View Full Version : Interesting Article on Trail Abuse
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/05/world/europe/05wasdale.html?ref=world
This is about what's called the "Three Peaks Challenge" which is used as a popular fundraiser, and it's impact on rural Britain.
Wow, isn't that fellow generous who self-imposed a maximum of 100 participants per each bus trip. Good way to bring about rules that then would afflict everyone else for generations after this fad dies down.
Pedaling Fool
03-05-2008, 14:18
This isn't about erosion, it's about people-on-people conflict. It's so transparent it's pathetic.
This isn't about erosion, it's about people-on-people conflict. It's so transparent it's pathetic.
BS it said 10 of 1000's of people. You don't think that causes erosion? :rolleyes:
Pedaling Fool
03-05-2008, 14:59
It’s also rocky terrain. Although I’m sure the number of hikers does add to the erosion somewhat, but that’s not most people’s concern, judging by what I read in the article and this little write-up on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Three_Peaks_Challenge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Three_Peaks_Challenge) they’re just throwing that in to pump up their case.
Once mountains stop growing they start shrinking, due to erosion. I’m sure that natural erosion will remove these big hills from the landscape quicker than 100,000 people a year.
Lion King
03-05-2008, 21:09
What I find interesting is how nice the trail in GA is considering how many people trample the hell out of it and then in Vermont, where the majority of those that started are gone, the trail is ankle deep mud even in drought conditions.
Dances with Mice
03-05-2008, 21:41
So I read the part about the problems at the middle peak - little available parking, no bathroom faciliteis leading to bad smells at the trailhead as hikers relieved themselves after a long drive, buses unloading large groups of hikers, and hikers not dropping much money in the nearby town - and I wondered why don't they (the complaining locals) just build a parking lot with bathroom facilities and charge a parking / user fee.
What's wrong with that idea? What am I missing?
Dances with Mice
03-05-2008, 21:55
What I find interesting is how nice the trail in GA is considering how many people trample the hell out of it and then in Vermont, where the majority of those that started are gone, the trail is ankle deep mud even in drought conditions.The entire Trail in GA is within driving distance of a major population center (Atlanta) that contains a lot of folk who don't mind volunteering to maintain the Trail. We have significantly less than 100 miles of AT and enough volunteers to branch out and maintain many other connected side trails and blue-blazed trails. It's relatively easy for everyone involved to gather, make plans and provide long-term leadership that enables long-range plans to be devised and implemented.
That's a fancy way of saying we have a lot of folk who live close to each other and work well together. You can't expect all states to be so blessed.
Appalachian Tater
03-05-2008, 22:18
So I read the part about the problems at the middle peak - little available parking, no bathroom faciliteis leading to bad smells at the trailhead as hikers relieved themselves after a long drive, buses unloading large groups of hikers, and hikers not dropping much money in the nearby town - and I wondered why don't they (the complaining locals) just build a parking lot with bathroom facilities and charge a parking / user fee.
What's wrong with that idea? What am I missing?It is a "hamlet" of 30 people with a one-lane road as access and the hikers get there at 2:00 am. A bathroom and a parking would help, but who should pay for it? Is there a municipal sewage system?
Dances with Mice
03-05-2008, 22:35
It is a "hamlet" of 30 people with a one-lane road as access and the hikers get there at 2:00 am. A bathroom and a parking would help, but who should pay for it? Is there a municipal sewage system?Yeah, I got that and obviously am ignorant about their sewage situation. It seems a construction loan to be repaid by user fees would solve most of their problems if no other options are available. I know it's easier to bitch than lead but the problems all seemed solveable. Cades Cove in GSMNP probably gets more traffic yet manages without muni sewage.
Appalachian Tater
03-05-2008, 23:24
Yeah, I got that and obviously am ignorant about their sewage situation. I was sort of just thinking out loud. Apparently there is no great water supply and the influx of hikers has exhausted it at times. One month there were over 29,000 hikers.
I am sure the AMC will pick up on the article in the NY Times, purchase land there, and establish a hut system with appropriate composting toilets and drill wells, fly in food, etc. Problem solved.
Dances with Mice
03-05-2008, 23:49
I was sort of just thinking out loud. Apparently there is no great water supply and the influx of hikers has exhausted it at times. One month there were over 29,000 hikers.
I am sure the AMC will pick up on the article in the NY Times, purchase land there, and establish a hut system with appropriate composting toilets and drill wells, fly in food, etc. Problem solved.Yeah, that's the thing. Pay toilets are not unusual in Europe, trust me. The article suggests the locals are saying "We get 29,000 users in a concentrated area, oh woe, woe, woe!" In the States somebody would be thinking "Hey! 29,000 outsiders paying just, say, 3 to 5 maybe even 10 Euros each, now there's an opportunity!"
OK, so in the States we wouldn't be thinking in Euros and maybe not in Jolly Olde, but the concept remains the same. A bunch of folk with money to spare for charity are having problems. The locals should only be bitching about what's keeping them from solving those problems.
Also note that this problem is in/on the edge of a national park administered by the National Trust. It is really a NT responsibility. No doubt the villagers could make lemonade out of the sour deal they feel they have, but that would not satisfy their grudge. Some small hamlets like this have been there for centuries, and some of the inhabitants also. I suspect it is just a misfit.
Wasdale Head is at the end of a long, narrow (and beautiful) road. It has a famous pub/inn, a small but excellent mountain shop, two small campsites, and nothing else but farms and sheep. It is inside a National Park, and its scenery and views are considered national treasures. With regard to parking lots and public toilets, there is simply not much the authorities would be allowed to do, even if there were space in which to do it, which there isn't. What the Times writes about is a real problem—the place does get well and truly trashed—but most locals realize it is one day a year, that they can do a little jawboning but not much else, and that ultimately they can live with it. The erosion issue I know too little about to comment on.
First a bit of background: last year I did this challenge but did not do it in 24 hrs, a group of friends who are woefully inexperienced in the outdoors had decided to do it and asked me to lead them, I think on the basis that I was the only person they knew who even owned a rucksack, and I flatly refused to do it unless we took 3 days instead of one. Also, one correction to the article, these hordes of charitable hikers do not turn up at 2am, more like 5am, the idea being to climb Ben Nevis the previous evening, drive through the night and then climb Scafell Pike with the sunrise rather than in the dark.
All that being said there are two main issues here for the residents of Wasdale Head and neither of them are trail erosion. The first and biggest issue is economic, as the article alludes to: all these hikers are turning up, scrabbling up the hill, rolling down again and then jumping in their cars and pootling off to Wales. These people are not getting the economic boom that the local businesses surrounding Nevis and Snowdon are from this challenge and that rankles, more than a little. However, when you do the challenge the way my little group and I did and camp in the area the night before and then move on, all is sweetness and light from the locals when they realise they have had the legitimate chance to get in your wallet.
The second issue is to my mind just as big and that is safety. Scafell Pike is a long way from a major mountain and is in fact the lowest peak in the challenge, however, it is arguably the hardest climb with a steeper ascent than that of the other two peaks. This puts a major drain on the local, volunteer run, mountain rescue service which, especially with the minimal local investment, causes even more rankling.
Add to this the rash of local car accidents involving sleep deprived hikers imposing a frankly daft and ultimately pointless schedule on themselves and I for one can see why at least some locals have an issue here, even if I don't entirely agree with them.
I suppose the central issue is that this challenge is being attempted by more and more people who are woefully unprepared for it and Wasdale Head is making the least money from them and having to deal with more expense than either of the other two peak communities. The challenge organizers are not helping with this and are releasing packs of pavement dwellers with little or no preparation onto a challenging climb, oftimes with no thought to emergency gear or the like.
Its noticeable that no-one in Wasdale Head is complaining about day hikers here, just the challenge hikers who immediately leave for Snowdon and its plethora of gift shops and campsites etc. Nobody in Snowdon would think about complaining about the money spinner that they are sitting on, I think Wasdale Head's main issue is that they have a tourist attraction and are not getting the returns that others are. I'll expect to see a toll-gate on the trail next year...
Appalachian Tater
03-06-2008, 01:16
First a bit of background: last year I did this challenge but did not do it in 24 hrs, a group of friends who are woefully inexperienced in the outdoors had decided to do it and asked me to lead them, I think on the basis that I was the only person they knew who even owned a rucksack, and I flatly refused to do it unless we took 3 days instead of one. Also, one correction to the article, these hordes of charitable hikers do not turn up at 2am, more like 5am, the idea being to climb Ben Nevis the previous evening, drive through the night and then climb Scafell Pike with the sunrise rather than in the dark.
