[at-l] Re: AT-L digest, Vol 1 #1041 - 32 msgs

[wolferrae@earthlink.net (Rogene Beers)]

BTW Happy belated Father's Day.  I was workifn so didn't get thsi taken car
of properly.

There's two new movies out that you might be interested in on is with
Harrison Ford and it deplicts the K219 submarine incident that sank off the
cosat in 86 and the other is called "Windtalkers" about the navaho code
takers in WWII.  I can't find them anywhere in my town right now but will
keep an eye out to see them if i can.  I like hisotrical stuff that GOd has
a hnd in.
Lov Ya, Bruce W.
Rogene
----- Original Message -----
From: <at-l-request@mailman.backcountry.net>
To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 1:02 PM
Subject: AT-L digest, Vol 1 #1041 - 32 msgs


> Send AT-L mailing list submissions to
> at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> at-l-request@mailman.backcountry.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> at-l-admin@mailman.backcountry.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of AT-L digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: 1936 Scout 'Hike' (Rami)
>    2. Re: What Bugs Us About Max? (Rami)
>    3. Re: Maine land prices (Texas Twelve-Step)
>    4. Why Didn't They Contest Shaffer? (RoksnRoots@aol.com)
>    5. Re: What Bugs Us About Max? (Bob C.)
>    6. Re[2]: [at-l] Maine land prices (Bob C.)
>    7. Re: Maine land prices (Raphael Bustin)
>    8. Re[2]: [at-l] Maine land prices (Raphael Bustin)
>    9. Re: What I hope to be my last post on the 1st Thru
>        (long) (saunterer@jimbullard.org)
>   10. Re: Upper body workout during thru-hike (Clark Wright)
>   11. Brawny's AT Journal (David Mauldin)
>   12. Re: ATN article, 1936 Scout Hike (Clark Wright)
>   13. Re: Which footware to buy? (Clark Wright)
>   14. Re: Maine land prices (Clark Wright)
>   15. Boy Scout Debate (saunterer@jimbullard.org)
>   16. Re: Brawny's AT Journal (AHuthmaker@aol.com)
>   17. Boy Scout Debate (RoksnRoots@aol.com)
>   18. POG and Belle Chere (Linda Benschop)
>   19. Osprey (Linda Benschop)
>   20. Re: Osprey (Amy)
>   21. Re: POG and Belle Chere (KarenS62@aol.com)
>   22. pictures (Wayne Bell)
>   23. Re: Boy Scout Debate (Bob C.)
>   24. Re: Boy Scout Debate (saunterer@jimbullard.org)
>   25. Father's Day (Lamar Powell)
>   26. Re: Re: Boy Scout Debate (Jim Lynch)
>   27. Check Writing Spree (Where the Mouth is) (Raphael Bustin)
>   28. Re: Maine land prices (Texas Twelve-Step)
>   29. Re: Boy Scout Debate (Arthur Gaudet)
>   30. Re: Maine land prices (Texas Twelve-Step)
>   31. Re-Supplying in Maine (Marielle and Paul)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:19:12 -0500
> From: Rami <rbenhameda@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] 1936 Scout 'Hike'
> To: kahley <kahley@ptd.net>, AT-L@backcountry.net
>
> Exactly one of the questions I had...
> This was supposed to have been organized as some form of publicity, yet
none occurred.
> Scouts goals are badges and awards.  When it became public knowledge that
Earl had hiked the whole thing, the Scouts training should have kicked in
and they would have made their claim known.
>
> At the very least, someone's mom should have said "My boy did that first!"
>
> Human nature is always the same no matter what generation we're talking
about...
> people prefer to talk about themselves over any other subject
> Parent's look out for the interests of their kids
> In athletics, recognition is the goal.  How many marathoners do it in
private?  How many golfers don't brag about their score?  How many peak
baggers don't log their latest peak?
>
> For NO ONE to have tried to claim this prize, would have required all 6 of
the scouts plus Mr. O'Grady (described as always there when needed, and very
persuasive) and the Vet support crew plus all of the associated family
members to go against this nature.
>
> Had this been described as a "communal nature walk" rather than a
publicity event, I would have no difficulty with the fact that it never came
to light until nearly 60 years after the fact.  I'm not saying it couldn't
have happened, look at the Navajo Code Talkers as an example where dozens of
people kept a secret for decades, but we're not talking about a secret are
we?  We're talking about an *event* which was organized as being for
publicity not secret.
>
> Still none of this is proof of anything.  There probably is never going to
be definitive proof on EITHER side of this argument.  There will be facts
which support the claim and facts which contradict it and it will be up to
each individual to choose which they believe.
>
>
>
> -r (can anyone tell me where to get a subscription to "detective
magazine"?)
>
>
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: kahley
>   To: AT-L@backcountry.net
>   Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 9:46 AM
>   Subject: Re: [at-l] 1936 Scout 'Hike'
>
>
>   One question and if it's been A&A'ed..sorry.
>   Why, if these scouts hiked the whole AT,
>   did none of them ever say anything about it
>   when the news hit that Earl had done it and
>   was regarded as the first?  It would seem to
>   me that the odds of none of the people involved
>   as well as none of the people associated with
>   the effort keeping mum is pretty slight.  I'd think
>   that such an accomplishment would be treasured
>   and the claim of another person would be countered
>   immediately.
>   If my kid did something so noteworthy, and then I
>   hear someone else taking credit, I's speak up,
>   wouldn't you?
>   Regardless...Earl had to prove it.  The scouts should
>   have been required to do likewise.
>   Shame on the ATC!
>   _______________________________________________
>   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
>
>   Stay on topic!
>
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:40:38 -0500
> From: Rami <rbenhameda@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] What Bugs Us About Max?
