[pct-l] Tim's broken ankle

Tortoise Tortoise73 at charter.net
Tue Sep 18 22:37:09 CDT 2012


I am a volunteer trail rover (sort of like a interpretative ranger or 
museum docent) for Redwood NP. I'm in my 3rd year doing this. Occasionally 
I see visitors bringing dogs on the trail. Service animals are permitted; 
other dogs NO. Usually when I remind them of the no dog rule, they say I 
didn't see the signs. Maybe they didn't. AFAIK, dogs are generally banned 
on trails in California state parks as well as national parks. Usually when 
I remind them, they are nice and take their dogs back to the car or 
whatever. I've had one woman get quite irate because I told her her dogs 
were not permitted on the trail. She gave various excuses -- my dogs have 
been in the car a long time, a dog has cancer, . . . Her husband returned 
and persuaded her to take the dogs back to the car. Another time I got 
various excuses from a hiker including claiming that a certain ranger had 
said the dog was OK. I checked with that ranger and he had said no such 
thing. He called the situation into park ranger law enforcement. I don't 
know what law enforcement did.

I think there are a few people who just miss the signs. With many others, 
this is a feeble excuse. And there are the blatant scofflaws.

As to costs of enforcement, I wonder how many seasonal rangers could be 
hired with the cost of fighting one significant human caused fire?  Do 
hikers ever read their permits?

Tortoise

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable
President John F Kennedy,  1962

All content is copyrighted. Reproduction or use elsewhere is is expressly prohibited without the express permission of the author. Use within the PCT-list is permitted.

On 2012.09.18 19:56, I Discovered That By Going Out I Had Really Gone In wrote:
> Mendo,
>
> Mixing high dose high grade narcotics with social media is never a good idea. After my ankle was reconstructed I flew home and I can tell that too much spare time will only compound the potential for mischief as all the filters are definitely down.
>
> Still the answer to the fires issue is education and self restraint by those who violate the ban. Peer pressure, applied  on the trail, for knowing violators of a fire ban, but in a strictly nonconfrontational way; one that does not criticize. I doubt any additional regulatory action or effort will be effective. Hiking your own hike, to me, emphasizes personal responsability; not whether you as another hiker give some sort of pass to another hiker for conduct you disagree with.  I regularly voice my problems with alcohol stoves due to their fire risk while I am on the trail, but do so as the reason for using another modality. Providing an example.
>
> My experience this year in Oregon and Washington with lightning caused fires makes me consider them the principal problem. Combined, of course with the multidecade build up of forest fuels through fire suppression. Each time I experienced a night time thunderstorm fires resulted and, in turn. the trail was closed.  As for hiker caused fires I have no information in support, but surmise casual non long distance hikers or campers are probable the principal sources of careless campfire caused blazes.
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>
> Edward Anderson <mendoridered at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Timothy,
>>   
>> I did not know that you are the hiker who broke your ankle six miles short of the Canadian Border. I just learned that from Piper's Mom.  I am so sad to now realize that you were the hiker. You must have been terribly disappointed. Hope that I was not too hard on you in my response to your response to my post on illegal campfires on the PCT. I sincerely apologize.
>>   
>> MendoRider
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Meridith Rosendahl <meridith.rosendahl at gmail.com>
>> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:12 PM
>> Subject: [pct-l]  Fire Bans
>>   
>> Maybe Tim's painful broken ankle is making him cranky, as might being so
>> close to the border and having to leave the trail.  No verbal lashings at
>> me, please.
>>
>> Piper's Mom
>>
>>
>> Message: 12
>> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:01:43 -0700
>> From: "Jim Banks" <jbanks4 at socal.rr.com>
>> Subject: [pct-l] Fire Bans
>> To: <pct-l at backcountry.net>
>> Message-ID: <005701cd9530$ca0a1680$5e1e4380$@rr.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> I am not siding with or against Mendo Rider's email to the Forest Service,
>> but Timothy Nye's response to Mendo Rider suggest that "hike your own hike"
>> now means you can ignore campfire and other restrictions.  He would "not
>> presume to proscribe limits or penalties on others."  Come on!   All the
>> various official rules associated with hiking the trail are in some way
>> limits or penalties.   But they are there to protect the trail, the
>> environment that it passes through, and in some cases hikers.  Geez, Timothy
>> are you so afraid of being characterized as judgmental that you are willing
>> to let others violate the fire restrictions that are in place?
>>
>>
>>
>> I-Beam
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pct-L mailing list
>> Pct-L at backcountry.net
>> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>>
>> List Archives:
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
>> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is prohibited without express permission.




More information about the Pct-L mailing list