[pct-l] Water Report vs Water Plan

[Bill Potter]

Water reports need to move away from printed versions to phone based applications.

Hikers should simply report if there was or was not water at a source on a specific date.  It would be much more timely and accurate than what we deal with now.  It would be easy enough to have a print feature if someone refused to carry a smart phone and wants the information.

Bill


________________________________
 From: Eric Lee <saintgimp at hotmail.com>
To: 'postholer' <junk at postholer.com>; pct-l at backcountry.net 
Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2013 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Water Report vs Water Plan
 

Scott wrote:
>
This year was a 2nd consecutive extreme dry year which created a very unique
opportunity. It allowed me to collect locations of thousands natural water
sources that were flowing for northbound thru hikers.
>

Every year on my section hike it's the same routine: look at my
map/guide/etc., see how far away the next documented water source is
(usually farther than I'd like), load up with enough water to make it there,
and then walk past like five undocumented sources with my heavy load (grrr).

It would be nice to know exactly the minimum amount of water I could get
away with at all times, but I actually do appreciate the fact that
HalfMile's maps (and others) are very conservative about what they list as a
reliable water source.  I'd *much* rather lug water past a few good ones
that I didn't know were there rather than make plans based on a supposed
source that turns out to be dry.  It's definitely best to be conservative.

The problems with greatly expanding the documented list of water sources are
these:
* This year was dry down south but not unusually dry in northern Oregon and
Washington.  I wouldn't consider this year to be the "worst case scenario".
* The smaller seasonal streams can vary quite a bit from year to year even
if the overall meteorological conditions were pretty much the same.  Local
precipitation variations or even differences in how the snow drifted during
the winter can change things pretty drastically.  Yeah, they may be there
many years, but not always.
* Once the thrus get out of southern California they're spread out over
several weeks, and of course section hikers use the trail pretty much
anytime it's hikeable. The smaller sources that were there when you hiked
past them might not be there for people coming along much later.

I'm curious to see what you come up with, but be prepared for a lot of rage
directed your way whenever your list leaves someone out of water when they
didn't plan to be.  Thru-hikers can be a mite touchy about that sort of
thing.  :-)

Eric

_______________________________________________
Pct-L mailing list
Pct-L at backcountry.net
To unsubscribe, 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.