[pct-l] sections A & B

[tahoe.cat at verizon.net (Bill & Cathy)]

Why does there have to be a historic reference? When the trail was built
from the Mexican border to KM, that's history for me. I live in SoCal, I was
born in SoCal and I hike in SoCal! One day I plan to hike from Mexico to
Canada on the PCT, as for becoming someone? I'm already someone. I'm not
trying to prove something, I love to be in the wilderness. It can be
Mountains, Desert or what ever, SoCal has it all and We have plenty of
History. The Franciscan Missionaries went from Mexico to San Diego to
Riverside to Los Angeles, They traveled all over SoCal to preach to the
Indians then they traveled north. Guess how they got there?  ON FOOT! I'd
say that's a lot of history. Go back to SEKI for another 20 years   and
remember  to "Be Prepared"   Ground Pounder Bill     "Semper Fi'
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Randall" <sierra_marmot@yahoo.com>
To: <pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 7:41 PM
Subject: [pct-l] sections A & B


> Getting from Mexico to Canada isn't really the point.  As Jonathan Ley
said, he hiked not "to do something" but "to become someone."   Remove the
caches at Frontier Mail, the GATN road, Rodriguez Canyon, etc. and you have
a section A that is extremely difficult to hike, but is natural.   The same
goes with Sections B, E and F.
>
> A trail connecting the Mexican border with the High Sierra is unnatural
almost by definition.  Most of the trails in the Sierra have roots to the
1840s or before; shepherds like John Muir drove sheep to places like Dusy
Basin.  The trails we follow today are mostly hundreds of years old.  But,
in order to compete with other long-distance trails we've gone out of our
way to force something where a natural event would not have happened.   The
PCT in SoCal is not natural.  There is no historic reference--i.e. an Indian
or animal path, unlike that in the Sierra.  The PCT in Southern California
has no historial reference.  It is a man-made project; artifical.
>
> Is it impure to have an eighteen-hundred mile hike that starts at Kennedy
Meadows and continues for four months to the Canadian border?  Jeez, I hope
not.  The major problems that occur on a full PCT hike occur in SoCal, and
that's only because By Definition the PCT is a Mexico to Canada experience.
>
> What if The Definition is wrong?   What if hikers gathered at Kennedy
Meadows for ADZPCTKO in mid-June and headed north?   Or San Gorgonio Pass?
Or even Idllywild?  The trail would be as long as the AT.  Is that the
problem?  Does the PCT have to be longer and harder than the AT?  Apparently
so.  AT-envy? Is it not just good enough to be long and difficult?
>
> Make no mistake.  I'm a PCT bigot.   But, I think we're tunneling our
resources in the wrong place.  The realities of our West is that without the
water from the Sierra and Rocky Mountains, all land would be the same as
most of Mexico; as it mostly is.   I think we're force-feeding a PCT
Mexico-to-Canada trail mentality because we want it to be longer, wider,
bigger and better than our East-coast brethren.
>
> Most of the PCT through SoCal is artifical; true, a challenge; but
artifical.  I'd like to see us re-define the PCT as starting at Kennedy
Meadows.
>
> I'm sure I'll be flamed and re-flamed for my opinion, however please
understand that I've been hiking in SEKI for the last twenty years, and I'm
entitled to my opinion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> john "marmot" randall
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> pct-l mailing list
> pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> unsubscribe or change options:
> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l