Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Carrying a bike

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by montcalm View Post
    Well in that case we might as well ban fishing poles, guns, traps, stoves, backpacks, canoes and paddles, canoe carts and rafts... because they are all mechanical devices. If you want the true wilderness experience I suggest you head off like they do in 'Naked and Afraid'.

    There are all sorts of terrible arguments why bikes should be banned, but in reality, they fall into the same category 'mechanically' as the devices above.
    I respectfully disagree.
    The only things that I posses and use in a wilderness area that are considered mechanical as a noun are my fishing rod & reel, my camera, and my headlamp. I haven't used a stove while backpacking in over ten years.
    Honestly, I personally don't have any problems with someone carrying their bike "through" a wilderness area, but I know people who do, and just passing my experience along.
    I like to ride also, but you can bet that I will at least make an effort to politely communicate with someone if I happened to see them with a bicycle in a wilderness area.
    Last edited by Justin; 05-31-2014, 06:59 PM. Reason: forgot headlamp

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by randomscooter View Post
      Sounds like fun and a great way to get a richer experience from your adventure.

      I've just sent an email to a ranger to get his feedback. Hopefully we will have a response before long.
      Okay, I got a response. I specifically mentioned the Upper Works to Loj via Indian Pass as an example.

      First, keep in mind that enforcement folks will look at the entire context of a situation that they encounter, not just the "boiled down" question that I asked. In other words, the reply leaves some doubt, or some wiggle room, depending on how you interpret it. We love simple answers, but that's not how the real world works. That said...

      First, if the bike is broken down there should be no problem.

      Second, if the bike is being pushed, with the pedals and/or crank removed, there is doubt. The ranger expressed concern that the bike can still be sat upon.

      That is the end of the ranger's input. The rest is just my thoughts, and should NOT be interpreted as being ranger's input.

      I believe the issue is that it would be possible to coast along on flats and downhills while sitting on the bike. Perhaps the doubt would be minimized/eliminated if the seat is removed, and/or gear is packed on the bike in such a way that it is obvious the bike cannot be ridden. Or perhaps not. You'll have to decide for yourself.

      If you encounter a ranger and he is doubtful, I would strongly urge that you be apologetic, stating simply that you thought it would be okay since you can't sit on it or otherwise ride it. Then alleviate his doubt by simply agreeing to disassemble the bike and carry it from that point on.
      Scooting here and there
      Through the woods and up the peaks
      Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


      "Pushing the limits of easy."™

      Comment


      • #33
        This thread exemplifies the best and the worst of the world of internet forums.

        Interesting question.
        Some thoughtful replies.
        Then the downward spiral (in no particular order): implications put upon certain posts that were never there (either that or I missed something). Helping to derail the discussion we often see replies using exaggerated examples that tend to antagonize. New implications built upon the previous implications. Baiting and interpersonal bickering that have SFA to do with the OP. I think we even got a dog reference!

        Anyway, no need to lock the thread if it can stay on topic heretofore.

        My .02 is that if it's legal, it's legal. If not, well it's not. What makes the question interesting fodder for forum debate is that it seems to fall into a grey area.

        One's personal ethics or beliefs don't answer the OP's question. It's not unlike someone asking if it's legal to bring a dog into the Siamese Ponds Wilderness and someone responds with their personal views (and an anecdote backing them up) on dogs in the wilderness.
        The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by randomscooter View Post
          Okay, I got a response. I specifically mentioned the Upper Works to Loj via Indian Pass as an example.

          First, keep in mind that enforcement folks will look at the entire context of a situation that they encounter, not just the "boiled down" question that I asked. In other words, the reply leaves some doubt, or some wiggle room, depending on how you interpret it. We love simple answers, but that's not how the real world works. That said...

          First, if the bike is broken down there should be no problem.

          Second, if the bike is being pushed, with the pedals and/or crank removed, there is doubt. The ranger expressed concern that the bike can still be sat upon.

          That is the end of the ranger's input. The rest is just my thoughts, and should NOT be interpreted as being ranger's input.

          I believe the issue is that it would be possible to coast along on flats and downhills while sitting on the bike. Perhaps the doubt would be minimized/eliminated if the seat is removed, and/or gear is packed on the bike in such a way that it is obvious the bike cannot be ridden. Or perhaps not. You'll have to decide for yourself.