> To: AT-L@backcountry.net
>
>
>   [R&R:]
>       I suspect that even some of Max Gordon's worst critics are bugged by
some
>   of his background and comments about his hike. <snip>  Let's look at
some of the
>   reasons we have trouble dismissing Max:
>
>       8) The pin given to him in North Carolina is material evidence and
it has
>   a memory attached. One is left to ask, "how did they get to NC if indeed
they
>   were trying to hike down the AT? Maybe Mr McQueen's descendants could
>   elaborate?
>
>
> [Rami:]    Is this really material evidence?  Does it have an inscription
which identifies it as being from Mr. McQueen from NC in 1936?  Could it be
a trinket which has no connection at all?  I agree that it should be
investigated, but finding  Mr. James McQueen or his daughter Flora might be
a fairly large task....
>
>   [R&R:]     All considered, we are left with only a few possibilities.
Either he's
>   lying (CHaynes said he learned about it by word of mouth); he's
>   reconstructing and revising a totally different hike or hikes; time has
made
>   him feel safe redefining a smaller hike as an end to end; he had some
kind of
>   late life mental failure that would lead him to attempt such a bogus
claim;
>   or he's humbly telling the truth - and that bugs me...
>
>
> [Rami:]
> The possibility which seems most likely to me is that Mr. Gordon and some
of his scout buddies were prolific hikers.  They probably had a grand
adventure which seemed to him to be longer than it was.
> Then, over the course of the years, memory blurred and a hike ON the
Appalachian trail became a thru-hike OF the Appalachian trail, but the truth
will probably never be known.
>
> -r
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: "Texas Twelve-Step" <texas12step@hotmail.com>
> To: <AT-L@Backcountry.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine land prices
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:07:57 -0400
>
> RoksnRoots wrote:
> > Texas Twelve-Step wrote:
>
> >> Unfortunately for the perservationists, this will
> >> mean that they'll actually have to pay for what they
> >> want.
>
> >> Legalized force is *so* much more appealing, isn't it?
>
> > This is fantasyland voodoo politics. What Texas won't
> > explain after his reckless attempt is exactly how and
> > where these funds will come from?
>
> I've explained it many times to both you and others on
> this list. The funds will come from those who actually
> have an interest in preserving the land. What right do
> you have to force others pay to satisfy your desires?
> And if you claim such a right, then by what right can
> you oppose someone else forcing you to pay for something
> you disapprove of?
>
> And before you go on about how your goals are for the
> "public good," I want to know what ethical leg you
> plan to stand on when the voters decide that opening
> the trail to ATVs is for the "public good?" Or is this
> simply a case of you knowing what's best for them?
>
> > Simply look at Saddleback to see that such an unrealistic
> > approach left in the hands of individuals will inevitably
> > lead to bloated asking prices well-beyond reasonability
> > or means for those attempting to save undeveloped lands.
>
> If someone goes to a car dealer and flashes a dog-choking
> motherlode of bills while emphatically saying that he's
> just *got* to have a specific, unique car on the lot,
> you can bet that the dealer will charge a hefty, non-
> negotiable premium. The asking price for Saddleback was
> bloated because the buyer had a thirteen-figure annual
> budget and declared that it had legislatively compelled
> itself to purchase that particular piece of land.
>
> Trail advocates *insisted* that be the case.
>
> Had Breen instead been approached by potential buyers
> of limited means, he almost certainly wouldn't have
> demanded such an extravagant price unless he truly
> didn't want to sell the land (which we know was not
> the case, or so folks claim). A private interest may
> well have been able to negotiate an affordable price
> for the Saddleback corridor -- perhaps even near the
> legendary $300 an acre.
>
> > What Texas is saying is, that when these deals fail
> > and the lands fall into ridgetop condo developments,
> > everything will be pure because they were done through
> > the all cleansing medium of free market enterprise
> > which has no bad outcomes through magical business
> > theory thinking.
>
> Where did I say that? I think loss of undeveloped land
> sucks. I think a lot of things suck, but that doesn't
> give me the right to initiate force (either personally
> or by proxy) to coerce others to do what I think is
> good.
>
> > This thinking is very attractive because it frees the viewer
> > from having to deal with the difficult inconsistencies and
> > conflicts involved in actually trying to do right and work a
> > balanced right to exist in for nature amongst man and his
> > destructive ways.
>
> Nature has no such right. It has no rights, period.
>
> > I think Weary pointed out before, that if this were the
> > desired and fair approach then perhaps big business should
> > pay for all the acid rain damage it does and other direct
> > result damages instead of taxpayer funding or passing costs
> > onto the consumer. In the same sense, these developers will
> > then also have to pay for what they want. Perhaps you have
> > something there after all Texas!
>
> Of course I do.
>
> > There comes a time when the government simply must step
> > in because the desired conservation outcome will falter
> > without their assistance.
>
> Desired...by whom?
>
> > This isn't perfect and not everybody will be happy, but
> > it's necessary.
>
> "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs."
>
> > The falsehood in Texas' method is the trust that the
> > individual will do the right thing and work for the
> > best outcome for all. This never works.
>
> I've never claimed that the individual will necessarily
> do the right thing.
>
> > What Texas does is suggest a tyranny of the individual
> > instead of the state.
>
> How do private individuals tyrannize you?
>
> > In the case of land conservation, the benefit for the
> > public outweighs on all counts that of the individual
> > in areas where manifest destiny of topography, geographical
> > location and quality, dictates natural preservation.
>
> Sez *you.*
>
> > Texas merely invites ruthless speculation in areas where
> > it isn't appropriate and abuse of the free market system.
>
> > It's backwards reactionary thinking in an age of global
> > environmental decline and antithetical to the AT -which
> > many enjoy but then unexplainably take stances against
> > what created it in their personal views...
