[pct-l] FW: Scott and Joe hiking closure

[Will Hiltz]

While I generally agree with the sentiment you're expressing here, perhaps
you're missing my point a bit.  Rather than wanting to really slam Scott and
Joe from behind a desk I just thought it would appropriate for there to be
some sort of general acknowledgement that what they are doing isn't
exemplary behavior and talk about ways that we as a community can identify
the standards of outdoor practice we want to espouse.

Whether by their will or not, through Scott's appearance in LAT, NYT and the
publiciziation of their attempt on this list, Scott and Joe have become the
public faces of the trail.  As such, they had a real opportunity to
demonstrate for all the other thrus what proper and consientious wilderness
behavior is and lead the community by example. They chose not to do that.
Hiking through closures is a bad idea for all sorts of reasons not just
including Scott & Joe's personal safety.  As role models one COULD say they
have an obligation to think about how their disregard of closures/wilderness
guidelines might affect not just the way thrus as a whole are percieved by
regulatory bodies etc., but also how their actions might affect the
decision-making of people actually on the trail.

When I was on the trail in '07, I stopped filtering my water after Kennedy
Meadows.  Most folks that I hiked with didn't also go w/o treatment
initially, but after having seen me do it successfully for several
days/weeks, they too began to drink unfiltered water.  Once I demonstrated
that the behavior was possible (though not necessarily advisable) for me,
other folks eventually tried it themselves.  That is the problem with what S
& J have done here-- this makes it way more likely that other thrus will
attempt this.  Other hikers will put themselves at risk, and maybe they
won't be as experienced or fast-hiking as S&J.  Maybe regulatory bodies will
crack down (suspension of the PCTA's ability to grant magical permits,
anyone?).  S & J had a real chance to show by example that these closures
(and by extension, wilderness regulations in general) are worthy of
consideration.

And honestly, how can we as a community not speak out against this and then
at the same time decry ATVers and Mt. bikers on our beloved trail?  Or rail
at folks for not using bear cannisters?  Rules are only rules if they apply
to everyone all the time.  Otherwise they're just suggestions.  Is that what
we're really pushing for?

YITOOD,

Easy


On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Andrea Dinsmore <zaqueltooocool at gmail.com>
wrote:

> DON'T JUDGE ME (OR ANYONE ELSE) UNTIL YOU WALK IN MY SHOES.............
>
> Unless YOU were there YOU don't know the actual conditions at that moment.
> If they where talked to by the authorities and not ticketed , put in jail
> or
> sent back.........the actual danger must not have been too serious. They
> did
> get dumped on by the water drop. That's the perils of being where they
> were.
> We all can sit at home on our computers and rag on what they did......not
> going to do any good. I can't think of any hiker on the trail that gives a
> hoot what us arm chair folks think.
>
> PCT MOM
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>