hiking as hard on trails as biking

[ryno lite]

IMBA has done some review of trail research and found that biking does no more damage to trails than hiking does according to the studies. Check out this link:

http://www.imba.com/news/news_releases/03_04/03_31_science_review.html

[BADEXPRESSO]

As an avid hiker, I find that what they are stating is true, BUT, usually bikers are seen more often then not seen. I have been hiking before and have walked right past people in campsites and have walked past un-noticed. But since bikes are more open to being seen, I can see how they receive a not so good reputation.

On the other hand, biking on a wet trail seems to cause more erosion then walking, from what I can see.

[Trevize1138]

Which is why we get militant when we see any evidence of people riding trails when wet or muddy. :mad:

:)

[manual63]

I just don't get the debate between the two. I mean.....you make a path in the woods and people either walk, bike, or ski on it. No matter which one you do, it's gonna do some damage. My opinion is that as long as the trail is made well and is followed, things should be okay. So the trail may get fu@#ed up every once in awhile, but that can be fixed. Arn't we more concerned with the sorrounding area where we shouldn't walk, bike or ski???

I get the same stuff at skateparks. Pegs on bike supposedly cause more damage to the surfaces. But yet you have skateboards grinding on metel trucks (supports for the wheels) and boards getting thrown into the surface (either out of anger or during a bail). They ban pegs on bikes at most parks. It sucks because for the money bikers pay, it more than enough covers for the expense of the extra damage, if any. (Some slight relationship here....:crazy: )

My point is that the debate is kind of stupid. Stay on the trail, follow the rules, don't ride or walk when muddy.....you know.....oh and don't run over hikers on your bike and don't walk looking at the ground......also most people do have ears.

[jitterjepp]

As an avid hiker, I find that what they are stating is true, BUT, usually bikers are seen more often then not seen. I have been hiking before and have walked right past people in campsites and have walked past un-noticed. But since bikes are more open to being seen, I can see how they receive a not so good reputation.

On the other hand, biking on a wet trail seems to cause more erosion then walking, from what I can see.
This is the same for hiking and riding horses on trails that are wet. I was in an adventure race last year that went on both sides of the river between Taylor’s Falls and Wild Mountain. During the mountain bike section we came up on a trail that people on horses had ridden when the trail was obviously wet. The footprints were at least eight inches deep. You couldn't even walk on the path because you were worried about getting a sprained ankle or a broken leg. Like an animal that weighs that much doesn't damage the trail and I've never seen anyone on a horse doing the pickup and leash thing.

I was up in Banning State Park a few years ago with my buddy and we ended up on a hiking trail and only realized it when we saw the no biking sign. We were turning around and these two people started yelling at us for being on the hiking trail. One of them had a paper Starbucks cup. I guess they drove all the way from the cities to five miles north of Sandstone to go for a hike because you sure as heck cant get the double latte up there. Anyway we say “ya we're lost” but they aren't very forgiving and start ranting about environmental destruction. We move on, get lost again and find ourselves about 100 yards down the trail from where we saw them. There on the ground is a Starbucks paper cup.

I picked up the cup and we found our way out. Back at the parking lot they are just coming out off the trail I and said, "Hey you forgot something on the trail" and showed her the cup. (Not very nicely though.) She didn't say a word. She was busted.

The erosion problem is an issue no matter what the activity on the trail. Climbers get the same thing as bikers. It's just that the activity we are doing bring this image of reckless people. There are a lot of people out there look at us like a bunch of scab eating punks. I don't see it as anymore damaging than hiking. You just can’t complain about a hiker because all they are doing is walking around. The truth is though that they close hiking trails off all the time and reroute them due to erosion.

[BADEXPRESSO]

I was up in Banning State Park a few years ago with my buddy and we ended up on a hiking trail and only realized it when we saw the no biking sign. We were turning around and these two people started yelling at us for being on the hiking trail. One of them had a paper Starbucks cup. I guess they drove all the way from the cities to five miles north of Sandstone to go for a hike because you sure as heck cant get the double latte up there. Anyway we say “ya we're lost” but they aren't very forgiving and start ranting about environmental destruction. We move on, get lost again and find ourselves about 100 yards down the trail from where we saw them. There on the ground is a Starbucks paper cup.

