From: dencisco@eos.arc.nasa.gov (David Paul Encisco)
Subject: Re: Oregon Wallowas
Keywords: alpine lakes - where?
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:38:30 GMT

karlm@sequent.com (Karl Maerz) writes:

>First of all, let me say this... *Anyone* who steps foot (or hoof) in 
>the backcountry, including wilderness and non-wilderness areas, should be 
>aware of their impact and take the appropriate measures to minimize it.  
>I have no more tolerance for horsepeople who ring trees, trample fragile
>areas, pollute water, etc., than for hikers who engage in equivalent
>activities -- and I've seen several examples.  I would favor a system
>which severely penalizes offenders, including revoking their rights
>to enter wilderness areas; though, to be fair, I don't know how it
>would be enforced.

Oh, it probably would be enforced by a couple of guys on horses. As
for minimal impact, I've yet to see an Outward Bound horse packing
faction or anything that comes close. 

I find it interesting when the argument is largely based on 
comparison (i.e., they do it too!). How and why we continue to
carry this form of argumentation from our youthful years I don't
know? Is it really constructively convincing? Not to me. 

Unless the basic premises are the same, unrelated comparisons 
such as a human driven horse versus a human are either a 
questionable or a false analogy. Instead tell me what the 
backcountry horse community is doing to change past trends. 
For example, and speaking only in regards to backpacking, 
for the last two years I've been carrying my toilet paper 
out and on short (very short trips) I'll carry my
excrement out (number two that is). The idea is to convince me that
things are changing and not to lay equal blame using a fallacious
analogy.

>to submit to mine.  For instance, my own backcountry experience is not
>exactly improved when I look up at rock formations and see pink lycra
>and ropes and chalk dust.

Another comparison, but point well taken. I agree with you hear. Besides
I've packed out my share of discarded webbing and pitons...fishing line,
shell casings, horse shoes, aluminum foil, etc. And I'm the guy who
thinks that anything left in the backcounty for the last hundred years
is trash.

>an initial odor which is not excessively unpleasant to many people.

"Is not excessively unpleasant"? Try walking up a pass following a
mule train! Man, I never seek out this experience! I'd rather sit
in a fly infested "meat-eater crapping" outhouse.

>Finally, banning a single class of user from wilderness areas will not
>solve the longer term overuse problem.  Restricted or permit-based access
>may help.

Yes, I'm all for permit-based access.

With regards to banning horses from wilderness areas, I think a greater
and more worthier fight is to get them cattle (and the horse riding
ranchers), miners and loggers (and their accompanying foreign investors),
and the pot growers out of the backcountry as soon as possible! Or, let's
start making money off them. It's a double whammy if you're a backpacking
(horse riding) tax payer.

>I have neither the time nor the energy to engage in a lengthy net.debate
>on this subject.

An opinion takes time and energy, if you don't take the time and energy
to voice your opinion no one will hear it. It's your values that you're
defending. No one comes to the aid for those who don't speak up.

Dave
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry