[pct-l] Water Caches now Mylar Balloons

[cvano at tmail.com]

On one cruise between San Diego and LA I saw hundreds of Mylar and other 
plastic balloons, floating in the ocean, many miles offshore.  Some were 
in groups so large, I thought they were wreckage and actually altered 
course to investigate.  What is this man made trash doing to the 
invironment?  What about the marine like?  I think places like 
Disneyland are responsible for a lot of it.  I was once flying over that 
park and had to take evasive action to avoid a herd of a hundred or more 
balloons that had apparenty been released or lost.  Damm things should 
be outlawed!  OK, off the soapbox and back to my corner now....

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 9:03 pm, Sean Nordeen wrote:
> Water Caches have been a way of life for people backpacking the Desert 
> areas.  However, they typically are small in size, hidden from sight 
> (if nothing else, to keep someone else from using it before you get to 
> it), and removed after a hike.  Leave No Trace (LNT) principles that 
> all public land agencies have subscribed to would seem to be against 
> the larger caches that are in plain sight.  One of the reasons many 
> agencies ask you to camp 100ft or more from trails is to keep your camp 
> out of sight from other hikers since many don't like to see any 
> reminder of civillization.
>
> That said, a wood shelf with water bottles on it doesn't really bother 
> me.  Empty bottles scattered all over the place and other trash left 
> behind does.  If you are going to leave a cache, can you please try to 
> set it up inorder to keep the emptys behind a bush out of sight?  That 
> doesn't seem unreasonable to ask and it would seem to make most people 
> happy.  Besides, I'm already programed to pick up trash on the trail.  
> If I see empty water bottles on the trail, I may pick some up thinking 
> they look like trash out of habit and carry it to the next trailhead 
> before I realize what I did.  Since I live in LA and there is always 
> trash near trailheads, this has become a thing I do almost on 
> autopilot.  So I'm sure no one would want this to happen.
>
> Also, some places seem to scream for a water source (San Fellipe Hills) 
> and caches may be a necessary evil for some out there.  But keeping 
> backcountry caches to a minimum also doen't seem unreasonable.  If the 
> only reason for a cache is to keep a hiker from having to walk 1 mile 
> off the PCT to get water, you are depriving an inexperience hiker of 
> his wilderness experience and he won't even realize it; shame on you 
> evil people! :p  All those little side trips maybe add up to an extra 
> day on the PCT meaning he gets to stay out on the trail just a little 
> longer getting to enjoying it; don't many wish they could stay out just 
> a little longer (so they can keep eating like a pig)?  Also the 
> plant/wildlife tends to be more interesting around natural water holes 
> so by making those side trips, the hiker gets to see more of what he 
> came out there for.  The poor inexperience hiker won't know this and 
> will hang out at the water cache and missing the possibility of seeing 
> something great
>   just a short trip away.  Don't you feel sorry for this ignorant 
> behavior?  When I think about it, I almost want to cry at the tragedy 
> unfolding.
>
> Now if only we could get the Sierra Club to protest at Kid's Birthday 
> parties in order to eliminate indestructable mylar balloons out of the 
> backcountry.  I don't understand why so many small children practice 
> catch and release with their balloons anyway.  I can't tell you how 
> many stupid balloons I've found and if I find another one, I'm going 
> to...
>
> This water cache debate is interesting and a valid discussion, and I 
> would like to see it continue.  But please try to keep it civil on both 
> sides since I've been seeing a few posts on both sides that are making 
> me nervous.  The last thing the list needs is Flame War CXXV.
>
> -Sean
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> The thing I want to take issue with in this debate is the way in which
> less-experienced hikers are somehow looked upon as less deserving to be 
> on
> the trail.  If water caches "enable" (in the words of Donna) more 
> hikers- is
> this a good thing or a bad thing?  Isn't it better for there to be more
> hikers on the PCT, so as to have more passionate advocates for the 
> trail
> that we love?  We need the long distance hiking community to expand, 
> not
> become more exclusive.  The trend in wilderness management these days 
> is
> towards so called "front-of-the-mountain" activities-- day hikes, 
> ATVing,
> fishing, etc. (i.e. things that can be easily done in a day and doesn't
> require huge planning like a backcountry trip.)  Wouldn't it be better 
> to
> have more, properly educated in LNT principals hikers so as to be 
> passionate
> users of and advocates for wilderness areas/experiences?  Why make the 
> PCT
> more exclusive?  Don't we want more people "on our side"?  More 
> donations to
> the PCTA?  Grumpy comments about hikers being "enabled" is not the way 
> to
> welcome and expand the LDH community, right?
>
> YITOOD,
>
> Easy
>
> PCT 2007
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> To unsubscribe or change list options (digest, etc):
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
It's not the Mountain that we conquer,
but Ourselves.  Anon.

Ol' Three Toes aka Chris
S/V Drifter ~~~_/)~~~
Anacortes, WA.