 Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
on: December 17, 2009, 10:35:56 AM
|
aluminiumsucks
Location: Northern California
Posts: 6
|
 |
« on: December 17, 2009, 10:35:56 AM » |
|
I'm planning a trip on a multi-use trail this spring and some of the route is going to run into trail sections that are closed to mountain biking. It's always a conundrum deciding whether or not to ride on closed trails, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. The planned route is going to be about 250 miles total, 25 or so miles of which is closed to mountain biking.
On the route I'm planning there will be some options for dirt roads or short paved sections to avoid the closed sections. I'm just curious to hear everybody's opinion on whether or not to poach the trails. None of them are on private property, but are restricted to hiking only, and one section (which I'm pretty intent on poaching) is open only to hiking and horse travel, which seems a bit silly to me, but that's just me. What does everyone think?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #1 on: December 17, 2009, 12:16:21 PM
|
protoceratops
Posts: 64
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2009, 12:16:21 PM » |
|
Yes, some of the restrictions are basically ridiculous.
Playing by the rules is good for the collective karma.
Poaching encourages the haters to hate and the restricters to restrict.
$.02
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #2 on: December 17, 2009, 12:56:57 PM
|
12wheels
Bolder Bikepacking Gear
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 211
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2009, 12:56:57 PM » |
|
+1 Play by the rules and keep the other trail users off our backs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #3 on: December 17, 2009, 01:04:00 PM
|
Majcolo
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 197
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2009, 01:04:00 PM » |
|
+1 Play by the rules and keep the other trail users off our backs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #4 on: December 17, 2009, 01:52:14 PM
|
sherpaxc
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 577
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 17, 2009, 01:52:14 PM » |
|
Please don't poach. Bad for us as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #5 on: December 17, 2009, 03:14:46 PM
|
AZTtripper
Moderator
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1724
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2009, 03:14:46 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #6 on: December 17, 2009, 03:52:07 PM
|
ScottM
bikepacking.net admin
Location: Wherever the GeoPro is parked.
Posts: 2863
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 17, 2009, 03:52:07 PM » |
|
+1 disassemble and carry (if not wilderness), or detour.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #7 on: December 17, 2009, 05:31:59 PM
|
bmike-vt
Location: Horgen, Switzerland
Posts: 1122
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 17, 2009, 05:31:59 PM » |
|
+1 disassemble and carry (if not wilderness), or detour.
if not wilderness? not allowed to carry a bike, or use a bike in wilderness? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #8 on: December 17, 2009, 05:41:15 PM
|
ScottM
bikepacking.net admin
Location: Wherever the GeoPro is parked.
Posts: 2863
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 17, 2009, 05:41:15 PM » |
|
Technically, no, you can't carry a bike through wilderness. At least according to FS and NPS regs, which prohibit the possession of a bike. http://www.wildernessbicycling.org/bikesbelong/cfr.htmlNot sure about BLM, but there aren't as many BLM WA's anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #9 on: December 17, 2009, 06:04:51 PM
|
bmike-vt
Location: Horgen, Switzerland
Posts: 1122
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 17, 2009, 06:04:51 PM » |
|
Thanks. I'll have to check regs on the ADKs, as I have 2 trails that need a 'connector'. Was planning a carry... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #10 on: December 18, 2009, 08:16:32 AM
|
Done
Posts: 1434
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2009, 08:16:32 AM » |
|
+1 Play by the rules and keep the other trail users off our backs.
Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Done"
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #11 on: December 20, 2009, 10:04:36 AM
|
WillyK
Posts: 34
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2009, 10:04:36 AM » |
|
[/quote] +1 disassemble and carry (if not wilderness), or detour.
+1 Poaching encourages the haters to hate and the restricters to restrict. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
--Spend time behind bars--
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #12 on: December 21, 2009, 03:40:06 AM
|
Mike Brown
Posts: 93
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2009, 03:40:06 AM » |
|
Your business is your business...except when it effects everyone else's business.
