[at-l] slackpacking: opinions on it ?

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

In a message dated 12/31/01 4:14:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
PMAnderson@apshealthcare.com writes:


> I don't see how it's related to trail mystique at all.....

  
    *** I do. It's the old question of how you do the Trail and what you have 
in mind while doing it. This is a hot topic and I don't intend to light any 
fires of controversy. I'll just point out that the more you haul and become 
self-contained, the more the Trail takes on the illusion of being a remote 
wild trek through the Appalachians. I did the opposite of slacking when I 
carried from 1 to 2 weeks supplies at a haul trying to avoid lingering in 
civilization in '86. I climbed Katahdin up and over from the other side with 
2 weeks food strapped to my pack. I found this prolonged the in-woods 
experience, giving me more time away from civilization. What the poster 
infers is that slackpacking draws more dependency on civilized intervention 
with a hike and therefore detracts from the feeling of detachment. Yes, the 
Trail is criss-crossed with roads and places to assist hikers, but that is 
besides the point. Cross the roads quickly and you are connecting a long 
corridor of unbroken forest and mountain lands. Keep going, and soon you get 
a feel gotten nowhere else. This is why some feel it somewhat imperative to 
discourage near-Trail development. You can add but you can't subtract...



> 
> Do you mean thru hiking mystique?   nobody outside the thru-hiking world -
> especially the AT thru world - even knows what slackpacking is or even
> thinks its an issue. 


      ***  I'm not entirely averse to slackpacking-type hiking. The type 
{Weary &} I would probably endorse is the Warren Doyle supported hike where 
hikers were met at day's end with a resupply van. You see, this type of 
technique does use civilization to enable the hike, *but* it also has the 
effect of keeping hikers in the woods longer. If a van is meeting you after a 
long slackpack day, and you sleep in the woods at the crossing, you are 
effectively staying on the Trail more than town stopping hikers, creating a 
more immersed experience. However, this still isn't the independent, 
self-reliant task of a (dare I say it) "traditional" hike...

      The problem with the issue of Trail approach is a sticky one where most 
people throw up their arms and recite, "well, just hike your own hike", or 
"perhaps that is meant for another place", without realizing that the AT *is* 
that place and their input *does* have an effect. A solo long distance 
backpacker tends to conform to the wild, remote Trail -and its 'mystique'- 
best. What you say above is too true for comfort. Very few outside the AT 
community also realize the Trail's need for space and how crucial it is for 
its existence. You see, the Trail's intention is to provide as deep a woods 
an experience as possible and is not there for providing a comfort level for 
all uses, -even if those users have no problem seeing it that way. Just read 
the thoughts of Benton MacKaye (the Trail's founder) if you have any doubts...



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