I picked up the cup and we found our way out. Back at the parking lot they are just coming out off the trail I and said, "Hey you forgot something on the trail" and showed her the cup. (Not very nicely though.) She didn't say a word. She was busted
I would have paid to seent he look on their faces. I hate it when people do this. Yep, every sport has someone against it.

[BADEXPRESSO]

I just don't get the debate between the two. I mean.....you make a path in the woods and people either walk, bike, or ski on it. No matter which one you do, it's gonna do some damage. My opinion is that as long as the trail is made well and is followed, things should be okay. So the trail may get fu@#ed up every once in awhile, but that can be fixed. Arn't we more concerned with the sorrounding area where we shouldn't walk, bike or ski???

I get the same stuff at skateparks. Pegs on bike supposedly cause more damage to the surfaces. But yet you have skateboards grinding on metel trucks (supports for the wheels) and boards getting thrown into the surface (either out of anger or during a bail). They ban pegs on bikes at most parks. It sucks because for the money bikers pay, it more than enough covers for the expense of the extra damage, if any. (Some slight relationship here....:crazy: )

My point is that the debate is kind of stupid. Stay on the trail, follow the rules, don't ride or walk when muddy.....you know.....oh and don't run over hikers on your bike and don't walk looking at the ground......also most people do have ears.

Shad,

STOP THINKING LOGICALLY, Start thinking illogically and you will see where the debate comes from. Kind of like Roadies vs. Mtbr's.

[manual63]

Shad,

STOP THINKING LOGICALLY, Start thinking illogically and you will see where the debate comes from. Kind of like Roadies vs. Mtbr's.
Roadies suck because they ride with skinny tires......there....hows that????

[ryno lite]

I've hiked on trails out west from the Mexican border to Alaska and I've seen plenty of trails with problems and most are only hiking trails! I can see why IMBA has developed stringent guidelines when it comes to the steepness of trails. I've seen it on almost every mountain or desert hike. A trail is too steep and the rain flies down and does damage. All or our activities do damage to the soil and of course trails remove vegetation causing problems with erosion. Thats why I love the way the IMBA built trails work, they seem to really soften the impact that bikers (or any user group for that matter) have on trails. Just makes a lot of sense. Hiking, biking and horse trails all need occasional maintenance and all user groups help damage the trails, but I don't want to see any users get banned and I don't want to see our access to trails curtailed because of erosion. Every user group has to remember that we must build the trails best we can to make them last and we must maintain them also. Even the best trails need work once in awhile. I love to hike and bike and even though I don't ride horses, I've never been against their access if the trail is suitable, I just get so irritated when bikes are always the bad guys to every other user group. Gets kind of annoying!

[Paul Bunyan]

All of the results listed in the research come from controlled studies and have little to do with what really happens in the environment. What we can derrive from the studies is that, with a few exceptions, damage to trails is directly correlated with the amount of use regardless of whether the user is a cyclist, hiker, equestrian or atv rider. The most heavily used trails are the most damaged.

ATV's can cover ground more quickly than the other users and thus damage more surface in a shorter period of time. ATV riders also outnumber all hikers, bikers and equestrians combined. More miles and more users add up to why you can see so much damage to motorized trails.

Hikers and MTB's cause similar damage in the studies. Theoretically, a MTB rider can cover more ground than a hiker in the same period of time, thus damage more area. Hikers, however, outnumber mountain bikers. My guess is that hikers as a group would cause more damage simply because there are more of them thus covering more miles.

The exceptions mentioned above include trails on hills or wet environments. Additional exceptions include, larger contact area and higher torque with ATV's, smaller contact area and a large mass with horses also tend to accellerate trail damage.

[manual63]

I've hiked on trails out west from the Mexican border to Alaska
Um....all at once???

If so......your nuts dude.....in a good way.....:crazy:.

[ryno lite]

Um....all at once???

If so......your nuts dude.....in a good way.....:crazy:.
Not that crazy.......yet. Different trips and locales over the years! Nothing as long as your epic Maah Daah Hey ride! Although backcountry in Denali with no trails was way cool!