RE: Marking with GPS

["Bob Morris" <bobmorris@rmci.net>]

At no time in any of my correspondence did I ever even imply
that <<<<Unlike Bob, I do not think that marking a trail in
this way is against the
AERC rules.  And I don't think that it is against the rules
to require
people to have bought a GPS if they want to do your ride
(after all,
nobody suggests that being required to buy and saddle and
hoof protection
is against AERC rules).>>>

What I did do was exactly the opposite. I quoted from the
AERC By-laws and Rules. I do so once again:

While our By-laws state in Article V Definitions Section 1.
Endurance Riding is defined as an athletic event in which
the same equine and rider cover a specified course of not
less than 50 miles.... and our Rules state in Rule 6d.
Following the prescribed course...I do not believe that the
use of GPS was the intent.

The By-laws and Rules do not specify any particular method
of marking in fact they do not even mention marking. The
ride directions could be just written out on a sheet of
paper with no map and still be with in the correct
interpretation of the laws and rules.

I did say that I did not believe that the use of GPS was the
original intent as GPS was not available at the time of
writing.

In fact if you so desired, you could be with in the
parameters by just describing the trail orally to the
riders. In fact I have seen this done to an extent early in
the game. Some Nevada riders may remember!

GPS is very much a legal method of trail specification, I
just do not agree with this method for reasons stated.

Bob Morris

-----Original Message-----
From: guest@endurance.net [mailto:guest@endurance.net]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:19 AM
To: ridecamp@endurance.net
Subject: RC: Marking with GPS


K S SWIGART   katswig@earthlink.net
Jim Mitchell said:

>   A track on your GPS that proves you didn't shortcut the
trail.
>(Unlike what Kat says), most units record where you went,
so you can
>prove you followed the course, or it can be proved you
didn't.

This assumes that you had the GPS on all the time rather
than just when
you thought you would need to look at it....which does
rather eat into
batteries...and that it is receiving a signal all the time
(which if you
have it stuffed in your pack isn't necessarily the case and
if you are
riding through heavy forest or deep canyons it also would
not be the case,
which doesn't apply when riding across the Great Plains).

>    Kat states she had problems following the trail when
the waypoints
> got close together. Kat had a Magellan unit I believe.
Those of us with
> modern Garmin units did not seem to have this problem.

Actually, I had the Garmin that the Duck sold me.  If I
needed to have a
unit better than the one provided to me by the ride
manager....hmmmm....

>    Disadvantages:
>  Kat is correct that the GPS requires you to look down at
it sometimes,
> or a lot of the time, and on a fresh, wild horse this may
not be
> feasible. In this case I follow a veteran horse with a GPS
person on
> board until my fresh horse calms down.

And maybe my dislike of GPS only marking as a general
practice comes from
this.  I ride lots of green horses.  I have one (yes, the
one that ran me
into a tree at the Grand Canyon) that I have to constantly
remind myself
that it is essential that I keep both hands on the horse and
my attention
focused on the trail and what her responses to the
environment might
be...or I might end up in the ICU once again.

One could (and quite reasonably) make the argument that this
horse is not
really a good candidate for an endurance horse; however, I
still contend
that it is dangerous for any rider on even the most placid
of horses to be
consistantly focused on looking down at a device in their
hand...it's just
that this one particular horse of mine is good at reminding
me of the
importance of this lesson.

The GPS marking worked fine for the ride this summer.  When
the course
entails, pretty much, riding 50 miles due west with nary an
obstacle in
sight, it is virtually impossible to cut the trail (so if I
was off
course, it matters not one whit).  And yes, the GPS
waypoints were
excellent for ensuring that even people who may get off
course can find
their way to the vet check or the finish anyway.

And I can think of other rides I have done that would be
just a suitable
for being marked in this way, and it did have the wonderful
by-product of
getting good written directions and and accurate map which
is what I
really used for navigating the trail because I could look at
those in
advance and memorize and look for what I needed to do
next...and I only
used the GPS when those things were not sufficiently clear.
But the place
where they became unclear is where the trail got a little
tricky...and
where the trail gets a little tricky is hardly the place
where I consider
it appropriate to require riders to take their focus off
their horses.

