Archives

THE SPOILS OF VICTORY
By Michelle Berditschevsky, Executive Director

One of the rewards of over fifteen years' involvement in the protection of Mount Shasta has been to create more understanding among those holding different positions. In the course of challenging the large-scale ski/condominium complex that threatened to dominate the mountain, there were many opportunities for meetings and dialogue with all sides.

By the time the development was defeated in 1998, a lot of people knew what was at stake, and the Forest Service ended up retracting the permit it had awarded in 1988. The developer, Carl Martin, said that the sacred vision of the mountain had won out, and that it was time for everyone to move on with their lives. (Note: we understand that he's now working at the ski area in Bend, Oregon.)

The result of this long battle involving appeals and lawsuits turned out to be a rapprochement among the parties. The view that environmental and cultural preservation need to be part of the management of the Mountain is now a greater part of Forest Service thinking. It is widely recognized that many people come to the area, as visitors and as residents, because the Mountain is largely in its magnificent natural state.

One thing though has changed: the popular areas of the Mountain aren't as remote and solitary as they used to be. There are more people and more uses, from the more contemplative to speed sports.

Mountain biking in particular has called attention to itself because of its rapid growth and increasingly visible impacts. This was the subject of our conversation with District Ranger Mike Hupp.

INTERVIEW WITH DISTRICT RANGER, MIKE HUPP

At a recent meeting with District Ranger Mike Hupp, who heads the Mount Shasta-McCloud Ranger District, we asked him about the effects of mountain biking on Mount Shasta.

EcoEcho (hereinafter "EE): At our meeting, you mentioned that mountain biking is becoming a menace to the ecological health of Mount Shasta. Would you elaborate on that?

MH: A threat to ecological health is a pretty broad term. I'd prefer to talk about specific impacts. Mountain biking is a wonderful form of recreation (I ride one in the tunnel trails.) and is a great example of the evolving recreational demands on National Forest lands. The impacts depend on where you are, how you ride and how many users there are. (You can say the same thing about hikers.) Mountain bike use is expanding rapidly, and is pushing into some pretty sensitive areas.

EE: How long has it been going on, and when were negative effects noticed?

MH: Our Wilderness Rangers first noticed the user-built bike trail in the old ski bowl about 3 years ago. Where the growing season is short and soils are thin, it doesn't take many trips with a mountain bike (or hiker's feet for that matter) to leave a rut that starts a soil erosion cycle. The rut channels water, and damages slow growing vegetation. Water then runs in the rut and you have the beginning of soil erosion. People either go through the rut making it deeper, or around it, making it wider. Whether they are hikers or bikers, there is an impact. The high country around Panther Meadows, Sand Flat and Bunny Flat is already strained from the numbers of hikers and other users. Aggressive mountain bike riding can have a real impact in these places from ruts and vegetation loss.

EE: How can mountain bikes lessen their impact on Mount Shasta?

MH: It depends on how you ride, how many riders there are and where you ride. A few riders on a hardened trail won't cause many problems. Aggressive cross-country riding on steep slopes or shallow, sensitive soils can leave ruts and damage vegetation. That leads to soil erosion, which leads to more vegetation loss, which leads to more erosion and so on. Conversely, riding on hardened sites or areas with longer growing seasons may have little or no effect. The areas we are most concerned about are the steeper slopes and heavily used areas from the old ski bowl down through Bunny Flat, and Red Fir Flat. At lower elevations where vegetation recovers, growing seasons are longer and there is not such a concentration of other uses, mountain bikes don't have near the impact. The "tunnel trails" in the plantations behind town are a great recreational resource. A lot of those are on old roads and skid trails that are already hardened and have waterbars. They are a great place to ride and can handle a lot more use than the high country. The Siskiyou Trail Users, a local mountain bike group, have done a great job of promoting responsible riding in these areas.

EE: Does mountain biking qualify as mechanized recreation? Is it prohibited within the Wilderness,
and are there any restrictions in place outside the Wilderness?

MH: Mountain bikes are mechanized recreation. As such, they are prohibited in Wilderness Areas. They are also prohibited on the Pacific Crest Trail. Otherwise, our road and trail system is open to mountain bikes. There are literally hundreds of miles of roads and trails open to mountain bikes.

EE: Does the Forest Service do any patrolling?

MH: We have a high presence in the Mt. Shasta Wilderness, but mountain bikes are not really an issue there. We would like to have a higher presence in other areas. If we are able to expand our fee program, that may be possible.

EE: Do mountain bikers use the same trails that hikers use, and is that dangerous? What measures would you propose to deal with the problem?

MH: It is clearly a hazard when a person riding a bike at high speeds meets a hiker, and we have gotten several complaints of user conflicts. I think that by far the best tool to address the issue is education of both riders and hikers. A popular hiking trail with blind corners is not a place for gonzo bike riding. Conversely, in a place that is dominated by mountain bike use like the tunnel trails, a hiker should expect to meet a mountain bike. As recreation use continues to increase, we may need to try "zoning" if we continue to get reports of conflicts in use. Perhaps we need trails that are dedicated to mountain biking, and trails dedicated to hiking like the Pacific Crest Trail. This is a good Forest Plan type of question.

EE: What advice can we give to any of our readers who might happen to be bikers so that their sport can be regarded as an appropriate backcountry use?

MH: The best thing to do is lead by example. Go back and look at a place you have ridden. Can you practice "no trace riding" like other people practice no trace camping? I think it is possible. Also, the time of year is important. Moist pumice
soils are not as fragile as really wet or bone dry pumice soils. Think about your impacts, and respect the land. That is the key.

EE: What are some of the other threats to the Mountain?

MH: Our primary concern is with the high spikes of use by climbers on the mountain that occur on weekends and holidays. These spikes lead to crowding, loss of solitude and some safety issues on popular routes like Avalanche Gulch. We also continue to have problems human waste in the high country. We have about 90% compliance with our pack out program for human waste, but if 10% of the people don't use the bags, and you have 6000 climbers, you get the picture. Other areas in the high country are feeling the strain of use like Squaw Meadows, Panther Meadows and Bunny Flat. It is not as much the number of people who use the area as it is how they use it. A person hiking on the trail in Panther Meadow has much less impact than someone walking across the meadow off the trail The land can handle a lot more "no trace" users than folks who may not have those skills. At lower elevations, we also have a real risk for catastrophic fire as a result of fuel accumulation. We hope to address some of these fuel issues in our upcoming Mountain Thin project.

EE: Any concluding thoughts?

MH: First of all, we appreciate the efforts of H.O.M.E. and others who volunteer to help take care of Mount Shasta. National Forests are brim-full of ecological and scenic wonders, but they are also here to be used. A sense of stewardship should guide our use so the next generation has as many options as we do.