Please don't poach.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #13 on: December 21, 2009, 05:32:53 PM
|
stevage
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 174
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2009, 05:32:53 PM » |
|
Never heard the term "poaching" before...nice.
I'm in Australia, so maybe the culture is different, but I weigh up a few factors before deciding. Things like, am I likely to see/offend anyone, is there a legitimate environmental reason (eg, some areas are closed to prevent the spread of pests). More often than not, the reason for closing a trail (or restricting it to bikes) is what I would call a lack of imagination: they simply haven't put the time into working out if/how bikes could use the trail. Or it will be arse-covering: say there's been a bushfire through and trees might fall down, they'll close the trail until they've assessed it and knocked down any dangerous trees. I think it's both reasonable for them to do so, and for me to ignore the warning.
I would have a lot of trouble obeying a "hiking and horses only" sign.
I did recently find myself in a prohibited area - a water catchment. I tried the two numbers on the gate, and one of them assured me that the track was open, and that the gate shouldn't have been closed, so I went in. But when I found another closed gate on the far side, I'm pretty sure they just had their wires crossed, so I felt bad - I really shouldn't have been in a protected water catchment area, and I wouldn't do it again.
Also, I'm not sure about the "Poaching encourages the haters to hate and the restricters to restrict". Around here, I can think of at least two examples where frequent bike use in restricted areas led to the restrictions being reassessed then dropped.
So...speaking for myself, I neither ignore all rules, nor obey them all. It's a judgment call every time. (I do respect all 'private property' signs though, unless a compelling reason like lack of water or something...)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #14 on: December 22, 2009, 03:53:50 AM
|
Mike Brown
Posts: 93
|
|
« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2009, 03:53:50 AM » |
|
stevage...Traditional use of the verb "poaching" in outdoor parlance would be for killing animals that are either not legal or out of season to kill. Obviously, doing this gets many people upset, often justifiably so.
THe reason why we use that word in the states to describe using posted off-limits mountain biking trails is that using said trails upsets the hikers and/or land managers in the states at a comparable level. I'm on the board of directors of a mountain bike advocacy group in an extremely popular outdoor recreation area- so I personally have heard these complaints directly, I'm not just repeating something I've read in a magazine.
Please notice I say "posted off-limits." That's what "poaching" trails is. Using a trail that's not on a map or posted in any way is an entirely different matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #15 on: January 24, 2010, 07:16:32 PM
|
fat bob
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 76
|
|
« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2010, 07:16:32 PM » |
|
Never heard the term "poaching" before...nice.
I'm in Australia, so maybe the culture is different
True, your continent was settled for the misfits and criminals that no one wanted back in England.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #16 on: January 29, 2010, 09:56:55 PM
|
krefs
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 492
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2010, 09:56:55 PM » |
|
Poaching is nothing more than selfish abuse. I'm not a fan of it at all, but I recognize that some places you run into serious challenges about how to get through. If it's a grey area, odds are that I'll ride it. If it's clearly marked against bikes, pack it up and carry it or find away around.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #17 on: February 25, 2010, 05:40:17 PM
|
antoneady
Posts: 2
|
|
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2010, 05:40:17 PM » |
|
In UK there are many trails that have historically had footpath status just because the powers that be haven't got around to upgrading to bridleways (trails open to bikes and horses too). Riding these is referred to as using "Cheeky Trails" Not quite the same issues as the original post, but similar. And here's a website with some thoughts and ideas on it. http://www.cheekytrails.co.uk/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #18 on: February 27, 2010, 05:35:00 PM
|
dave54
Location: Lassen County, CA
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2010, 05:35:00 PM » |
|
I have poached, I admit sheepishly.
I felt guilty and the guilt detracted from the ride. Don't do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Name: To Poach or not to Poach
|
Reply #19 on: February 28, 2010, 06:42:03 AM
|
phil_rad
Location: Gelnhausen, Germany
Posts: 566
|
|
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2010, 06:42:03 AM » |
|
Bad carma, don't do it.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
