Hiking Carts in Wilderness?

Senators Mike Lee and Orrin Hatch proposed a bill called the Human Powered Travel Wilderness Areas Act that would allow hiking carts for use on trails in wilderness areas. It would also allow bikes on trails. I think it is time for hiking carts to be allowed to go into the backcountry, but am not sure if bikes should be allowed. What are your thoughts?

This is a light weight backpacking forum. With today's light equipment, carrying a pack is not that difficult. I would think pulling a cart over rough and rock trails would take more effort. Few of the trails I have been on are smooth enough or wide enough for a cart.

As for bikes, hikers and bikers usually do not mix well. Hikers have anxiety about being run down and bikers have to watch out so much for hikers that they cannot go as fast as they would like. I would approve of having a few bike-specific trails. Hikers use trails to get somewhere in the wilderness; bikers use trails as the venue for their athletic activity. Yes, they also appreciate the wilderness, but wilderness is down on the list of what makes a good bike trail.

I would think pulling a cart over rough and rock trails would take more effort. Few of the trails I have been on are smooth enough or wide enough for a cart.

Politically speaking, I'd say linking game carts (sometimes used by hunters to transport their dressed kill back to their vehicle) with mountain bikes, even though the two have entirely different uses and effects, is an effort to form a coalition of hunters and mountain bikers. That's astute politics, because it also would tend to pull in the NRA on the side of passing the bill.

I expect the practical effect of this bill would not be to change much about how hunters utilize wilderness, but it would throw open the door to bikers. My guess is that large numbers of wilderness trails would be ignored by the mountain bike community as unattractive and unrewarding, because they require too much slogging uphill in a very low gear. But the trails they find most attractive, such as moderate-grade trails along rivers or trails where you can car shuttle to start at a high elevation trailhead and end at a much lower trailhead, would soon see very heavy use.

I can't say I'd welcome that development.

Wait---when is the mountain biker season open? Did I miss that?

I agree about keeping mountain bikers out of wilderness. Despite the fact that hikers are supposed to have the right of way over bikes, on "multiple use trails" I've had to make any number of sudden leaps to the side of the trail to avoid being hit. Also, most mountain bikers want a different kind of trail than do hikers. I know they don't like switchbacks, and hikers don't appreciate the results of bikers skidding around those sharp turns, putting us in agreement here. I would like to see more mountain bike trails outside of wilderness, though.

Even though I'm getting rather decrepit, I'd far rather carry a 20 lb. pack than try to haul a cart. In fact, the latter would be impossible for me.

I believe these are the same politicians who favor turning Federal land over to the states or selling it outright.

I used a homemade cart/5 gallon can contraption to hike in the desert around Death, Eureka and the Saline Valleys many years ago, but I don't think this is the intent of the proposed law. More likely, it's a "foot in the door". After all, abandoned strip mines would make great mountain bike terrain.

I was run into on a trail on a Isle au Haut in Maine. It's part of Acadia National Park. Put a pretty good cut in my leg and luckily my FAK covered the damage. I had no choice , but use a trail that was multi-purpose at the time. Now, the NPS discourages mountain bike use on the island and their use is banned on hiking trails. Dual use of foot oriented trails is a poor choice for both users safety and enjoyment.. I know of one place in the Smokies where carts are popular to bring gear up Hazel Creek, once they are ferried across Fontana Lake. It can get very crowded, as the carts allow for "bringing the kitchen sink".

First, I wanted to find out about the bill. I found this as a pretty unbiased analysis: http://www.outsideonline.com/2098966/con...ilderness-areas

I understand the trepidation many have with allowing bikes in Wilderness areas, however I don't think it is appropriate to say mountain bikers use land to exercise and are not interested in the environment. You can get exercise on any city street or highway. People are certainly choosing to mountain bike in part to be out in nature.

I have concerns with mountain bikes taking over wilderness trails, but I would be OK with certain trails in wilderness areas being designated for mountain biking. The more people we get out into the wilderness the more political capitol wilderness will have. What concerns me most about this bill is that if the head of the forest doesn't act it automatically opens the entire wilderness up to bikes. I'm OK with having a mechanism in place to allow wheeled vehicles. I am more concerned with releasing total control over the process.

There was a lengthy and generally thoughtful discussion of the ins and outs of mountain bikes in wilderness on the excellent website run by a local (to me) non-profit, Trail Keepers of Oregon:

http://www.oregonhikers.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21655

Of course, no forum discussion that runs 150 posts will be thoughtful for more than a few posts in a row. In case people wonder, the "Aimless" you see participating there is me.

Ugh! That seems pretty clearly to be against the intent of the Wilderness Act. Maybe it comes down to how you define "motorized" and how that "motor" is powered. However, I have to admit I likewise feel pretty uneasy when I hear about things like the pair that ran the JMT "assisted" in 3 days. I believe they had people set up along the way to give them little pit stops as needed (feed them, give them water, dig their catholes and wipe their butts), so that all that they needed to do was just run and carry next to nothing. I'll grant you, it was a physical achievement that I could never do, and maybe I'm jealous of that. Still, things like that disturb me, it feels like it isn't what wilderness is all about in my mind. Where is the contemplation of Nature? But there is always a fine line line that we backpackers walk, between "wow, look what I did!" and "Wow! Look at this incredible wilderness that exists separate and indifferent to me".

PS A few years back, while hiking a segment of the Wonderland Trail in Mt Rainier, I met a guy who had what I guess would be considered one of those "hiking carts". a homemade one and surely illegal. I don't remember exactly how it worked. It was clever but also hokey, kind of like a dolly, and I wondered if he was going to make it all the way without it breaking. When necessary, he explained he could tilt it differently and use the attached pieces of skis to slide it on snowfields.
He was a likeable coot. He was planning on doing all 93 miles in 4 days. He complained about meeting a guy who was trying to do it in 3 days, which he thought was too fast. Said he thought it was ridiculous that the guy wouldn't even stop to have lunch with him in Longmire. Of course, I thought it was ridiculous that neither would stop to take an afternoon nap with me amongst a field of avalanche lily while watching marmots box and clouds swirl.
In the future, I may have to be sure to keep an eye open that I don't get run over by mountain bikes and hiking carts when I take those naps.

Maybe it comes down to how you define "motorized"

The actual wording in the 1964 Wilderness Act is "mechanized", rather than "motorized". A bicycle clearly adds mechanical leverage to human power through linkage and gearing and so is prohibited, unless the original law is amended.