3 ms·
I learned this concept hiking with a ranger when I was young. I caught myself about to cut the corner of the trail. I jokingly shamed myself for the thought, an
by betenoire 3y ago
I learned this concept hiking with a ranger when I was young. I caught myself about to cut the corner of the trail. I jokingly shamed myself for the thought, and he says,"that's a sign we designed it wrong here". He went on to explain that they do watch hikers for how they got it wrong in that sense
- rgbrenner 3y agoThe assumption in that statement is that the trail being convenient for people is the only important consideration. I was out hiking a couple of years ago on a very steep trail with lots of signs telling people to stay on the trail because they were trying to regrow the forest in the surrounding area to prevent land slides... and what did people do? They cut through it anyway. No wonder they had to shutdown entire portions of the trail. Sometimes things have to be done a certain way for other reasons. The most convenient technical solution is not always the right solution either.
- betenoire 3y agoThe assumption? I think it is more subtle than that. Your example shows that if perhaps there were two trails, say the one for the hasty short-cutters, and one for the others, the inevitable damage could have been minimized and a closure avoided. But my comment wasn't about trail management, I'm recounting an anecdote from 25 years ago. The point was to check your assumptions against reality, and adjust accordingly.
- GauntletWizard 3y agoI wish more trails I walked had "fast, hard, short" vs "slow, easy, long, pretty" route markers - and not necessarily in that combination! Sometimes a long trail is long because it's pretty, sometimes because it has low grade. I've walked with people in crutches and wheelchairs, warnings that "this trail has steps" have been invaluable (and really annoying when missed).
- regular_trash 3y agoI might not totally understand the context of the trail you were on, but how does making the trail less convenient support re-growing the forest? It seems like the regrowth probably has little to no preference on where it occurs, so couldn't the trail designers still have made the trail with convenience as the chief goal?
- klodolph 3y agoI have seen this on trails. Regrowth, itself, has no preference. But the people maintaining the mountain want regrowth to happen in such a way to mitigate erosion.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yencabulator 3y agoAlso, shortcuts on switchbacks increase erosion of the hill. Too much of that and the trail will get closed as unsafe.
- pessimizer 3y ago> The assumption in that statement is that the trail being convenient for people is the only important consideration. Is that an assumption, or what the ranger said? No need to make up requirements that don't exist.
- marcosdumay 3y agoThat sounds a lot like the OP's point to me. They didn't go around telling people to stop, they closed the trail, and people stopped.