Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Carrying a bike

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

  • #16
    There are as many miles of roads and trails you could ever ask for outside of the wilderness area why can't people just be content and ride there instead of wanting to go through the areas there not supposed to, I don't have a big problem with people riding bike but is it really necessary to take a bike through that certain area? What's wrong with the rest of the trails and roads?
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -Benjamin Franklin

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by albert View Post
      There are as many miles of roads and trails you could ever ask for outside of the wilderness area why can't people just be content and ride there instead of wanting to go through the areas there not supposed to, I don't have a big problem with people riding bike but is it really necessary to take a bike through that certain area? What's wrong with the rest of the trails and roads?
      There are as many miles of sidewalks and paths and shopping malls you could ever ask for outside of the wilderness area why can't people just be content and walk there instead of wanting to go through the areas there not supposed to, I don't have a big problem with people walking or hiking but is it really necessary to walk through that certain area? What's wrong with the rest of the malls and trails and sidewalks?

      I'm not trying to ride in areas that are designated a certain way. I'm hoping to walk through, just like thousands of others. The difference is that I will have some luggage with me called a bicycle.

      Comment


      • #18
        Mr bmike-vt,
        I too have a need to suffer...
        Do you care to share one of your prospective routes? I'm intrigued with the idea of linking areas via a bike ride/carry.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by montcalm View Post
          ... pushing a disabled bike is no different than canoe cart in terms of trail impact - which is completely legal in Wilderness areas.
          This is true in Adirondack wilderness areas, but canoe carts and other wheeled vehicles are forbidden in federally-designated wilderness areas. (Wheelchairs are ok)

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by stripperguy View Post
            Mr bmike-vt,
            I too have a need to suffer...
            Do you care to share one of your prospective routes? I'm intrigued with the idea of linking areas via a bike ride/carry.
            I agree, a more specific route might help with responses about local ethics of a given area, regardless of the government's regulations. Whatever the NYSDEC says, doesn't always necessarily make it so. I think that it is clear that some folks may not take kindly to your bicycle in a wilderness area, and that you should be prepared for some criticism if you happen to come across other hikers along a "wilderness" trail.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Justin View Post
              I agree, a more specific route might help with responses about local ethics of a given area, regardless of the government's regulations. Whatever the NYSDEC says, doesn't always necessarily make it so. I think that it is clear that some folks may not take kindly to your bicycle in a wilderness area, and that you should be prepared for some criticism if you happen to come across other hikers along a "wilderness" trail.
              So, regardless of regulation it doesn't make it so?

              I have got to stop reading this thread. My head is going to explode with some of the responses.

              What would you say if you came across someone carrying all their gear for a multi day outing, and had their bike, in pieces, strapped to their back?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by bmike-vt View Post
                What would you say if you came across someone carrying all their gear for a multi day outing, and had their bike, in pieces, strapped to their back?
                I'd stop and say "Hi, how's it going... where are you headed"? As I usually do when I pass people on the trail.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by bmike-vt View Post
                  What would you say if you came across someone carrying all their gear for a multi day outing, and had their bike, in pieces, strapped to their back?
                  I'd ask you why you didn't just strap your gear to your bike and push it. Seems a lot easier to me.

                  I wouldn't get bent out of shape over the anti-bike in the wilderness attitude. It's pretty common. But really what is the worst someone is going to do? Give you a dirty look and call the DEC when they get back. Go for it I say. A lot worse goes on and goes unpunished. If someone wants to whistle blow someone because they saw a bike in a 'Wilderness' area, then go for it. I'm sorry the sight of a rolling bicycle caused you so much grief... not! If it's not hurting the trail then who cares besides some elitist blowhards who think it is aesthetically unpleasing?

                  And I hate to say it, but it is for the DEC to decide whether or not to ticket you. They are the body which enforces the law. If a ticket was issued, then it would be for the court to decide. Not anyone on an internet forum or on the trail for that matter.

                  You won't get a ticket for pushing a bike without pedals. Pretty sure of that.

