[pct-l] re:Trail Markers

[chelin at teleport.com (Sharon & Chuck Chelin)]

Good morning, Ken,

I agree with your comments about signage in the various areas along the PCT.
Among the regulations and administrative guidelines for trail signage on
Forest Service, BLM, and Natl. Park Service lands there are also Wilderness
Act requirements, and guidelines (or wishes) for the PCT in general.  Even
among these various jurisdictions there can be considerable latitude in the
interpretation of the same basic published information.  Usually the
guideline for Federal Wilderness encourages signage to be rustic and
minimal, for example a small, wooden sign may point to a destination but it
would omit the distance.  I am not fond of signage in general, but I will
admit to being comforted by seeing a PCT marker about 50 yards after a trail
junction.  Most of Oregon is so marked, sometimes with the current
chubby-delta metal sign, more recently with the rustic embossed wooden
delta, and occasionally with the old PCT diamond.

As an option to more PCT signage I suggest the Databook and the Guidebook be
expanded to include the GPS map coordinates of any trail junction or point
on the trail where confusion may exist.  Once a person is sure they are at
the correct coordinates, Guidebook text can more easily describe where the
trail proceeds.  No additional signs would then exist, except upon the
screen of a GPS receiver, which can be carried or not based upon individual
choice.

The PCT is what it is, and will hopefully remain that way, but for those who
wish a more complete wilderness experience similar to a PCT hike, I suggest
the challenge of beginning at the Campo marker and ending at Monument #78,
but in between bushwhacking the Pacific crest as best they can while totally
eschewing any existing trail or road.  That would be a very significant
challenge for ambitious and experienced hikers.

Steel-Eye, who will probably stay in the trail.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kmurray@pol.net>
To: <pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 9:25 PM
Subject: [pct-l] re:Trail Markers


> In reference to Scott's note, cited below:
>
> Scott, there is certainly a conflict in approaches.  Some feel that there
> is no place for signs, at all, in wilderness.  Certainly the philosophy of
> the Wilderness Act would indicate that signing should be the minimal that
> is neccessary.
>
> Currently, there is someone or several, who is making a practice of
> tearing down trail markers in the Angeles National Forest.  They leave a
> note saying "No signs in wilderness!!"
>
>
> Others would say that the PCT is not really a wilderness experience,
> anyway.  There is a tremendous effort to do work on the trail, each year.
> Some times that involves dynamite, it certainly involves thousands of
> workers.  (the High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew (www.trailcrew.org), with
> whom I work, takes care of only about 30 miles of the PCT, and has about
> 300 volunteers, by itself).   There is a very conscious policy of the
> various agencies to do some of the work in such a way that you can't tell
> work has been done (methods of pruning, for example).  To many experienced
> hikers, the PCT has the appearance of a superhighway!  Is this really
> wilderness, considering the volume of traffic?
>
> Also is the issue of what actually happens out there.  One cannot follow
> this discussion forum, without being impressed by the number of people
> (including EXPERIENCED people), who go missing.  Inevitably, there is
> debate about whether they missed "that confusing junction".  Some of those
> people never turn up.  Huge Search and Rescue efforts ensue.  If a few,
> unobtrusive, well-placed signs would avoid all that, I'm not sure I could
> argue against that.