>
> Force did not create the Appalachian Trail, but force is
> quickly destroying that which I value about it.
>
> -TXIIS
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> From: RoksnRoots@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:27:23 EDT
> To: rbenhameda@comcast.net
> CC: AT-L@backcountry.net
> Subject: [at-l] Why Didn't They Contest Shaffer?
>
> In a message dated 6/15/2002 1:21:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> rbenhameda@comcast.net writes:
>
>
> > For NO ONE to have tried to claim this prize, would have required all 6
of
> > the scouts plus Mr. O'Grady (described as always there when needed, and
> > very persuasive) and the Vet support crew plus all of the associated
family
> > members to go against this nature.
> >
>
>     *** WWll was so psychologically traumatizing that it caused the Trail
to
> go unattended for almost a decade. This same societal tumult that took at
> least two of the hike partcipants lives was probably a big shock back then
> and set many things back or even erased them from immediate concern.
Coming
> so close to the alleged hike it probably overwhelmed it and made it
> insignificant in their memories. With many of the participants gone, and
WWll
> serving as a shadowing event, it's possible the hike was overlooked for
all
> intents and purposes.
>
>     What this looks like it could be is a reluctance of the involved
> participants to bring down a celebrated achievement done by a solo WWll
> veteran in order to submit a truck supported and undocumented group hike
that
> would have melted in with other Trail techniques at the time. The troop
was
> shattered by the war and Pop was probably too far away and otherwise
occupied
> to go back and take the pains it would have taken to contest Shaffer's
hike
> (if he even heard of it). Maybe they didn't bother. Stranger things have
> happened...
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 15:36:11 -0400
> From: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> Reply-To: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] What Bugs Us About Max?
>
> "...Is  he  lying  about this too?" asks RnR, as he ponders the
possibility that
> Max Gordon and a team of Boy Scouts thru hiked the trail in 1936.
>
> I don't think it necessary to assume Max was lying in order to disbelieve
that a
> thru hike happened in 1936.
>
> I  think  it more likely that as a 15-year-old and the youngest member of
a team
> of  older scouts he never understood the nature of what was being
undertaken and
> what  was  accomplished.  In  his  mind  he translates a summer of hiking
on the
> Appalachian Trail with doing all of the Appalachian Trail.
>
> Possibly  the original goal was to do "all" the trail. The fact that they
didn't
> may explain why the adventure -- planned as a promotion -- never was
publicized.
>
> Nor, does the fact that his school mates suddenly looked on him with new
respect
> upon  his return tell me anything about the the nature of the adventure.
If they
> spent  121  days,  the  Scouts  had  hiked at least 1,000 miles --
certainly far
> enough to win the awe of Bronx compatriots.
>
> I  occasionally tell the story of Tux, who I met in 1993. After hiking 800
miles
> and  losing  50 pounds, his doctor told him to throw away his heart
medicine. He
> did so, and then quit the trail.
>
> Thru  hikers who hear the story aren't impressed. Others are amazed.
"Wow," they
> say, "he actually hiked 800 miles!"
>
> At  age 15 in 1944, I was by far the youngest of several kids who rode our
bikes
> on  a 250 mile round trip to a campground in the shadow of the
Presidentials. We
> spent  two  weeks hiking daily. I have but the vaguest memories of the
trails we
> took.  I remember watching a sunrise on Mt. Washington. I know we did a
traverse
> of  the  range,  but the trails to the summit are a complete mystery. I
was just
> tagging along. Wherever others went, I went.
>
> My  suspicion is that Max was in the same boat. It may not be fading
memory that
> blocks the details. He may have never bothered to notice in the first
place.
>
> Weary
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 16:03:00 -0400
> From: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> Reply-To: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> Subject: Re[2]: [at-l] Maine land prices
>
> There  is  not  a  government  in the world that does not reserve for
itself the
> right  to take private land for what it perceives is the common good.
Frankly, I
> find  it hard to imagine a society that could function without giving
government
> this right.
>
> Probably humans first formed governments to regulate the distribution and
use of
> land.  It  is  a  role that continues to this day and will continue until
humans
> finally are eliminated from this earth.
>
> Several  European Kings proclaimed their ownership of the lands that we
now call
> North  America.  After  numerous  wars  among themselves -- wars in which
nary a
> king,  but  numerous  land  users  died -- we gradually evolved into the
present
> stand off.
>
> Perhaps  12-step  could  explain  how  a  half millennia of wars,
destruction of
> native  peoples,  and  exercise  of  sheer  government  power somehow
created an
> absolute right of untouchable private property rights.
>
> I agree a wise government needs to use its powers carefully. But I have no
doubt
> that the power is needed and it's use for creating roads and trails and
parks is
> appropriate.
>
> Weary
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 16:18:40 -0400
> To: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> From: Raphael Bustin <rafe.bustin@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine land prices
>
> At 02:07 PM 6/15/2002 -0400, Texas Twelve-Step wrote:
>
> >If someone goes to a car dealer and flashes a dog-choking
> >motherlode of bills while emphatically saying that he's
> >just *got* to have a specific, unique car on the lot,
> >you can bet that the dealer will charge a hefty, non-
> >negotiable premium. The asking price for Saddleback was
> >bloated because the buyer had a thirteen-figure annual
> >budget and declared that it had legislatively compelled
> >itself to purchase that particular piece of land.
>
>
> Because the "buyer" was the US government, does that
> give the seller the moral right to take shameless advantage
> of the situation?
>
>
> >Nature has no such right. It has no rights, period.
>
>
> But if we keep screwing over nature, we will only be
> screwing over ourselves.  We can run, but we can't hide.
>
>
> >How do private individuals tyrannize you?
>
>
> Oh please, use your imagination, Texas.  Are you
> claiming that all evil flows from government?  Mind you,
> I have heard that argument before...