All that being said there are two main issues here for the residents of Wasdale Head and neither of them are trail erosion. The first and biggest issue is economic, as the article alludes to: all these hikers are turning up, scrabbling up the hill, rolling down again and then jumping in their cars and pootling off to Wales. These people are not getting the economic boom that the local businesses surrounding Nevis and Snowdon are from this challenge and that rankles, more than a little. However, when you do the challenge the way my little group and I did and camp in the area the night before and then move on, all is sweetness and light from the locals when they realise they have had the legitimate chance to get in your wallet.
The second issue is to my mind just as big and that is safety. Scafell Pike is a long way from a major mountain and is in fact the lowest peak in the challenge, however, it is arguably the hardest climb with a steeper ascent than that of the other two peaks. This puts a major drain on the local, volunteer run, mountain rescue service which, especially with the minimal local investment, causes even more rankling.
Add to this the rash of local car accidents involving sleep deprived hikers imposing a frankly daft and ultimately pointless schedule on themselves and I for one can see why at least some locals have an issue here, even if I don't entirely agree with them.
I suppose the central issue is that this challenge is being attempted by more and more people who are woefully unprepared for it and Wasdale Head is making the least money from them and having to deal with more expense than either of the other two peak communities. The challenge organizers are not helping with this and are releasing packs of pavement dwellers with little or no preparation onto a challenging climb, oftimes with no thought to emergency gear or the like.
Its noticeable that no-one in Wasdale Head is complaining about day hikers here, just the challenge hikers who immediately leave for Snowdon and its plethora of gift shops and campsites etc. Nobody in Snowdon would think about complaining about the money spinner that they are sitting on, I think Wasdale Head's main issue is that they have a tourist attraction and are not getting the returns that others are. I'll expect to see a toll-gate on the trail next year...So the solution would be to stop the pootling, then everyone would be happy.
So the solution would be to stop the pootling, then everyone would be happy.
Recipe for a healthy planet. :sun
Wasdale Head should put in a toll road. With part of the revenue they could put up privy's and do trail work.
What I find interesting is how nice the trail in GA is considering how many people trample the hell out of it and then in Vermont, where the majority of those that started are gone, the trail is ankle deep mud even in drought conditions.
I'd say that's mostly because VT had a glacier and GA didn't. :)
Pedaling Fool
03-06-2008, 10:51
...and then in Vermont, where the majority of those that started are gone, the trail is ankle deep mud even in drought conditions.
I found that region interesting, because of those mud pits. I don't know why they are there, but feel pretty confident that the answer is in the geology of the region. ki0eh says it's a glacial thing, sounds plausible.
Pedaling Fool
03-06-2008, 10:59
...pootling...
What is that?
Appalachian Tater
03-06-2008, 11:13
What is that?
pootle intransitive verb - to motor with great speed away from an impoverished hamlet without prior economic contribution to the local economy. Ex: The hikers pootled off from Wasdale to Wales without so much as having tea.
not to be confused with poddle - a short swift hike with a definite destination in mind. Or indeed toddle - the same but slower, and bimble - a slow walk with no set destination. Ex: After a a swift poddle round an interesting side trail I toddled off to a trail town to resupply before resuming my bimble through the backcountry.
I am a declared devotee of The Art Of Bimbling, hence the screen name...
Pedaling Fool
03-06-2008, 12:36
pootle intransitive verb - to motor with great speed away from an impoverished hamlet without prior economic contribution to the local economy. Ex: The hikers pootled off from Wasdale to Wales without so much as having tea.
not to be confused with poddle - a short swift hike with a definite destination in mind. Or indeed toddle - the same but slower, and bimble - a slow walk with no set destination. Ex: After a a swift poddle round an interesting side trail I toddled off to a trail town to resupply before resuming my bimble through the backcountry.
I am a declared devotee of The Art Of Bimbling, hence the screen name...
Thanks, I've always wanted to learn a second language.:D
minnesotasmith
03-06-2008, 12:37
pootle intransitive verb - to motor with great speed away from an impoverished hamlet without prior economic contribution to the local economy. Ex: The hikers pootled off from Wasdale to Wales without so much as having tea.
Sounds like the longer way to say "poot". Here's what that means in America:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJdHzRag8q0
Thanks, I've always wanted to learn a second language.:D
You're welcome, guess you never thought it would be english though, huh? ;)
Dances with Mice
03-06-2008, 14:47
OK, so we've got pootle, poddle, toddle and bimble.
What's a toodle?
What's a toodle?
Say good-bye, Gracie.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=toodle
You'll be surprised...
(certain definitions possibly NSFW)