[pct-l] Third gate Water Caches

[Jeffrey Olson]

AT the risk of creating ire and bad vibes I would vote to NOT provide 
water (or routine trail angel) support anywhere on the trail.  I know 
I'm probably a minority opinion, but I want to express it regardless.

As part of a circumambulation of the Ritter Range and Minarets starting 
and ending at Tuolomne in mid-june, we hiked 35 miles on the PCT.  We 
ran into 40 or so thru-hikers in three days.  One of them said there 
were 600 permits issued and 400 hikers on the trail in a standard normal 
curve covering two or three weeks.  We hadn't run into the "herd" - they 
were still coming.  I don't know how accurate these numbers are.

I'm all for people envisioning a dream and then planning well enough to 
carry it out.  A couple 35 mile stretches of trail w/o water is part of 
the hike, part of the planning.  "What do I do?" "How do I carry this 
off?"  It's like getting caught in a snow storm going down the knife 
edge in the Goat Rocks.  You deal with it and move on.

But I'll tell you, running into 40 thru-hikers in three days had me run 
the gamut of valorizing their effort with the first couple, to ignoring 
the rest when they occurred often enough to seem like ants.

I got lambasted a couple months ago for telling a story that attempted 
to be humorous about trail angels.  The underlying theme was threatening 
I guess.  I'll just baldly state it so there's no misunderstanding.  
Non-hiker supports on the trail move a thru- or long section-hike into 
the realm of possibility for more people. I don't think this is 
desireable or good.

When I first started doing section hikes in the early 90s a trail angel 
was someone who out of the blue, while in the midst of their own life, 
helped out a hiker.  They didn't carry hundreds of gallons of water or 
put coolers of pop and beer near road crossings.  I don't disparage 21st 
century trail angels motivation.  Those I've met have been warm and 
caring people.

My point is not to punch trail angels in the gut.  My point is that 
doing the trail on the trails terms is an important part of the vision.  
If I think I can count on water someone put somewhere, then I'm not 
hiking the trail on its own terms.

I used to think that hiking in loose groups was somehow not "true" long 
distance hiking.  You had to do it on your own - to challenge  yourself, 
to feel the deep emotions that wanted you to leave the trail and go 
home.  Now I realize I don't like hiking alone, and would only consider 
my next long hike if it involves people.  To someone dedicated to hiking 
alone, my perspective involves not hiking the trail on its own merits.

This is an opinion.  Feel free to disagree.  Just don't get all negative 
on me.  If your ire raises, just ignore this perspective.  It's just one 
person's opinion...

Jeffrey Olson
Rapid City, SD


What I have stated in my earlier post is very much the case. If 
thru-hikers were my self sufficient there would not be a need for a 
water cache at both Scissors Crossing and 3rd gate. It is very realistic 
that hikers can make the journey between SC and Barrel Springs without 
the 3rd gate cache. Every one out there should be able to plan and carry 
enough water to go 23 miles, even if this takes 1-2 days. I was not 
critical of the volunteers that have done so much to maintain this cache 
in the past, but there are other options and what I suggested is just 
one that does in fact have merit.