>
>
> rafe b.
> aka terrapin
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 16:21:58 -0400
> To: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> From: Raphael Bustin <rafe.bustin@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re[2]: [at-l] Maine land prices
>
> At 04:03 PM 6/15/2002 -0400, Weary wrote:
>
> >There  is  not  a  government  in the world that does not reserve for
> >itself the
> >right  to take private land for what it perceives is the common good.
> >Frankly, I
> >find  it hard to imagine a society that could function without giving
> >government
> >this right.
> >
> >Probably humans first formed governments to regulate the distribution and
> >use of
> >land.  It  is  a  role that continues to this day and will continue until
> >humans
> >finally are eliminated from this earth.
> >
> >Several  European Kings proclaimed their ownership of the lands that we
> >now call
> >North  America.  After  numerous  wars  among themselves -- wars in which
> >nary a
> >king,  but  numerous  land  users  died -- we gradually evolved into the
> >present
> >stand off.
> >
> >Perhaps  12-step  could  explain  how  a  half millennia of wars,
> >destruction of
> >native  peoples,  and  exercise  of  sheer  government  power somehow
> >created an
> >absolute right of untouchable private property rights.
> >
> >I agree a wise government needs to use its powers carefully. But I have
no
> >doubt
> >that the power is needed and it's use for creating roads and trails and
> >parks is
> >appropriate.
>
>
>
> I'm not in the habit of quoting posts verbatim, but I have to say:  nicely
> said.
>
> (And well worth repeating.)
>
>
> rafe b.
> aka terrapin
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 19:48:09 -0400
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> From: saunterer@jimbullard.org
> Subject: Re: [at-l] What I hope to be my last post on the 1st Thru
>   (long)
>
> At 10:08 AM 06/15/2002 -0400, Bob C. wrote:
> >"...  How  often is it true that there is snow on most the AT (in Maine)
> >in June
> >that is drifted and requires breaking trail?" someone asks.
> >
> >The answer is never.
>
> Thank you Weary for answering that and validating what I thought.  There
> appear to be several on the list who want to believe this so badly that
> they will believe even a remotely possible explanation that supports it.
>
> sAunTerer
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:57:38 -0400
> From: Clark Wright <icw39@ncfreedom.net>
> To: "BRANDI N. RESA" <bresa@zimmercos.com>
> CC: "'AT-L@MAILMAN.BACKCOUNTRY.NET'" <AT-L@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Upper body workout during thru-hike
>
> All I can say is that I did not have enough excess energy to worry about
> that kind of thing! :)  I did work out my own routine of using my Leki
> poles harder than normal on some long upgradient sections, and that did
> add a bit pf work load to my arms, but nothing to really write home
> about.  My upper body SHRUNK due to the 24 or so pounds I lost! :)
>
> Thru-thinker
>
> "BRANDI N. RESA" wrote:
> >
> > I have read several thru journals and at least one mentions doing
pushups.
> > Although I do not consider myself to have an incredibly strong upper
body, I
> > do try to maintain decent strength through lifting, swimming, etc...
> >
> > Thoughts on how to maintain upper body strength during a thru hike?
> >
> > As always, thanks!
> >
> > BuffaloBrandi
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> > Stay on topic!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> From: "David Mauldin" <rainmaker@rabun.net>
> To: "ATL" <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:57:53 -0400
> Subject: [at-l] Brawny's AT Journal
>
> Brawny's journal has been updated, and now includes entries for the =
> Springer Mtn., GA - Delaware Water Gap, PA portion of her hike.
>
> It can be accessed here:
>
> http://www.trailquest.net/BRindex.html .
>
> David Mauldin
> www.trailquest.net
> "To Walk In The Wilderness Is Freedom"
>
>
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:02:44 -0400
> From: Clark Wright <icw39@ncfreedom.net>
> To: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> CC: at-l@backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] ATN article, 1936 Scout Hike
>
> OK, I tried to supress this urge for several days, but it's leaking out
> tonight! :)
>
> WHO CARES?!  :)  I'm "quite certain" NONE of us are CERTAIN in the
> truest sense of the word . . . and the rest is more of that ink blot
> stuff! :)
>
> Earl and the Scouts probably all had a good time hiking, though! :)
>
> Thru-Thinker
>
> "Bob C." wrote:
> >
> > "...I  believe  Weary,  you  are injecting your own personal technique
into this
> > claimed   hike  for  reasons  of  personal  validation  rather  than
accurately
> > investigating  whether the 1936 hike happened from the available
evidence." says
> > R nR.
> >
> > Many  thanks  to RnR for injecting a bit of levity into these
discussions. I had
> > to chuckle at his observation. The last thing I need at this stage of my
life is
> > "personal validation," especially on something as insignificant as how I
spent a
> > six  months  hiking vacation. It boggles my mind that I even managed to
stick it
> > out for six months.
> >
> > I'm  quite  certain  the  1936  hike  never happened for many reasons.
First the
> > existence  of the trail was largely unknown. It had not even been
finished. It's
> > hard  to  conceive  a group of scout leaders taking scouts on a
2,000-mile, four
> > month thru hike of a trail that hadn't been completed.
> >
> > It  is conceivable that those leaders might have taken these scouts on
visits to
> > selected segments of this trail -- and that the youngest of the group
might have
> > become  confused  about just what it was they were about. What might the
purpose
> > have been? One can only speculate. Had the adults read Benton McKaye,
they might
> > have  been  scouting out the work camps McKaye had dreamed of creating.
Perhaps,
> > they were just checking on places for future hiking excursions.
> >
> > I just can't conceive of a desire to "thru hike" an incompleted trail as
being a
> > goal that sensible troop leaders from a big city neighborhood would
choose -- or
> > even think about.
