| Re: Potential good news for Mt. Washington access.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <33u072F44jgusU1@individual.net>,
Matt O'Toole <matt@deltanet.com> wrote:
>Booker C. Bense wrote:
>
>> _ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
>> at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
>> most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
>> you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
>> and in my experience riding up it is harder.
>>
>> _ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
>> it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
>> entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
>> would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
>> you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
>> with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
>> time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.
>
>Mountain bikers ride fire roads like that all the time. The mountains of the
>western US are riddled with them -- 4000' climbs at over 10%, sometimes over
>15%. Rims get hot, but not enough to blow tires. So I don't see what the big
>deal is. There are a bunch of roads around here with sustained grades like
>that, but nothing that long -- 2-3 miles at most.
_ I agree, for a reasonably competent mountain biker that road
would be no big deal at all. There are many many fire roads out
west that are significantly steeper with much worse road
conditions.
>
>However, when you have such a road that's a magnet for cyclists, you have a
>management problem. As mentioned, that particular road is privately owned, so
>there may be liability concerns too. I say people ought to be free to crash if
>they want to, but unfortunately US law and insurance doesn't work that way.
_ There's also the fact that it is surrounded by a protected
wilderness area that is illegal for mountain biking. I'm guessing
it would be up to the Auto road company to cover the cost of
enforcing that and I think they could make a pretty reasonable
"rational basis" on just that arguement alone, outside of any
safety issues.
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBQdnpfGTWTAjn5N/lAQEdAQP/aRN9eL70IRnRqYNKVz5IVLkBb8Io1Vvw
cPBDq9ihCai2tZMVpRhYluFh9fKZgeTcbxHRLv46ZY3OzLOk+h iuz3KvFqpQxmMK
TqCmW75wX00kIp35IbMcxyEWpRvFGAQV47X11HbF9WAkotS5n0 yn9SCRBws4SIGa
QSaO/tFPvc4=
=58Ah
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|