Vitaliy M wrote:

Neophiteat48 wrote:

Vitaliy M wrote:Troy, every time you get out you see people cutting switchbacks????

Throughout this summer I didn't see any random people doing so...

Didn't say every time- try reading the post.

Well you did list all the places you visited in last 10 years that had switchbacks!

OK, you and Chad and get together and do your little circle jerk together. That's fine.

Neophiteat48 wrote:".......an opinion as sweeping as mine", try reading again Chad. I wasn't in the least making that suggestion.

Troy- I was trying to be serious. Your post indicated that you believe young people cut switchbacks, and older people generally do not. I do not think that observation is very robust.

Would I could buy into, however, is that people new to hiking (beyond the crowded areas) might cut switchbacks activities more, and those with more experience have a different thought mentality. This could be what drives the behaviors. In this case, one might tend to think people are cutting switchbacks because they are younger/more disrespectful, but in reality it is just that in most cases, certainly not all, younger people have aquired less experience. So it would be more accurate to say that novices tend to cut switchbacks, rather than young people.

btw you are really screwing up the quotes lately.

mrchad9 wrote:

Neophiteat48 wrote:".......an opinion as sweeping as mine", try reading again Chad. I wasn't in the least making that suggestion.

Troy- I was trying to be serious. Your post indicated that you believe young people cut switchbacks, and older people generally go not. I do not think that observation is very robust.

Would I could buy into, however, is that people new to hiking (beyond the crowded areas) might cut switchbacks activities more, and those with more experience have a different thought mentality. This could be what drives against the behaviors. In this case, one might tend to think people are cutting switchbacks because they are younger/more disrespectful, but in reality it is just that in most cases, certainly not all, younger people have aquired less experience. So it would be more accurate to say that novices tend to cut switchbacks, rather than young people.

btw you are really screwing up the quotes lately.

against the younger group of hikers, most are respectful[quote]

Those were my words, sweeping? I stipulated "most are respectful". And I would have used a word such as "novices" if I'd seen a true mix of older people and younger who were cutting the switchbacks but that wasn't the case.

As to the screwing up the quotes- I haven't figured out this 3 quotes only thing.

i admit i cut switchbacks. i know i shouldn't, but we all have our vices right? i love scree sliding and can't contain myself when i see a reasonable chance to cut one. i'd say though that hardly anybody cuts switchbacks, it's only faster, not easier then walking down them. also way more dangerous, i'm surprised i haven't broken an ankle on some of them.

Good comments and discussion. These folks were probably mid twenties, college kids or just older with a german shepherd. He was carrying all their gear in a Kelty frame pack and she had a water bottle.

On this particular trail, it appears that quite a bit of trail cutting occurs. It's made worse by the fact that a big part of the hill is a natural slide area anyway.

Keep up the good work spreading the word of experience.

Yeah I also see a lot of trail cutting, and in some places, the erosion is terrible. If the trail cutters would even stop and think of all the work that goes into maintaining the trails and building the supports (I forget what they are called) that help divert water off the trail, they might respect it a little more, but most people don't stop and think and rather scurry home in their full size SUV.

I was on San Antonio (Baldy) today as part of a 3-peak conditioning hike, neighboring peak to OP's mention of Baden-Powell. The cutting is terrible on the east summit slope (Devil's Backbone). I've seen it many times here in the past, reminiscent of what I saw on Baden-Powell as well. It's difficult to tell what's the actual trail (or trails - there's a few legit small split offs) and erosion/scree run-outs in order to not exacerbate the issue.

For whatever reason, today was the day that the straw broke the camel's back. Not mad, but I felt the need to help. Not for praise or anything else, but to do the right thing and give back to the mountain. On ascent and descent among others going up and down on this summit slope, I spent a good half hour observing and fixing what I could. Only 4-5 major 'spots' at both the bottom and top termination points which were obvious runouts that people made worse by going straight down, or running on them downhill, or doing so poorly with poles kicking up everything - many of those runouts are quite dangerous to go down as well. I used the rock-edge method like I observed on the very well-maintained Vivian Creek trail on San Gorgonio where the switchbacks went through scree slopes. Occasionally a person asked, and it was an opportunity to cordially educate them on the switchbacks and erosion issues. Some knew what I was up to, others hadn't realized and it was an eye-opener for them.

Does it solve the issue? No. Could those 'fixes' be kicked away by someone not caring for the mountain and being reckless? Sure. But hey, there's no hurt in trying at least. If it leads at least a few people to follow the actual trail, it's just that much little less erosive damage and care in the long run.

Maybe the positive experience of these people who notice and abide by the little route fixes they see, much like my own experience on Vivian Creek, will inspire those people to pay it forward at some point too. Positive change can grow exponentially from a simple idea.

Hotoven wrote:Yeah I also see a lot of trail cutting, and in some places, the erosion is terrible. If the trail cutters would even stop and think of all the work that goes into maintaining the trails and building the supports (I forget what they are called) that help divert water off the trail, they might respect it a little more, but most people don't stop and think and rather scurry home in their full size SUV.

They are called "water bars" if they divert the water off the trail; if they just slow the water down where diverting it is not possible they are called "check dams."