> >
> > The  journal of Eric Ryback, 17, hiking 23 years later, describes the
difficulty
> > of  finding the trail in Maine, climbing Katahdin and crossing the
Kennebec even
> > then.
> >
> > I  can  find  no  evidence  in the ATN article, to suggest that more
than a tiny
> > piece of Maine was traversed by the 1936 Scouts. No mention is made of
Katahdin,
> > the Kennebec, the poorly marked trail, the bugs ...., nothing except the
patches
> > of  drifted snow. Eric, judging from his account, was a powerful
17-year-old. He
> > traversed  the  30-mile  Mahoosuc  Range  in  one  day. But he still
required 20
> > percent more time to do Maine than the scouts claim.
> >
> > Weary
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> > Stay on topic!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:22:15 -0400
> From: Clark Wright <icw39@ncfreedom.net>
> To: Daniel Eisenbud <eisenbud+at-l@cs.swarthmore.edu>
> CC: David Smith <dsmit19@columbus.rr.com>, at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Which footware to buy?
>
> New PA State Motto:  "Pennsylvania ROCKS!"  :)
>
> Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> >
> > If you're willing to forego ankle support and waterproofness, and they
> > fit your feet well, I'm a big fan of Montrail Vitesse trail-runners.
> > They dry out fast when they do get wet, they're light, they're
> > well-cushioned, they have good soles.  They seem to be somewhat sturdier
> > than the New Balance trail-runners, but on the other hand those come in
> > multiple widths, so if you have very wide or narrow feet they might be a
> > better bet.  Personally, though, if I were thru-hiking again, I would
> > switch back to heavier boots temporarily just for Pennsylvania.
> >
> > -Heavy
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 10:26:31AM -0400, David Smith
<dsmit19@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > I am new to the list and have enjoyed lurking for a while..I've been
> > > away from hiking for a while but am thinking/contemplating a thru-hike
> > > in 2003 and would like to get suggestions on boots....I know this
> > > subject has probably been kicked to death in the past but any
> > > suggestions would be appreciated!
> > >
> > > So far I am thinking about Fusions or Vasque Sundowners...with
> > > smartwool socks and no liners...
> > >
> > > any help would be appriciated!
> >
> > --
> > Daniel E. Eisenbud
> > eisenbud@cs.swarthmore.edu
> >
> > "We should go forth on the shortest walk perchance, in the spirit of
> > undying adventure, never to return,--prepared to send back our embalmed
> > hearts only as relics to our desolate kingdoms."
> >                                         --Henry David Thoreau, "Walking"
> > _______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> > Stay on topic!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:32:34 -0400
> From: Clark Wright <icw39@ncfreedom.net>
> To: Raphael Bustin <rafe.bustin@verizon.net>
> CC: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine land prices
>
> I, for one, am glad I live in a land where the government's (valid)
> condemntation powers are constrained by the Constitutional right to just
> compensation.  Governments need powers of condemnation and land owners
> need the protection of just compensation and reasonable statutory limits
> on how the condemnation process is carried out, and for what purposes.
> Trails, and parks, like roads, are valid purposes.  Where the rubber
> meets the road (as recent supreme court decisions vividly indicate) is
> in determining just what is a taking when the government does not do it
> directly, and just what is just compensation . . .
>
> Again, thank goodness we live in a place where the debates are about
> those finer points - at least most of the time! :)
>
> thru-thinker
>
> p.s.  Happy father's day to all out there - let's face it, there is at
> least ONE father in everyone's life! :)
>
> Raphael Bustin wrote:
> >
> > At 04:03 PM 6/15/2002 -0400, Weary wrote:
> >
> > >There  is  not  a  government  in the world that does not reserve for
> > >itself the
> > >right  to take private land for what it perceives is the common good.
> > >Frankly, I
> > >find  it hard to imagine a society that could function without giving
> > >government
> > >this right.
> > >
> > >Probably humans first formed governments to regulate the distribution
and
> > >use of
> > >land.  It  is  a  role that continues to this day and will continue
until
> > >humans
> > >finally are eliminated from this earth.
> > >
> > >Several  European Kings proclaimed their ownership of the lands that we
> > >now call
> > >North  America.  After  numerous  wars  among themselves -- wars in
which
> > >nary a
> > >king,  but  numerous  land  users  died -- we gradually evolved into
the
> > >present
> > >stand off.
> > >
> > >Perhaps  12-step  could  explain  how  a  half millennia of wars,
> > >destruction of
> > >native  peoples,  and  exercise  of  sheer  government  power somehow
> > >created an
> > >absolute right of untouchable private property rights.
> > >
> > >I agree a wise government needs to use its powers carefully. But I have
no
> > >doubt
> > >that the power is needed and it's use for creating roads and trails and
> > >parks is
> > >appropriate.
> >
> > I'm not in the habit of quoting posts verbatim, but I have to say:
nicely
> > said.
> >
> > (And well worth repeating.)
> >
> > rafe b.
> > aka terrapin
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> > Stay on topic!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:37:16 -0400
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> From: saunterer@jimbullard.org
> Subject: [at-l] Boy Scout Debate
>
> Jim Lynch:
> >Its very difficult (impossible?) to prove a negative. That's why we ask
> >for evidence (factual, repeatable, verifiable...) that someone *did*
> >something. We don't ask others to gather evidence that they did not.
>
> Yep!  TO BE ON RECORD AS THE 1ST PERSON IN HISTORY TO HAVE DONE SOMETHING,
> THERE SHOULD BE A "RECORD" (beyond your own word) THAT YOU ACTALLY DID
> IT.   Seems like basic logic to me.
>
> R&R:
> >I've re-read the ATN article and it suddenly struck me that maybe aging
> >Max remembered the hike dates incorrectly. ....
