[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[at-l] R&R..the unanswered points....

In a message dated 6/14/01 7:21:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kahley7@ptd.net 

<< Kinnicinic asked:
  > We are now starting to see some of
  > the dregs of society, whom we had avoided by hitting the trail, out there.
  > It will only get worse on this trail, partly because of Trailplace.
 Please explain what you mean specifically in this sentence.

    +++ Not my post. The "dregs" are welcome by me if they follow the rules. 
"Dregs" usually don't clearcut large tracts on the corridor's edge for 
condos. If anyone still takes the original 'Regional Planning' prospectus 
seriously, it shows that the AT was designed as a place where these persons 
could get it together in a healthy way. 

 Vcat asked:
  > I do feel that much more approving of socializing hikes is encountered on
  >websites by people intending well by accepting all forms of hike but not
  >realizing they are lending assistance to lowering Trail standards.
 My impression from this statement is that you believe people who weekend or
 section hike, and those who accept such hiking, are lowering trail standards.
 Is that what you're saying?

    +++ This is my post. Wrong impression and, as usual, interpreting my 
opinions in the worst possible way in order to attach extreme connotations to 
make them unpalatable. The response is designed to make me say "all 
non*through*hikers are illegitimate." 'Come on, I think we know better than 
that.  It was meant more towards roving party, frat bender type hikes than 
the other mainstay usage's you speak of. These hikes will probably always be 
there, but seeing people enforce HYOH in defiance of persons actually 
attempting to establish a standard (not a dirty word) creates an atmosphere 
of permittance and indirectly contributes to the problem.
 DaRedhead asked:
 1) In what way has this list, or the people on it, shown that we are *not*
 serious about Trail advocacy?

    +++ My first answer would be a unanimous naysaying of all of or friend's 
efforts at Trail conservation. I have not seen one budge of admitting ANY of 
the achievements the banished one has done. Any superficial tool of 
tangential criticism of his efforts is permissible in order to throw a wrench 
in his works. The difference being that although many AT*Ler's may be making 
efforts on their own, any outsider reading this site will be lead to believe 
that Trail efforts are all bogus and persons like WF who step up and make a 
stand for the Trail will be cut down as being egotistical quacks by the Trail 
insiders. This sets a bad precedence. What this outsider will learn is that 
childish taunting and reckless attacks on the other site are the first 
priority and stepping up and participating for the Trail will be done only 
after a gauntlet of pillory is survived by the protagonist. If Wingfoot 
doesn't help himself is secondary to this. What you may not realize is this 
is exactly why he does it. In this instance, I believe Wingfoot acts 
appropriately in proactively organizing and filling the need for first 
response advocacy.  

 2) How, given the earlier post by Paddler, can you say that the scales are
 tipped in WF's direction on this matter?

    +++ Simply because WF cuts to the chase without wallowing in popularity 
contests before figuring out what to do. At least he is trying and not mainly 
focusing on complaining about other site's techniques. Trailplace could 
become the public constituency needed to go beyond the limits ATC is bound by 
because it is a formal institution. Wingfoot was preserving the Gulf Tract 
while others were busy talking about him. 
   Furthermore, although Wingfoot may toot his own horn, I don't see ATC 
giving back the money from the new memberships corresponding with the surge 
in Trail use following his efforts. We'll just not mention that. Jim should 
include the spike in ATC sales and contributions following the Wingfoot 
egotistical self*advertisement if he wanted to be totally objective. I expect 
somebody will make an effort to respond that there is no evidence of this or 
this is one of WF's lies. At this point I start feeling sorry for the poor 
%$@#$*. These are usually the facts left out during a witch hunt. And no, he 
doesn't extend any hand for reconciliation (I wonder why?). 
 Fur asked:
 ....to lowering Trail standards
 Could someone please send me this list of trail standards! I've never
 seen this list posted before. And, who puts out this list?

