Act, 82 Stat. 919, shall be administered primarily as a footpath and horseback riding trail."

"Unfortunately, however, U.S. regulations and regulators have not, thus far, been able to fully curb the illegal use of the PCT by mountain bikers," adds the article. "The resulting trail damage and user conflicts can't be taken lightly. To complicate matters, bikes are permitted on many trails that lead to the PCT, resulting in bikers reaching the PCT on such trails and then proceeding along the PCT to pick up another feeder trail. Given land management agency staffing and budget issues, policing and enforcement is sorely lacking."

The article goes on to point out the problems associated with mountain bikes on the Pacific Crest Trail: the trail was not engineered to handle mountain bike traffic, it can be easily and quickly ripped up by bikes riding in wet and muddy conditions, erosion problems can arise.

"I can't stress enough the importance of responsible trail users reporting illegal uses of the PCT," says Ian Nelson, the trail association's regional representative for northern California and southern Oregon. "It is crucial that we hear from concerned users so that we and our agency partners can strategize as to how to curb the illegal use."

Comments

Kurt, thanks for the suggestions on places to ride where mountain biking is allowed. I have ridden in the Sawtooths, assuming that's where the Williams Creek and Fisher Creek trail loop is located, the one between Ketchum and Stanley on the east side of the highway. Fine trails. I had to share them with a group of motorcyclists but they were polite, albeit unavoidably loud. I've also ridden some of the trails to the west of the highway that links Ketchum and Hailey.

Regrettably, Wilderness advocates want to lock up parts of that area so mountain bikers can't ride there (maybe the Wilderness bill that just passed achieved this?):

http://www.imba.com/news/news_releases/06_04/06_22_idaho_wild.html

The San Rafael Swell, for those who don't know, is a majestic north-south-running escarpment (I hope that's the right term) that causes I-70 to drop from about 7500 feet in central Utah on the west side of the swell to about 3500 feet on the east side, which is near Green River. I've heard there are two or three worthwhile trails there. And I drive through there every summer on my way to Colorado's fine high-altitude mountain biking. Unfortunately, it's always 100 degrees at the lower level, where I think the trails are, so I keep going—too hot!

Regrettably, Wilderness advocates also want to lock up the San Rafael Swell so mountain bikers can't ride there either:

http://www.amazon.com/Struggle-Over-Utahs-Rafael-Swell/dp/0816526699

http://www.suwa.org/site/DocServer/LtrSizeMap.pdf?docID=1821

But apparently they're not making much headway (indeed, they have to rely on a New York representative and Illinois senator to push for it!):

http://www.hcn.org/issues/179/5818

Good suggestions. We'd better ride these areas while we can do so legally. Sad, isn't it?

I admit I'm more interested in access to Wilderness than the national parks. The parks are rather regimented anyway, and I doubt they're going to grow much. (Still, I support the NPS proposal, it goes without saying.) Wilderness keeps expanding and it now contains much of America's most majestic scenery.

What I would like to do, however, is be able to ride all of the Pacific Crest Trail someday, including where it may run through a national park. As mentioned before, most of the PCT is engineered for cyclists: it's not steep and it's rather wide. It is dramatically different from the Appalachian Trail in those respects; now that is a footpath, or at least large parts are. Right now, it bears repeating, cyclists have zero access to the PCT. And that's how this thread started, lo these many words ago!


I also have difficulties with my knees and could never hike the PCT, however I would love to see it on my bicycle.

I hope that it happens someday.


Firstly, on the bike, try a 29er at least. I love mine. Secondly, at least the part of the PCT that I use (through the Lakes Basin Area) would be great for Mountain Biking but not the Downiville type downhill ride. I am drawn to riding this section because it looks like a beatifull and challenging ride, not a thrilling decent. I don't ride it becuase it's illegal and poaching trails doesn't help anyone. But isn't there a way to share the trail? It seems like we are so caught up in arguing that nobody has any creative solutions. I don't think alternating days would work becasue it's used for multiple day treks. (I'll also add that doing a multiple day bike ride on the PCT would be epic if it were legal) What about a permit system to limit the number of bikes at any given time? Find a way to prohibit shuttle runs of the PCT. This would act as a cardio vascular regulator for trail use. If you can't climb it, you can't go down it. This will limit trail use. Maybe require everone to put a bear bell on their bike so hikers can hear bikers coming. Much as I hate creating new rules, this is the basic issue of sharing. We're not children we can figure this out.


I have read all the comments and I will state that I do not bike trails. I am have hiked and I am a horseback rider. I have not ridden NPS on horseback since it takes too much time to get there. Plus horses do tremendous damage to trails. In order to ride rough land we have to the horse shod on all 4 hooves and that means 4 steel shoes.

However as a person who was active in creation of the Wilderness Areas and upkeep of the AT and trail network I will say that the big trail networks were a result of people who enjoyed that activity.

Mountain biking is a new activity and like hikers they want access to the trails. It seems the PCT is ideal trail and if bike trails end on it is inevitable that bike will use it to get from one trail to another.

