[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.