[pct-l] Water caches
Donna Saufley
dsaufley at sprynet.com
Mon Dec 31 18:22:09 CST 2007
Thanks for the kinds words. Ya know, I paid attention to the various
jurisdictions I hiked through from the southern Kennedy Meadows to Echo Lake
(and there were many), but since I haven’t hiked A, B, or C other than
little bits I don’t know what the jurisdictions further south are – though I
bet some out there do know. That said, most of the trail passes through
USFS, NP, and BLM lands, not to mention county and state parks, and
occasionally private land. Even though the caches may not be in designated
“wilderness” areas with all that entails, they are being placed on
government managed lands, often with special dispensation for the PCT. None
of it is “open” territory where people can legally do as they please.
I’m willing to bet $100 that none of these jurisdictions would approve or
allow caches if they knew about them. Problem is (or benefit depending on
how you view the issue) is that these agencies are not out patrolling the
trail and seeing what’s going on. I will not only pay up but will publicly
eat crow if anyone can prove me wrong on this, meaning solid proof that the
agencies (USFS and BLM) approve of the practice of caching. I’m thinking
this is a pretty safe bet.
L-Rod
_____
From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
On Behalf Of Phil Baily
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 2:14 PM
To: pct-l at backcountry.net
Cc: AsABat at 4Jeffrey.Net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Water caches
I have only read some of the postings on this topic, but I always read
L-Rod's postings because they are well-written and well thought out. They
usually stimulate my thinking. Here are some additional and overlapping
thoughts.
--- Most of the PCT is not wilderness. Some of it is very far from that.
Most of the caches that I have seen have not been in designated wilderness
areas. Wishing an area was more wilderness-like should not be a reason for
eliminating caches. There should be none in designated wilderness areas.
--- Using caches for trash disposal is just as reprehensible as dumping
trash trailside where there is no cache. However, it is not a good reason
for deleting caches any more than it is a good reason for deleting roads.
--- My personal use of caches has depended strongly on season, weather and
the accuracy of my own advance estimates of water needs. Their advertised
presence does bring piece-of-mind and has made hiking more pleasant when I
have availed myself of their benefits. I try not to use more than necessary.
They are a big help to lots of people, particularly those who walk lower
mileage days than most of those on this list. In my opinion they are
extremely helpful, particularly in some areas. They are desirable but not
but not a necessity. Of course, many cross-country hikers would say the same
about trails.
--- Locating caches off-trail with directional signs on the trail is not a
solution to anything. It only determines who (walkers on which trail) gets
to walk past and observe the cache, unless it is not on any trail and then
it is really changing the nature of an undisturbed area, not just the trail.
Location should be for the convenience of the users and the maintainers.
--- The esthetic pleasure or displeasure associated with a cache of bottles
on the ground tied with a string and a cache with wooden case with neatly
arranged bottles on and behind it and a cache with a sign-in register and
marked by a paper skeleton hanging from a tree is in the eye of the
beholder. One is not any esthetically better or worse than the other.
Thanks to all the cache maintainers, and to those who use them neatly.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
HYOH
Pieces
At 10:57 AM 12/31/07, Donna \"L-Rod\" Saufley wrote:
As always, great thoughts. I like the idea of the caches being away from
the trail, out of sight. It has the secondary benefit of keeping the cache
itself safe from vandals and those who are not the intended recipients of
the water. By my own actions, I have proven that I want to help (some could
rightfully say enable) hikers along their journey. I understand the
kindness and love, not to mention physical toil, that goes into placing and
maintaining a cache. I am on the side of trail angels, and cannot blame
anyone for wanting to help the hikers. But there is another voice within me
that plays devil's advocate, and is voicing what I've heard directly from
hikers.
I have trouble with the idea of leaving anything in a wilderness area, on a
trail that is reputed to be a wilderness trail. The trash and debris that
has been getting left behind in recent years not only blows away, it is
temptation for wildlife and potentially dangerous to them. Isn't leaving
anything at all in a wilderness area against the law? How are we
(collective hiker community) able to justify defying those laws? Because
we're special, and it made our hike easier? Because what we're doing is
good for our guys, so let's alter the environment to suit ourselves? I have
a lot of trouble with this morally and ethically. It seems to me that the
practice of leaving caches does not align with Leave No Trace principles.