>
> I've considered that he might even have had the year wrong but how far are
> we going to make allowances for his lack any supporting evidence?  Note
> that Weary has told us that the answer to how often is the AT in Maine
> mostly snow covered in June is "never".
>
> More R&R:
> >I suspect that even some of Max Gordon's worst critics are bugged by some
> >of his background and comments about his hike. There's definitely a
conflict
> >here where something has to be wrong one way or the other. My thoughts
here
> >are that Max wasn't written off as a nut immediately because he provided
us
> >just enough facts to make us wonder. His background raises questions of
> >whether what he is saying is actually true or not. Let's look at some of
the
> >reasons we have trouble dismissing Max:
>
> But the other hiking exploits he tells about (50 out of 52 weekends, 72
> miles in 18 hours) that are quoted as lending credence to his claim also
> require that we believe what he says in the absence of evidence.  I don't
> think he was deliberately lying or a nut but I don't think reversing the
> burden of proof is a fair or accurate way to record the early history of
> the trail.  Note: It was not immediately accepted for inclusion on the
list
> after publication of the article.  Read "Paper Trail" on page 7 of the
> March/April 2001 ATN for an explanation of why it was added to the list 6
> years after the article.
>
> Rami:
> >For NO ONE to have tried to claim this prize, would have required all 6
of
> >the scouts plus Mr. O'Grady (described as always there when needed, and
> >very persuasive) and the Vet support crew plus all of the associated
> >family members to go against this nature.
> >Had this been described as a "communal nature walk" rather than a
> >publicity event, I would have no difficulty with the fact that it never
> >came to light until nearly 60 years after the fact. I'm not saying it
> >couldn't have happened, look at the Navajo Code Talkers as an example
> >where dozens of people kept a secret for decades, but we're not talking
> >about a secret are we? We're talking about an *event* which was organized
> >as being for publicity not secret.
>
> Very true.
>
> Rami:
> >8) The pin given to him in North Carolina is material evidence and it has
> >a memory attached. One is left to ask, "how did they get to NC if indeed
they
> >were trying to hike down the AT? Maybe Mr McQueen's descendants could
> >elaborate?
> >
> >[Rami:] Is this really material evidence? Does it have an inscription
> >which identifies it as being from Mr. McQueen from NC in 1936? Could it
be
> >a trinket which has no connection at all?
>
> Also true.  We have only his word that is where and when it was given to
him.
>
> R&R:
> >*** WWll was so psychologically traumatizing that it caused the Trail to
> >go unattended for almost a decade. This same societal tumult that took at
> >least two of the hike partcipants lives was probably a big shock back
then
> >and set many things back or even erased them from immediate concern.
Coming
> >so close to the alleged hike it probably overwhelmed it and made it
> >insignificant in their memories.
>
> But the hike happened before WWII while the AT was still being built, not
> during a decade of neglect.
>
> Weary:
> >Possibly the original goal was to do "all" the trail. The fact that they
> >didn't
> >may explain why the adventure -- planned as a promotion -- never was
> >publicized.
> >Nor, does the fact that his school mates suddenly looked on him with new
> >respect
> >upon his return tell me anything about the the nature of the adventure.
If
> >they
> >spent 121 days, the Scouts had hiked at least 1,000 miles -- certainly
far
> >enough to win the awe of Bronx compatriots.
> >I occasionally tell the story of Tux, who I met in 1993. After hiking 800
> >miles
> >and losing 50 pounds, his doctor told him to throw away his heart
> >medicine. He
> >did so, and then quit the trail.
> >Thru hikers who hear the story aren't impressed. Others are amazed.
"Wow,"
> >they
> >say, "he actually hiked 800 miles!"
> >At age 15 in 1944, I was by far the youngest of several kids who rode our
> >bikes
> >on a 250 mile round trip to a campground in the shadow of the
> >Presidentials. We
> >spent two weeks hiking daily. I have but the vaguest memories of the
> >trails we
> >took. I remember watching a sunrise on Mt. Washington. I know we did a
> >traverse
> >of the range, but the trails to the summit are a complete mystery. I was
just
> >tagging along. Wherever others went, I went.
> >My suspicion is that Max was in the same boat. It may not be fading
memory
> >that
> >blocks the details. He may have never bothered to notice in the first
place.
>
> I think Weary has pegged it.  They set out to do it all and quite probably
> did a lot of it, perhaps even most of it.  When they didn't do it all
"Pop"
> O'Grady put the best face on it to make the boys feel good about their
> achievement as something to be proud of (as well they should) and
> undoubtedly the schoolmates would be duly impressed by a hike of 800, 1000
> or even 1500 miles.  It would have the effect on his classmates, teachers
> and his self confidence that he reports but would not have rated reporting
> to the ATC or to the media as a BSA thru-hike coup.
>
> FACT: So far there is nothing that constitutes a record of Max's alleged
> thru or even objective anecdotal evidence that supports his claim.  All we
> have is his story which doesn't mention Katadhin or the Kennebeck (the
> start of his alleged epic journey and the first major obstacle) and spotty
> memories that include some extreme weather that is unlikely to have
> happened according to weather records and the norms of weather in Maine
and
> NH during the period of time he alleged the hike occurred.
>
> Yes, one can quote all kinds of unusual weather possibilities that might
> have gone unrecorded but it's twisted logic to say that one possible but
> unlikely and  unrecorded event is 'evidence' in support of another
> undocumented and somewhat questionable alleged event.  It is even possible
> to demonstrate that the claim might be credible if we assume that he was
> mistaken about the month (or perhaps the year) but we are back to the
> illogic of using one factual error regarding one detail to support the
> credibility of other questionable details.