From an equestrian point of view I do not like bikes or hikers on the trails, there is a big chance of injury to either. I have run into kids on country trails who thought it fun to ride after horses, They did not find it fun when I turn around and road after them. But idiots aside, many riders also ride at speed and there is possibility of danger to others on the trail. Hikers sometimes act foolishly and horses spooked, can kick, Bikers are moving fast also can run into people and spook horses. I do not want to be responsible for a biker getting injured I will pull all the way off any trail when I run into other users. Horses get restless and can hurt others. Of course, I can also get thrown, but I took that risk when I mounted my horse. However my wishes do not dictate the use of trails by other people.

My point is that if there is a large group that want access to the NPS lands they will lobby for changes in trail designation and get trails built for them. The NPS is designed for recreation and use so visitors can enjoy the beauty either in a car, from horseback, rafting, canoeing, climbing or hiking. Accommodating to bikers is just another group to use the parks.

I disagree that NPS is solely to be enjoyed as Kurt indicates. There has been a lot of push to accommodate the disabled and I agree with that. But that involves more development. Thankfully the NPS are large and can accommodate the visitor that wants peace and quite and the person who will roll down a paved trail in their wheelchair. There are a variety of NP’s that are more primitive and some that are more developed to accommodate different users.

Bikers will get more clout and get more access and as bikers get older they will slow down and impress greater responsibility on newer bikers. That is the way any new sport happens, an upsurge and then it slows down.

Bikes were not in the picture when the PCT was designated but any new cross-country trail will have to deal with multiuse.

Foe those who want to expand trails in this country I suggest you ally with bikers, as they have been very successful in getting new trail development. Rather than users of trails fight over their slice of the pie, figure how to get the pie bigger and work with each other than fight


I just poached a section of the PCT today on my mtb. I know that mtb's are not supposed to be on the PCT but the short section (less than 1.5 mi.) I rode linked up a huge network of trails. Maybe certain sections of the PCT that have heavily traveled mtb trails linking up to it should be considered as multi-use sections (hike, horse, bike). In these sections, signage can alert the hiker/horse pounder that they will be sharing a certain section of trail with mtb's.


There are iresponisble Mountain Bikers, hikers and horse people alike. For the last 35 years I regularly enjoy our trail systems in all three ways. Common sense, and frankly (kind) policing those that choose to break rules will keep these trails enjoyable for all.

After all, trail maintaince is the responsibility of us all. Extending the use to many will help to keep those same trail systems growing with the internest of the public that uses them.


Such passion from both sides of the fence! I enjoy riding a mountain bike as much as I enjoy hiking/backpacking in the wilderness. The idea of riding a bike in the wilderness or national park seems wrong and is something I would not do. Living in Southern California, I enjoy both of my passions (biking and hiking) on a variety of trails and avoid most conversations of user entitlement. I completely subscribe to the multi-user mentality of trails outside of designated wilderness zones. While biking, my approach on ANY trail (whether that is the paved beach trail or the PCT) takes into consideration the environmental issues as well as consideration of another trail user's peace & serenity. I ride PCT without hesitation and have done so for over 25 years. Does that make me a bad guy? You make that call. I am ultra conservative when approaching ANY other trail user. I attempt to engage in pleasant conversation and do a very good job at minimizing my impact on anyone else's backcountry trail experience. Does that make me a good guy? You make tha call. However, if you choose to chastize me or attempt to "inform" me that I am a criminal or not supposed to be where I am, I will simply smile and say "have a nice day" and leave you behind. You won't get an argument out of me as to why I feel bikes should be allowed on PCT, nor will you stop me from enjoying what I am doing. People like Chris Anderson who say that most mountain bikers don't care about the environment are making generalizations that I can not agree with. I have found through my trail experiences that the mountain bike community is very involved in trailwork and volunteer work just as much as any other user group.

There are rude, obnoxious bikers AND hikers on the trail. Whether that is a bonehead biker blazing past your group on a narrow section of trail or a clueless group of 20 hikers leaving their trash on the trail, hiking in mud while discussing the damage to the trail tread by "wheeled machines". It's a small world, times change, and we all adapt. Let's try to get over the passionate discord for other "user groups".

There is a lot of angst on this topic and I have found it futile to attempt to provide an argument or justification for my cause. Time will eventually work this out. Perhaps I will be too old to ride legally on the PCT, but that day will come. A day when we can all enjoy the day's adventure and put aside out "titles" of mountain biker, hiker, trail runner, motorcyclist or whatever and unite to be "trail enthusiasts".


Yesterday I spent about an hour watching CNN coverage of the confirmation hearings for Sotomayor. My main interest was to get a better idea of this jurist's qualifications, but I was also interested in the process. America is a nation of laws, and that's certainly one of the key reasons that this is the greatest country that ever was. Jay may think it's OK for him to to break the law because -- well, because he is a nice guy. 'Scuse me, Jay, but I am not impressed.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.