According to the most experienced PCT thru-hikers (categorized as those
who've hiked it multiple times over a period of years) there IS water to be
had along the trail. It takes effort to get to, sometimes as far as a mile
off trail. But it's there, and the trail can be hiked without use of any
caches, even in drought years. Of course, there are many people who either
do not want to carry more water, lack the skills or patience to find these
water sources, or simply would not want to have this type of challenge added
to an already challenging hike. The reality is that caches are in fact
making the trail possible for some who would otherwise not be out there for
whatever the reason.
I remember not too long ago the discussion regarding the graffiti on signage
up north -- specifically the helpful directional signs. Yes, the graffiti
was helpful and made the hike easier. Yes, it was great not to have to stop
and take out the map. But the fact is it is graffiti defacing the signage
and against the law, and therefore it is quite technically wrongdoing. How
does leaving caches differ?
I fear that we look at the kindness and intent, as well as the fact that it
may prove opportune or convenient, and forget to consider the impacts to the
world in which we are all stewards. We justify -- and even applaud it -- it
because it suits us, without regard to the law or consequences. It's easy
to do when you don't stick around to see the consequences.
L-Rod
-----Original Message-----
From: jeff.singewald at comcast.net
Sent: Dec 30, 2007 7:49 PM
To: Postholer , pct-l at backcountry.net
Cc: AsABat at 4Jeffrey.Net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Water caches
It is obvious there is a wide range of positions re: water caches, but I am
curious about the history of these organized water caches. So a question or
two for the old time thru-hikers (Stryder, Monte Dodge and others). When
did these organized water caches begin to be common place along the PCT?
How in the world did you guys/gals make it to Canada without these water
caches? For those that hike the trail before these water caches became
common place, would you prefer to have had the luxury of these caches?
I am not a fan of these caches, but one idea that was brought up earlier has
significant merit. Why not place the water caches off-trail, maybe 1/4 -
1/2 mile off-trail, so that if you need an emergency cache, you can go
off-trail to reach it, without too much difficulty. This idea would seem
to please those that are opposed to on-trail caches as well as those that
feel a strong desire to provide emergency assistence to thru-hikers.
This is not all that much different than support provided at Hiker Heaven or
the Andersons or even the Manns. You would need to detour off-trail to take
advantage of this trail-angel support, rather than placing the assistence
right atop the trail like so many of these caches.
Elevator
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Postholer" <public at postholer.com>
> Water caches; a quote directly from the pen of the Mann's:
>
> "I knew which caches were fairly reliable, and where the alternate
off-trail
> water sources were, if a cache was empty."
>
> By this description the on-trail cache has become the source. Going
> off-trail is 'the alternate' to the cache!
>
> Are the cache maintainers 'getting it' yet? If you really care about
helping
> hikers, fix it. You're a small group and you probably communicate. You
> already know what needs to be done. Change this before you can't.
>
> The Mann's complete post:
> HYPERLINK
"http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/2007-December/012135.html"ht
tp://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/2007-December/012135.html
>
> -postholer
> --------------------------------- --- > Trails : HYPERLINK
"http://postholer.com/"http://Postholer.Com
> Journals : HYPERLINK
"http://postholer.com/journal"http://Postholer.Com/journal
> Maps : HYPERLINK "http://postholer.com/gmap"http://Postholer.Com/gmap
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> To unsubscribe or change list options (digest, etc):
> HYPERLINK
"http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l"http://mailman.backco
untry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
_______________________________________________
Pct-l mailing list
Pct-l at backcountry.net
To unsubscribe or change list options (digest, etc):
HYPERLINK
"http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l"http://mailman.backco
untry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1205 - Release Date: 12/31/2007
3:32 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1205 - Release Date: 12/31/2007
3:32 PM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/attachments/20071231/0db00740/attachment.html
More information about the Pct-L
mailing list