>
> The ATC may wish they never set themselves up as keeper of the 'who
> thru-hiked first' records but the fact is they did when they demanded
proof
> from Earl.  When they decided to cease requiring evidence in 1973 it was
> because the possibility of a thru had not only been demonstrated but was
> being to become relatively routine and reviewing the evidence was taxing
> their resources.  I wonder if they actually contemplated (in 1973)
applying
> that policy retroactively to claims that would predate Earl's hike?  I
> seriously doubt it, but in doing so they have effectively applied a
> standard that is the complete reverse of what they applied to Earl.  The
> burden of proof should be on those advocating its inclusion.
>
> I do not believe that Max's claim can be either proven or disproved at
this
> late point in time.  I think the ATN article was entirely appropriate but
> it was absurd for the ATC to list it on their database of thru hikes by
> applying the 1973 policy retroactively and now suggesting that those who
> fault them for their absurd decision should undertake the impossible task
> of disproving it.  When they asked his thoughts on the matter Earl's
> response that he considered his thru as secondary to his WWI service
> demonstrated what a great (and humble) soul Earl was.  I only wish that
the
> ATC had chosen to honor his service to the country  and the AT by
requiring
> an equal standard of evidence for any claims of thrus that allege to
> predate his.
>
> sAunTerer
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> From: AHuthmaker@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:11:05 EDT
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Brawny's AT Journal
> To: rainmaker@rabun.net, at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
>
>
> In a message dated 6/15/02 9:58:58 PM, rainmaker@rabun.net writes:
>
> << http://www.trailquest.net/BRindex.html . >>
>
> Rainmaker,
>     I have been following Brawneys Journal and I am enjoying it
immensely!!!
>  I have to say that she is truly amazing!  Have you gotten a good look at
her
> mileage!!?  And I love that her definition of 'mega hills' is a 15oo foot
> climb and above!!  When I first climbed Levilland ( @500 feet?)  I thought
I
> was a real woman!!  Then last weekend I climbed Blue Mountain (@1000 feet
?)
> and I KNEW I was a real woman!!!!  However, then I read Brawneys journal
and
> have now faced the fact that I have a long way to go before I am half the
> woman she is!!  *G*  Rainmaker, please pass along to her that I am loving
her
> reports and sending her all of the 'good luck' vibes I have to offer!
Thank
> you for sharing her journal with us!!  anna
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 17
> From: RoksnRoots@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:22:28 EDT
> To: saunterer@jimbullard.org
> CC: AT-L@backcountry.net
> Subject: [at-l] Boy Scout Debate
>
> In a message dated 6/15/2002 10:35:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> saunterer@jimbullard.org writes:
>
>
> > I've considered that he might even have had the year wrong but how far
are
> > we going to make allowances for his lack any supporting evidence?  Note
> > that Weary has told us that the answer to how often is the AT in Maine
> > mostly snow covered in June is "never".
>
>
>      ~~~ Bear with me. The reason I'm doing this is to allow for the
> possibility of one otherwise publicity-uninterested man happening to
mention
> a historic hike and not being believed.
>
>      But Saunterer, we have reason to believe that the winter of 1936
could
> have indeed provided a serious snow pack for May. In all his attention to
> details, I've noticed that Weary fails to mention that just last year
there
> was a serious snow pack left over from the record snow year which caused
> Brian Robinson to abort his hike. Just last spring I read on this site
posts
> by Weary himself telling of reports of snow too deep to start a May
> southbound. Rafe confirms this. I suggest if you, Weary and myself went to
> the AT last May 15th or so and started a southbound, we would at minimum
> encounter conditions that a 15 year old Bronx boy would easily consider
> "drifted snow for the length of Maine". I have a feeling that his version
of
> "drifted" is actually "winter accumulated hardened base packs remaining in
> sheltered pockets and on ridge lines". These ridge deposits would look
like
> drifts because they would be piles of snow checkered by open ground making
> them look like drifted accumulations. Due to elevation they would be on
all
> the ridges for the "length of Maine". I believe comparison of the winter
of
> 2001 would show some serious rain events prior to May. Obviously they
didn't
> melt the high ridge snow pack and could even have been snow up there...
>
>
>
>   > Weary:
> > >Possibly the original goal was to do "all" the trail. The fact that
they
> > >didn't
> > >may explain why the adventure -- planned as a promotion -- never was
> > >publicized.
> > >
>
>
>      ~~~ Weary could be more right here than he realizes -but not in the
way
> he suspects. It's possible that honor bound Boy Scouts could have realized
> that they didn't do the 3 miles that were uncompleted in 1936. Hearing of
> Earl's achievement, maybe the living scouts realized that there would be
no
> reason to supplant a record that they couldn't have possibly earned under
the
> Trail's condition in 1936. Earl hiked the entire completed Trail, they did
a
> truck-supported scout hike that was a common approach back then.
>     I have a problem with Weary's low mileage estimates for the group.
After
> all, if some of the hike is true, maybe the "2 weeks" for Maine is true
too.
> This leaves the boys supported by a structured map and itinerary following
> vet group team expecting them to keep a pace for resupply. If the Maine
> segment was an accurate example of this pace, the 121 days gets them down
the
> AT and into history. If we can find a record of the time they actually
took
> off from school, we would have a better estimate of just how long they
were
> out there. At that point we have a vet support truck dropping them off at
the
> north end and picking them up at Oglethorpe 121 days later. Something
> happened in between...
>
>
> >
> >
> > FACT: So far there is nothing that constitutes a record of Max's alleged
> > thru or even objective anecdotal evidence that supports his claim.
>
>
>   ~~~ I'm curious where Cliff Hayne's troop picked up word of the 1936
hike?
> That was 1959. Somewhere somebody was talking about it enough to pass the
> word. The word they were passing, if I understood Cliff correctly, was
that
> these scouts had done the AT. I wonder if that was a Maine based story or
if
> it was circulated BSA wide? Where did they hear it?
