[at-l] Connecticut Stealth

[RoksnRoots@aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

In a message dated 10/23/01 6:10:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
gwright@connix.com writes:


> one of the
> more frustrating things for a backpacker in CT is that camping is
> generally *NOT* allowed on any of the blue-blazed trails.  There
> are a few backcountry (if you can call it that in Connecticut)
> camping sites, and of course the shelters on the AT in Connecticut,
> but other than that it would seem to be quite difficult to do a
> multi-day hike on any of the blue-blazed trails in CT.  Does anyone
> know if the new Federal status will affect this?
> 

   *** I wouldn't hesitate to stealth. My read on this is that these laws are 
generally to keep a squatter/homeless occupation from posing as overnight 
camping. There are also liability imposed fears and restrictions. My take is 
that these are largely "look the other way" enforced laws and a good 
through-hiker could get around them. I would bet I could find enough 
sheltered and separated sites to stealth around the restriction.

    Morally, I think the honorable intention of trying to through-hike would 
absolve you of any anti-social guilt. They probably won't be looking for you 
anyway. The trick is to know where you can get away with it. Call me a 
scofflaw - but please, the day we can't camp on a distance trail on a 
through-hike to enjoy our American Heritage is the day %&*$#^  ^*^#^*  #@%*. 
I think our founding fathers would be shocked to learn that people were being 
arrested for camping in the hills on a hike! You will find the restriction of 
swimming or denial of overnight rough camping is generally for the comfort of 
an institution or such rather than the guarding of your freedoms. The fact 
that there is a trail there keeps you from just being a bold violator.

    As I prove above, sometimes it's best to just shut up and do it...  ;)  


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---