And, as I said, in those places, if I was sufficiently
confused (and I
couldn't follow the tracks of the horses in front of me
because clearly
they were as confused as I was), I just told myself "I know
I need to be
over there." and figured out for myself the best way to get
there, for all
I know I could have cut out something like Cougar Rock by
having done so;
although, one would think that something like Cougar Rock
would have been
on the written directions, but if that is the case then in
one particular
instance, I figure I was probably off course because "drop
down a six foot
bank, ford a 25 foot wide river, and jump up the bank on the
other side"
probably would have been on the directions too.  But that
didn't keep me
from doing it.  I knew I needed to be on the other side of
the river
(because the road that WAS on the directions was on the
other side of the
river...but actually crossing the river wasn't) and I didn't
see any
bridge, and I didn't see anywhere where I had passed a
bridge (and a
bridge wasn't on the written directions either).

Does this kind of thing happen on trails marked with ribbons
as well?
Yes.  But with ribbons, riders get off course when they stop
paying
attention to the trail and allow themselves to be distracted
by other
things (like the scenery or their riding companions),
whereas when
navigating using the GPS waypoints, I found that I would get
off course
when I was looking down the trail instead of looking at the
device in my
hand.  BIG difference.

Unlike Bob, I do not think that marking a trail in this way
is against the
AERC rules.  And I don't think that it is against the rules
to require
people to have bought a GPS if they want to do your ride
(after all,
nobody suggests that being required to buy and saddle and
hoof protection
is against AERC rules).

I, personally, think that the GPS is just one more tool in
the arsenal
that ride managers and riders can use is marking a trail.
That there are
some trails that are suitable for it, and some that are not.
And some
sections of trail that are suitable for it, and some that
are not.
However, I also consider it a HUGE and not irrelevant
disadvantage that
this particular way of marking the trail does require that
riders be
moving forward on their horses while they are not looking
where they are
going as a way of orienting themselves when they are lost.
This is most
definitely not true of looking for ribbons.  Looking for
ribbons (or a
trail that will lead you to ribbons) has the exact opposite
effect of
having the rider scanning the environment and looking well
ahead...which
is what I tell my students that they should always be doing:
Look ahead,
look to the next fence, look down the trail, prepare your
horse for the
next move, DON'T look DOWN!

Which is what any driving instructor will also tell somebody
who wants to
learn to operate a car safely:  Look ahead, watch the other
cars, be aware
of the pedestrians, anticipate the traffic signals.  Because
that is the
safe way to handle any moving object...especially one that
is moving at
high speeds and outweighs you :).

Looking down upsets the rider's balance and it upsets the
horse's balance.
Most of the time, you can get away with it...as you can in a
car.  But it
only takes a split second of lost attention for something
unexpected to
happen and lead to disaster (and yes, many a car accident is
caused by
somebody futzing around with a map and directions, which is
why the
highway department provides road signs...so drivers can
navigate without
looking down).

I am perfectly willing to admit that there are lots of
advantages to
marking the trail with a GPS (although ride managers can
provide good maps
and written directions even if they have used a different
way to mark the
trail...and they could also mark the trail with GPS
waypoints and not
provide the map and written directions, but to do so would
be a
disaster...so one could reasonalby argue that it was the
good map and
directions that got people through the XP not a GPS).

I just don't want people to forget the biggest disadvantage,
which is not
that you have to buy a GPS and learn how to use it and not
that they don't
operate reliably unless they have a clear signal which can
fairly easily
be interfered with, but rather that using one for navigating
off the back
of a horse, even after you have one and know how to use it
and it is
working perfectly, is inherently dangerous.  Because it
significantly
distracts you from the important business at hand...piloting
the horse
through the terrain.

And even you noticed this when you were riding an excited
horse (and just
allowed somebody else to navigate for you).  However, ALL
horses are
excitable...at the drop of a hat (even 45 miles into a 50
mile ride).

kat
Orange County, Calif.

p.s.  Pilots are not flying IFR with handheld units...and a
GPS is only as
useful as its antenna.  Oh yeah, and they are not flying
through the trees
or in deep canyons (at least one hopes not).


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net,
http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer:
http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=