[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[at-l] Purism...to me.
I tend to agree, but then again we always had a hoot discussing just how
pure is pure . . . here are some examples of what various hikers I
talked with would discuss, in all seriousness:
1) If you are going around a blown down tree, do you have to walk up to
the tree, then back up, go around, and then back up to the other side of
the tree to be sure and cover all the Trail?
2) If you catch a ride, and enter the pickup truck on the south side of
the road, but then exit the right door on a car coming back the other
way when you return to the Trail, do you have to cross back to the south
side of the road and then walk across the road northward?
3) Do you have to hike it all in the same direction?
4) Several shelters have a "south entrance path" and a "north entrance
path." Sometimes with up to a mile of AT between them . . . do you have
to enter and exit each shelter on the same pathway to avoid missing any
of the "real" AT?
5) If the ATC has designated or recognized a high water detour, or bad
weather detour, does that count?
6) What if you have not seen a white blaze in a bit, and then start
seeing them again? Do you have to backtrack to be sure you were not
off-Trail for a few hundred feet?
7) If you head into the woods to take a crap, do you have to mark
exactly where you got off the Trail to be sure and not end up back on it
a few feet further along?
8) Do you have to hike the approach trail at Amicalola Falls?
9) Do you have to carry a full pack, including tent or tarp and
sleeping bag, up Katahdin?
10) Do you have to cross all waterbodies without the aid of bridges or
ferries?
11) Do you have to slog through all mud-puddles in the Trail?
12) Do you have to do it all without getting off for any length of
time?
13) Do you have to do it all without staying in any motels or hostels?
Last summer alone, I actually heard various hikers discuss all of the
above at some point or the other; instead of laughing at some of these,
it is indeed interesting to see just how many different ways there are
to "draw the line" in defining a "true" thru-hike. I think some people
value consensus on which of the above to worry about more than others .
. .
And then, the vaguest issue of all: Just what is the official ATC
approved route for that particular year, and just how in the heck does
one verify it? And by what date each year does the ATC put out it's
official re-routes? Or, if such re-routes are ongoing during each year,
how the heck does anyone say they did 100% of that year's "official"
route?
Moral of all of the above: You can go insane trying to slice this issue
down to finer and finer levels of "purity!" And if you spend a lot of
time doing that, you will miss out on a lot of the real AT experience!
:)
thru-thinker
DTimm65344@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 03/24/02 12:44:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> AThiker@smithville.net writes:
>
> > HOW 'BOUT THEM HOOSIERS!!! FINAL FOUR, BABY!!!
> >
> I'm in Felix's camp on this one (except on that Hoosier stuff (Buckeyes,
> baby, Buckeyes)) - hence my redo of Blood when the legs were able. If I
> apply for the patch/certification when I'm done (I have no idea if it will
> matter to me in ten years, don't know if it matters to me now) I figure I
> will need to be honest about it. At the very least, if I tell someone later
> in life that I've hiked the AT, I want that to be a true statement
> (otherwise, why bother telling anybody). It's called integrity. If you
> ain't got that, you ain't got much.
>
> Hike happy and HYOH (I treat the blue blazes as gravy on top) -
>
> Black&blue
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> ---
> _______________________________________________
> >From the AT-L mailing list est. 1995
> Need help? http://www.at-l.org
> Archives: http://www.backcountry.net/arch/at/
> Change your options or unsubscribe:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l