[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[pct-l] Thoughts on the ADZPCTKO thread
On Apr 26, 2005, at 12:36 PM, yogi wrote:
> All the suggestions for changing/moving the Kick Off would benefit
> others ? towns, angels, etc. Yes, the towns and angels are important
> and I?m not minimizing their contribution to our hikes. But who really
> benefits from the changes proposed? Overall, it?s not the hikers.
Thru-hikers are just one part of the larger trail community. To the
extent that thru-hikers pose unique logistical problems to other parts
of that community I think it is reasonable for thru-hikers to help
minimize their impact. That's just being neighborly and yes sometimes
that means doing something that isn't optimal for thru-hikers. This
becomes more important as the number of hikers grows.
In the longer term I think it is thru-hikers themselves that benefit
when
the towns, businesses, and residents surrounding the trail welcome and
support hikers. Certainly experience on the AT has shown that when
thru-hikers
become demanding, inconsiderate, or otherwise burdensome, future hikers
start getting turned away at businesses and unwelcome in some towns.
Another example of what not to do:
In 2004, the town of Chester was inundated by the Rainbow Gathering
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Gathering) a couple of weeks
before the thru-hikers arrived. Because the Rainbow Gathering community
was less than considerate of the town of Chester (shoplifting,
vagrancy, panhandling, as I heard from residents and observed)
thru-hikers
had a somewhat difficult time getting in and out of town and were not
as welcome as we might have liked in some of the businesses.
Unfortunately
to the undiscerning eye/nose, dirty and smelly Rainbow Gathering members
look and smell a lot like long-distance hikers.