          If you encounter a ranger and he is doubtful, I would strongly urge that you be apologetic, stating simply that you thought it would be okay since you can't sit on it or otherwise ride it. Then alleviate his doubt by simply agreeing to disassemble the bike and carry it from that point on.
          This is good info and clearly gives the best choice. Thanks for asking.

          Different rangers may see this differently. The sources I had consulted (not Rangers but DEC employees) had claimed the disabled bike was OK whether the user was on the seat or not.

          My choice is to push - not carry. In light of this response I would remove the seat as well as the pedals to give the best chance for leniency. I still would also be humble if questioned by a Ranger and not freak out if I got a ticket or was asked to carry the bike.

          I'm guessing High Peaks rangers might be a little more stringent than some of the other areas, just because of relative traffic.

          I didn't mean to get upset, but I too, like the original poster, get upset when certain people attack bikers for trying to enjoy the outdoors within the regulations given. Sometimes that requires creative thinking.

          And I still do not see a bike as any more or less mechanical than a fishing pole, a camera, or a headlamp. The latter two even go beyond into the electrical realm. It seems to be more what people are accustomed to rather than what it really is in terms of mechanisms in the Wilderness.

          Comment


          • #35
            Thanks all.

            I think it's great that we can drive right into the heart of wilderness to hike (with or without your favorite canoe, fishing pole, camera, hi tech fabric, GPS, etc) with a fossil fuel guzzling vehicle, that might have come up on the north way or over hundreds of miles of paved roads, tapping into complex global infrastructure to keep it running and fueled up - yet some appear to get upset when someone (me) politely asks if I might, in order to honor the spirit of the regulation of wilderness (kind of funny, having those words right next to each other), traverse said country (and even 'wild forest' country on non approved trails) with a particular clean, light, human powered piece of equipment either disabled or carried for certain portions of a trip.

            Anyway, this has been great information. I don't know if a trip will happen this year - but it will help greatly for planning.

            Comment


            • #36
              I would not fret bmike. The times, they are a changin'. We've already seen a radical shift out west in terms of bikes in the wild and I know for a fact that things are being done to expand trail networks in the Adirondacks. Some of this is networking of current Wild Forest trails on private land by those owners gracious enough to build and provide these trails. Some of it, I believe, but I don't know for sure, is in response to the lack of areas to ride, but based on some of the areas I know this is happening it may be also to connect around Wilderness areas without using roads.

              Riders really need to form networks and clubs to improve current snowmobile and ski trails to be utilized in the warmer months. A lot of these networks are horribly maintained or in poor repair because they were not designed to be used by bikes. Many of them look much different with 3 or 4 feet of snowpack on them. This forces most bikers onto old dirt roads, or current dirt roads. This, however, is not true mountain biking and becomes as boring as riding on paved roads or an exercise bike.

              Anyway, I would not count on the DEC or hikers to help improve these trails in the Wild Forests. Get active if you want to ride in the wild!

              Comment


              • #37
                I think we even got a dog reference!
                Sorry, that was my fault. What I was intending to convey was that in my opinion laws matter but personal ethics are very subjective and individual and not relevant to the actions of others.
                Zach

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Zach View Post
                  Sorry, that was my fault. What I was intending to convey was that in my opinion laws matter but personal ethics are very subjective and individual and not relevant to the actions of others.
                  Zach
                  No problem. In your example you didn't pass judgement on dogs that use smart phones.
                  The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by montcalm View Post
                    Riders really need to form networks and clubs to improve current snowmobile and ski trails to be utilized in the warmer months. A lot of these networks are horribly maintained or in poor repair because they were not designed to be used by bikes.
                    Sorry for the additional thread drift but this caught my eye.

                    I wouldn't expect much cooperation from snowmobile clubs, especially if you want to use the same trails. There are a lot of reasons, but you hit on part of one, some of the trails aren't meant for bikes. Like it or not, under the wrong conditions bikes damage trails, and you'd be surprised what kind of havoc some ruts in the underlying dirt can do to the snow cover on a trail in the winter. There are a lot of snowmobilers who don't want ATVs on "their" trails for this reason (and a lot of them own ATVs).

                    But the snowmobile trail model is a good one. Snowmobile clubs are fairly organized and have been working for decades to secure permissions on thousands of miles of private land. A similar network of mountain bike clubs could well do the same, it's a great idea.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X