What I hate is having to hike trails that were built for mules. Ever go up and down the Meysan Lakes trail out of Whitney Portal? Endless long switchbacks, each with very little gain (or loss) in elevation. You walk (calling it hiking is a stretch) for about a mile to get less than 1000 ft of actual travel. It's just plain infuriating. The terrain isn't even steep. Screw it, I'll take every cut I can find. When the switchbacks are designed for humans that's another story.

I have hiked a trail in Kings Canyon which is properly designed. There are endless switchbacks for those who choose to use them, and a rougher but much more direct route up the middle with enough water bars to prevent erosion. Perhaps it was Copper Creek trail? I don't recall. I guess the switchback cutters voted with their feet and won.

When you volunteer to maintain trails and damage is caused by people cutting switchbacks, it's very annoying, especially because those who cut switchbacks don't put in any effort to maintain the trails.

Is anyone aware of any laws regarding trail cutting in various places? I'm not aware of any laws requiring people to stay on trails. You see signs on trails in National Parks and similar, but I'm not entirely sure there are any actual and enforceable regulations there either- are there? I mean, head up any of the lesser-climbed routes on the south end of Rainier... you have to get off the trail, if you were ever on one to begin with. Sometimes there are little pack trails, other times there are not. There's definitely no signs, once you get off the pavement.

As someone who frequently needs to go places OFF-trail, and has definitely spent more time bushwhacking than trail hiking, I don't feel this glue bond to the trails that most of you folks seem to.

I keep trying to wrap my mind around the whole question, and can't. I don't get it. There's no defining lines anywhere. Some examples of thoughts that I have, when trying to come up with a neat little package of rules that work for me:

Hikers don't want to have to see damage to the beauty they're trying to enjoy.

Flipside: they're walking on a trail, which is damage to the beauty they're trying to enjoy.

Flopside: Well, true... but the idea is to minimize the damage necessary to enjoy the wilderness

Flapside: Then why have trails at all? Who decides what's OK damage, and what isn't? What if I want to enjoy natural beauty with no permanent damage?

Flepside: You can't prevent damage to nature if you want to enjoy it, your presence necessitates damage.

Flupside: Then who the fuck are you to tell me your damage is somehow less than my damage? And screw you, my route up this mountain over here has no trail, so I'm going to step off the trail and stomp my way across this fragile alpine meadow ecosystem. At least my steps only leave bend grass blades and the occasional crushed flower, all of which will grow back so long as we don't bring a cattle drive through here, much like what you're doing over there on that trail. Stupid hippy.

Obviously it's about conforming to the majority sub-culture. It would seem that most hardcore, dedicated hikers think you should hike on trails and not leave the trail between trailheads.... so since these self-appointed stewards of the trails make that the standard, others just kind of go along with it because they don't want any awkwardness. So really, it comes down to pandering this special group of people and making sure THEIR experience hiking a stupid trail isn't disturbed by being irritated that others aren't conforming to their invented rules.

But since I don't live in that culture, I can't stop there. I mean, if you yell at people to stay on the trail, you're detracting from their hiking experience. Why is yours more important than theirs? Your irritation comes from people not conforming to your dominant sub-culture ideals about the proper way to hike. The ONLY power you have in enforcing these completely unofficial rules is spewing irritation at people and trying to spoil their experience.... so now everyone's experience sucks, because you didn't want to be alone in your irritation.

Can someone pick all this apart/make me see the light that I'm apparently missing completely?

I think the thing that you are missing Ben is that the goal here is minimizing damage. Our presence in the mountains causes damage so we try to minimize it by using trails to reduce the amount of erosion we create. As for you stepping on alpine ecosystem plants and grasses like it is preferable to walking on the trail I'm not quite sure what to say to that. I'd have trouble saying anything nice. Have we all done it at some point in time? Sure. But few of us go out of the way to do it because we know how long it takes for alpine flora to recover from a single foot print. In the Adirondacks they have summit stewards who keep the people on the trail on the higher elevations. They will pointedly ask you to stay on trail if you blunder off of it in the Alpine Zone. There have been many times in Colorado where me staying on trail meant increased safety for people below me due to rockfall danger so that is another consideration.

Looking at your profile does however tell anyone who looks at it that for the areas you have hiked being on trail is much less important because of environmental factors. Much of your climbing has involved glacier travel which is ideally suited for your non trail philosophy. Snow and ice gives not a damn what you are doing on top of it. A steep rock face doesn't have foliage to damage. That having been said, if you went stomping across an alpine meadow in the northeast with a usable trail handy you WOULD get people to talk to you, and they wouldn't be impressed with whatever you had to say.

The question isn't about staying on trails; it is about cutting switchbacks. Most all of us do bushwhacks, but cutting switchbacks isn't bushwhacking. It's real simple; either go off the trail totally and go where the trail doesn't go, or stay on the trail. Use it (or not), but don't abuse it.

You wouldn't drive through someone's front yard when the road is just across the curb, would you?

No, you're all missing something. Technology is to blame here; first and foremost, the GPS unit:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xLR5mjkfs4[/youtube]


By the way, can anyone tell me why I expend the energy to carry (and buy) a handheld hiking GPS unit if I never turn the darn thing on?


Ed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xLR5mjkfs4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xLR5mjkfs4