                  And do you know what happened out west when they started banning bikes on Federal land? People just broke the law and rode them anyway. And guess what? It's legal now in certain areas. I have no idea about 'Wilderness' areas. But what you propose isn't even the same. It's low impact and non-threatening to others enjoying the wild. One could argue actually riding is not, but pushing? And pushing a disabled bike? Really?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Believe it or not, some people go to wilderness areas to avoid other people and their mechanical devices.
                    Again, local etiquette usually has some sort of right of way, regardless of the government regs.
                    That's just been my experience throughout the Adirondacks.
                    Take it for what it's worth, which is only my opinion and thoughts on the subject, which I'm passing along, and I'm sure doesn't carry much weight.
                    People will always do what they think is ok, no matter what others say, even when they ask first.
                    Please accept or excuse my Adirondack Wilderness advocate point of view.
                    Last edited by Justin; 05-30-2014, 11:02 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      montcalm - yes, i can roll it, and i have done that here in VT on a short stretch of bikes forbidden trail, (less than 1/4 mile) to connect to bike legal trails.

                      packing for me, just eliminates any doubt of what i'm doing. the bike is part of my luggage. its an external frame pack. and if i'm on the road machine with cross tires its not crazy heavy. if I'm on the fargo with fatter tires - then it certainly can add to the weight.

                      anyway, thanks for all the info.

                      regarding routes:

                      going back to my notes from my MRP trip when i mapped out some options - those revolved around getting into and out of MRP and trying to cut out road sections. one sketch was from perkins clearing to NPT then otter brook (is it / isn't it legal bike?) then on to MRP. another was looking at hoffman notch as a cut through. getting to or from hoffman road / schroon lake.

                      a route i looked at a couple of years ago would give me a days ride to north of upper works, camp, then walk through to the loj, then out and back to VT.

                      i also want to do some trips without a car from home - in a loop, or through trip.

                      here in vt i sketched out some rides that get me to 1 side of mansfield or camel's hump or a WMA. if i carry up and over, i can continue on.

                      its not about shortcuts, its about exploring the world.

                      anyway.

                      the real goal here is to be able to do self propelled, long(er) trips, and use existing trails or overland routes to connect interesting places. just because i'm on a bike doesn't mean i don't want to also hike through areas and see them from 2 feet. and the ultimate goal, when budget allows, is to get a pack raft so i can ride in, hike as needed, and float out to some other place interesting.

                      some pics from out west:
                      not me, but in the grand canyon:



                      i believe this one is on fed wilderness - near aspen. carrying 10 miles through eliminated a 70 mile road ride:



                      a nice end goal would be to be able to mix in some of this




                      lots of places in the ADKs 'dead end' in water if you aren't prepared with a boat. but that is a ways off. i need to get fitness back to where i was when i did my solo 200 mile road through ride in a day from burlington to utica, and when i did a 2 day 230 mile ride with camping gear through the MRP. lots to think about. lots of fitness to be gained.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        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.
                        Scooting here and there
                        Through the woods and up the peaks
                        Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


                        "Pushing the limits of easy."™

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          If I ran the world people would not be allowed to let their dogs run loose ahead of them and harass other hikers, but this still goes on frequently(at least in my limited experience). If an activity is both legally allowed and non-threatening to others I wouldn't worry about whether it offended someone's sense of "ethics".
                          Zach

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Justin View Post
                            Believe it or not, some people go to wilderness areas to avoid other people and their mechanical devices.
                            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.

                            Trail impact is the last straw that is hanging by a thread to keep bikes away. Most of the fault is trail design. And the bike legal trails aren't necessarily better for bikes. There have also been some controversial studies that show boots erode trails just as much as driven bike tires do, if not worse.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I haven't weighed in on this but far and away, whatever your beliefs are, telling someone to just ignore the law has no justification. A law is a law, whether we agree with it or not. No law is going to please everyone and there are a lot of laws that should exist but don't in many peoples minds.

                              Sometimes laws are needed to ensure personal freedoms, as much of an oximoron as that might seem.

                              I also believe that suggesting to someone that they ignore or violate the law is against the rules that are posted for this forum.

                              There are laws that I disagree with, however I obey them because it is my responsibility as a citizen.
                              "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by redhawk View Post
                                I haven't weighed in on this but far and away, whatever your beliefs are, telling someone to just ignore the law has no justification. A law is a law, whether we agree with it or not. No law is going to please everyone and there are a lot of laws that should exist but don't in many peoples minds.

                                Sometimes laws are needed to ensure personal freedoms, as much of an oximoron as that might seem.

                                I also believe that suggesting to someone that they ignore or violate the law is against the rules that are posted for this forum.

                                There are laws that I disagree with, however I obey them because it is my responsibility as a citizen.
                                no one suggested ignoring a law - the law clearly states 'operating a bicycle' not carrying a bicycle.

                                However people who willful disobey the law may use such as a form of protest. Such was the case with bikers out west, and it worked out in their favor. No where ever in this entire post was it suggested that bike be ridden in a Wilderness area as a form of protest or not...

                                the notion of pushing bikes in Wilderness areas has been suggested and talked about long before this post.
                                Last edited by Neil; 06-01-2014, 11:03 AM. Reason: Personal.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X