[at-l] 2000 Plus Or Minus

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

     When I did it in 1985-86 most of the people who I hiked with blue or 
yellow blazed simply because it was easier. It might sound good to hindsight 
philosophize about how blue-blazes can be better trails or give a better 
Appalachian experience, but the people I was standing next to when I was 
hiking the Trail, and heard them discuss why they were taking the blue-blaze, 
did it because it was less difficult and the easier/shorter way. Just the way 
it was...

      The trick in recent times is to act like you are so open-minded and 
above such petty distinctions that you don't get hung up about it and 
small-minded people do. What noble souls! Fact is people used to take the 
Trail as a serious achievement and respected it enough to honor it by doing 
it pure. That was the harder way and used to register that way and was 
respected that way because of it. Today you are sort of taken as a square or 
goof for taking that seriously. If you shut up and stay quietly to the side 
you'll be acceptable to the community who simply want to avoid the issue. 
Well I'm not afraid to say it just because some don't like hearing it... 

   The blue blazing issue is weird because it isn't necessarily a lesser 
hike. If you think about it, a through-hiker who really plans out a wide 
ranging blue-blaze alternative hike can actually end up doing a harder, 
longer hike that involves more Appalachia, socializing, or "AT experience" so 
to speak. The question then rises if this hiker should be told he didn't 
legitimately complete the AT. Technically he didn't, but technically he makes 
a case for not doing so. Also, some people who use blue-blazes are taking the 
old AT that other hikers got credit for. These hikers would technically not 
qualify for 2000 miler status after having hiked the exact same trail that 
awarded 2000 milers did. There's obviously a case here for ATC widening its 
definition of what constitutes a through-hike. This would lead to the 
possibility of new, extensive blue-blaze loops enhancing the AT and lessening 
traffic...

    What I'm getting at is let's be open minded, but let's not put down those 
who still appreciate what purism means and who hold that as important 
according to the old school. Apparently ATC still holds that as important in 
their diploma requirements. An AT through-hike or 2000 miler completion is a 
significant accomplishment. Some see that as a source of pride and value a 
diploma. Those who don't wish recognition are fine, but I tend to think that 
those who do it by the letter are also those who look into the Trail more 
deeply and perhaps inquire into its calling further. These personalities have 
proven of value to the Trail (beyond just through-hiking) before.   

    I still believe white-blazing is a harder hike and involves tougher 
choices. I would even contend that the opposite end of the spectrum tends to 
accumulate around some of the worst Trail problems that have developed in 
recent times. Hikers doing the 'party' style tend to run out of money sooner 
or drift away from the task of heading on up the Trail. So, if a contentious 
Trail figure wants to consolidate the old school into an Avery society, I see 
no harm in it. Perhaps some might look back and thank him for encouraging 
them to make it and pushing them where they would have failed without it. To 
me, to join in a call to heckle and discourage such an endeavor would 
constitute the equal opposite extreme of campfire monitors and be just as 
restricting and closed minded. 

     I don't see anything wrong with doing it pure and encouraging others to 
do so...


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