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

[kcristler]

 I concur with Tortoise
           Kerry, Covina  CA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tortoise" <Tortoise73 at charter.net>
To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [pct-l] FW: Scott and Joe hiking closure


>I agree with Will's first post as well as some others.
>
> How can we complain about the Forest Service or ATVers or whoever not
> obeying the rules when we don't expect thru hikers to follow the rules.
>
> With all the forest fires still burning the forest service has a lot more
> to care about and a lot more important to care about than the 
> inconvenience
> of a trail closure to hikers. The trail closures will keep hikers safe 
> even
> if inconvenienced.
>
> Apparently, most thrus are behaving properly and respecting the closures
> even if they don't like the closures.
>
> As for me I will consider Scott and Joe's attempt at a record illegitimate
> for violating the trail closure.
>
>
> Tortoise
>
> <> He who finishes last, wins! <>
>
>
> Will Hiltz wrote:
>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pct-l mailing list
>> Pct-l at backcountry.net
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>