    +++ Well, Garvey for one. ATC for another. Let's see an ALDHA member 
trash talk this venerable icon! I see little mention of this famous hiker by 
responders. I was inspired to hike the AT after finishing 'AH 2'. When I 
speak of this wickedly unsubmittable "traditionalism" I compare Garvey to 
naked hikers being jailed for public drunkenness and yellow blazers 
submitting for 2000 milers status. It is more a role model than a written ten 
commandments. When you press traditionalists for exact justifications you 
take the wrong side and aid what you already know to be a detriment to the 
Trail. Purists and traditionalists have a place and deserve not to be shunned 
off the screen in AT circles. These fundamental principles of AT hiking 
should at least be given a chance to present themselves in order to educate 
hikers for the Trail's sake. If Wingfoot has burned all the bridges around 
him, I think he sees it as a way to be able to present these views without 
hindrance. The conservation then goes beyond that. An isolated tower, maybe, 
but at least a place where his "Grail" is safe.   
 And i would like a few more details (that's where the devil lays(lies ?)
 *** We'll start at the form of serious hike that ATC once took as important 
 enough to require proof.
 Please explain a serious hike under traditional definitions or your 

    +++ I kind of agree that the main trail should be required to have been 
followed to claim a through*hike. I believe most of the Rodale hikers at 
least set out to do that * I know Garvey did. The ATC embodied the authority 
overseeing the Trail. If this agency once felt that through*hiking was 
serious enough to require detailed proof positive of actually having walked 
the entire Trail, well that gave more meaning to a through*hike. It has been 
suggested that many of the mentalities who end up trashing hostels or gaining 
a bad reputation for the Trail were ones with less than a conforming attitude 
towards the old school approach. Idle hands etc... In any case, I don't see 
the evil in encouraging people to hike the entire Trail and uphold old 
standards. If this is brought up on AT*L, most likely the poster will be 
accused of being a Wingfoot "toady" or something. Not good. What would be 
wrong in making it a "new" standard?  
 ******The next would be one that promotes behavior true to the Trail's
 definition by ATC as a primitive place to be upheld.
 Please specifically define the desired behavior.

    +++ The best way would be to first read MacKaye's intentions in the 
prospectus and then the ATC desired guidelines. The more one keeps things 
simple and natural the more he is on the true Trail. Cell phones fit in 
nowhere in these desired conditions. The AT is still a project and movement. 
It requires participation and a preexisting mindset of existing in the 
corridor according to these definitions. Most Trail enterers don't get that 
deep. The Trail wouldn't even be here if MacKaye hadn't.
 *******I guess  traditionalism would best be described as keeping such a 
 level of new
 interest in the Trail controlled to the point that it doesn't interfere 
 with what the Trail is.
 Since you have not responded positively to my suggestion that dan shut down 
 I'm assuming you think it should continue (with the new emphasis on 
 Should we take it then that you feel all other's sites should shut down if 
 they fail to do likewise?
 Specifically...how do you seek to suppress new interest?

   +++ No. That is putting words in my mouth. I like the ALDHA Gatherings and 
consider them to be an essential warm component of the Trail's universe. If 
AT*L managed to save the Place, well they have earned their place right there 
alone. One need not compete against or cancel the other. You all know how 
Wingfoot is, if he banned the Place drive he probably knew it was covered and 
wanted to focus his energies elsewhere. The more for the Trail the better. 
Sadly, it could already be the case that Trailplace has been technically shut 
down as a community participation site by withdrawl of support (I won't 
comment on why in either direction) 
 Finally......about quotas.
 How would these be allotted, specifically. what percentages to
 thru hikers,
 section hikers,
 Groups such as Scouts?
 How would they be allotted?
 First come first served?
 If the thruhiker quota was filled, and X percentage of the thru allotees
    dropped out at Neels, would those slots be reallocated to other hikers?
 Would there be a staging area where hikers could await a washout slot?
 How would the NPS decide if a hiker had washed out or was taking
    town time to reorganize or heal?
 Would there be a time limit to town time?
 Would a hiker need to keep to a proscribed schedule to maintain the daily 
    and a smoothly managed flow?
 If not, how would the differing speed be handled to prevent bunching up?
 What would be the penalty for failure to meet such scheduling guidelines?
 Loss of ticket?
 Would dayhikers, section hikers, weekenders be banned during thru season?
 When would thru season be?
 How much will the ticketing and monitoring cost?
 Where will the funds come from?

   *** This is very difficult and deserves a whole post for itself. I will 
say that Denali National Park does it without all this resistance and 
questioning. Why not the AT too? I'll turn it around and ask what, then, 
would your solution to the high season crowding be? 
 I admit there are a lot of questions here, but you came to  convince us.
 If your serious in this quest for our support, the time spent answering would
 seem worthwhile.

   +++  Thank You,  * R 'n R
 _______________________________________________ >>