[at-l] Trail Maintenance: Blazing

[icw39@ncfreedom.net (Clark Wright)]

Well, se my other post - but one additional point.  Our national parks
struggle daily with the issue of how much access is too much access -
those parks are "for the American Public" too, but saying that does not
in and of itself answer the difficult questions, such as how much road
access; how many campgrounds; permits; do you even let cars in; do you
allow technical climbers; do you give exclusive contracts to the food
service and lodging people; etc.  Those same type issues will remain
with us always in terms of struggling to draw the right line for AT
users as well.  Bottom line:  No easy answers - tree barking or no tree
barking! :)

thru-thinker

Jim and/or Ginny Owen wrote:
> 
> Clark Wright wrote:
> >Two points seem appropriate here:  First, like many political issues,
> >the question of how often you want to see blazes can become a litmus
> >test on whether you believe, as Jim does, that if more than .01% of AT
> >hikers [i.e. more than a few out of the thousands of thrus, and tens of
> >thousands of sectioners] get lost, then there are not enough blazes, or
> >on the other end of the spectrum, that blazes should only occur where
> >there is a clear decision point [i.e., intersections with other trails,
> >crossing roads at funny angles, etc.]
> 
> Clark -
> I'm gonna confuse you because you (and Weary) are both barkin' up the wrong
> tree.
> 
> Let's make it simple - the AT is supposed to be a "blazed" trail from
> Georgia to Maine for the use and enjoyment of the American public - meaning
> "people".  Any people, any experience level, anyplace on the Trail, anytime.
>   If anyone has a problem with that "definition" then let's hear it.
> 
> Now, given that definition, Weary's apparent cavalier attitude toward
> "people" getting "lost" or misplaced" or however else you want to express
> it, is inconsistent with his responsibility as a trail maintainer.  If it's
> a public trail and it's supposed to be for "anyone", then it needs to be
> blazed so "anyone" (including the dumbest, no-load, wet-behind-the-ears city
> boy) can follow it without getting lost.  That doesn't, by the way, include
> those who get lost in shopping malls - some people can't follow their own
> noses.
> 
> If any significant number of hikers - of any level of expertise - lose the
> trail in a particular section, then the maintainer for that section is NOT
> fulfilling his/her function. Likewise, if they don't know how to paint
> blazes and aren't willing to get educated, then they're incapable of
> fulfilling the function.   And I don't care who likes this or not - if
> someone's gonna do a job then they should either do it right or get out.
> 
> Now - if Weary wants a "wilderness" trail then he should try the CDT.  On
> second thought - they're screwing that up too.  In 1992 there were 600 mile
> sections of the CDT without any marking at all.  By 1999 we didn't go for
> more than 200 miles without seeing a CDT marker.  God knows what we'll find
> in '06. Fact is that I prefer the CDT, at least in large part, "because"
> it's not "blazed" every 30 feet.  But we KNEW it was like that when we
> started - AT hikers have entirely different expectations.
> 
> For the rest - I'll suggest that you go do trailwork on trails other than
> the AT - it's a different world and the blazing variations are nearly
> infinite.  If you think the AT is variable, come to Pennsylvania - or New
> York - or West Virginia - and chase some of the off-AT blazing.
> 
> Walk softly,
> Jim
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT-L mailing list
> AT-L@mailman.backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l