[pct-l] Early PCT Casulities

[Paul Mitchell]

>Ahem....I wouldn't call that arguably true.  I'd call it demonstrably dangerous.

Fair enough, but the danger is relative to the conditions, so I'd argue that it's still arguable.  ;)  Of course when there's sufficient snow on the ground the trail isn't there to follow, but generally speaking it's a very easy-to-follow trail and on an average year a person could (not should, just could) hike almost or possibly all of it without maps.  I did say that I wouldn't personally advocate hiking without maps, but my point in the greater context of that message was that the trail isn't what it used to be back in 77 (or whenever) and criticizing inexperienced hikers for not being prepared in 2013 the way hikers needed to be prepared 30 years ago isn't fair.

These sorts of things are ultimately personal choices, to a point.  Some people think it would be nuts to not filter every water source, some of us prefer to not filter unless there are dead cats floating in it.  Some want to be hyper prepared for every contingency, some of us like surprises and unpredictable adventures so want to remain a bit more ignorant of what's around the next bend until we get there, and we're willing to risk some consequences.  At some point the scales tip - too much risk to ourselves & others (sure, heading into snowy sierras without maps would be a good example) and sometimes it's super obvious someone made a really bad decision that got them into trouble, but a lot of the time the perspective of what is/isn't a justifiable risk and/or a sufficient level of preparedness is really, to be fair, a matter of personal opinion.

I didn't mean to debate specifics though, so much as to challenge the critical tone towards those who chose to give it a try without what others would judge as sufficient experience. 

Cheers,
Potential 178