>
>
>   All we > have is his story which doesn't mention Katahdin or the
Kennebeck
> > (the
> > start of his alleged epic journey and the first major obstacle) and
spotty
> > memories that include some extreme weather that is unlikely to have
> > happened according to weather records and the norms of weather in Maine
and
> >
> > NH during the period of time he alleged the hike occurred.
>
>
>     ~~~ If they started in May, they probably would have skipped snowbound
> Katahdin. I'm sure they didn't ford the Kennybeck in May. It would have
been
> 6 feet deep! Even if they skipped Katahdin, I'm interested in exactly what
> they did hike? It would still be a novel hike...
>
>
> >
> > Yes, one can quote all kinds of unusual weather possibilities that might
> > have gone unrecorded but it's twisted logic to say that one possible but
> > unlikely and  unrecorded event is 'evidence' in support of another
> > undocumented and somewhat questionable alleged event.
> >
>
>     ~~~ Well let's slow down here. This is certainly better than
declarations
> of the hike's illegitimacy before searching every possibility. Max
Gordon's
> school record would be a boon to the investigation if it showed a 1936
date
> for special early dismissal. Especially if it showed one for May! His
class
> could then be sifted for names that line up with preserved registers from
> Katahdin and the Whites. It's way too early to pat old Max on the head and
> give him a sympathetic "good try"...
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 18
> From: "Linda Benschop" <athummingbird@tds.net>
> To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:03:06 -0400
> Subject: [at-l] POG and Belle Chere
>
> Last year it seems that you were a bit disappointed that no too many of us
> showed up.  I have a feeling that you may be complaining about too MANY
> folks showing up.  We had such a great time last year and will be there
with
> bells on again!  Counting the days.  One warning:  Do not let David A.
make
> you a
> drink.....LOL!
>
> Hummingbird
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 19
> From: "Linda Benschop" <athummingbird@tds.net>
> To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:15:25 -0400
> Subject: [at-l] Osprey
>
> Hello All,
> It took wind of Baltimore Jack's carrying an Osprey, that brought me out
of
> RVW (Rip Van Winkle) mode. After trying two G-4s and having the straps cut
> into my shoulders, the belt not providing weight shift relief, I obtained
an
> Osprey net model (1.5 lb.) by pro deal, and carried it on our last trek:
the
> one where I faced down a hungry black bear. Bliss. The straps are nicely
> padded and adjustable without (obviously) too much weight, as is the belt,
> placed, slanted and cupped right, and wide enough not to practically cut
me
> in half. It has adequate room, two forward-placed bottle holders with
> barrel-locked bungee cinches, and two zippered compartments to hold first
> aid, bug protection, and a pack cover. Altogether, an intelligent design.
> And oh, yes, it is made of some tough stuff. Happy trails, y'all!
> Dutch Treat
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:31:15 -0400
> From: Amy <askowronek@mindspring.com>
> To: Linda Benschop <athummingbird@tds.net>
> CC: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Osprey
>
> Got a URL?
>
>
> Linda Benschop wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> > It took wind of Baltimore Jack's carrying an Osprey, that brought me out
of
> > RVW (Rip Van Winkle) mode. After trying two G-4s and having the straps
cut
> > into my shoulders, the belt not providing weight shift relief, I
obtained an
> > Osprey net model (1.5 lb.) by pro deal, and carried it on our last trek:
the
> > one where I faced down a hungry black bear. Bliss. The straps are nicely
> > padded and adjustable without (obviously) too much weight, as is the
belt,
> > placed, slanted and cupped right, and wide enough not to practically cut
me
> > in half. It has adequate room, two forward-placed bottle holders with
> > barrel-locked bungee cinches, and two zippered compartments to hold
first
> > aid, bug protection, and a pack cover. Altogether, an intelligent
design.
> > And oh, yes, it is made of some tough stuff. Happy trails, y'all!
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:52:34 -0400
> From: KarenS62@aol.com
> To: athummingbird@tds.net, at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] POG and Belle Chere
>
> In a message dated Sun, 16 Jun 2002  8:05:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
athummingbird@tds.net writes:
>
> > Last year it seems that you were a bit disappointed that no too many of
us showed up.  I have a feeling that you may be complaining  about too MANY
folks showing up.
>
> Hey, I never said that! I think we had ten for breakfast on Sunday -
that's a pretty good number. But we sure did have some laughs.
>
> POG
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 22
> From: "Wayne Bell" <rainmaker@onlinexpress.net>
> To: <DTimm65344@aol.com>
> Cc: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:33:11 -0400
> Subject: [at-l] pictures
>
> Loved your pictures . Left us with great memories of our section hikes =
> last year and this year from Woody Gap to Hot Springs . Please keep them =
> coming so we can preview our fall hike to Damascus. Thanks.=20
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:39:00 -0400
> From: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> Reply-To: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Boy Scout Debate
>
> If  Max was mistaken and they had started in early May, not June, and the
season
> was  so  cold  that  they waded through a lot of drifted snow through
Maine, the
> scouts almost certainly did not start on Katahdin.
>
> Remember,  that in 1936 no plowed roads lead to Katahdin. A May start
would have
> required  driving  through 35 miles of unplowed drifts. June would not
have been
> easier.  Mud  season  would have been underway. The nearest tarred road
ended at
> Millinocket.  Baxter Park was still partly a dream. Only the clients of a
couple
> of  sporting camps had any reason to approach Katahdin. My guess is most
arrived
> at the mountain by horse and carriage.
>
> Also until the snow and ice of winter disappear from most Maine trails,
Katahdin
> tends to be a technical climb, not a hike. "Prepared" Scouts should have
carried
> ice axes, worn crampons, and used rope protection.
>
> A  final  note in the interests of accuracy. Once winter breaks, the
packed snow
> that Max seems to be describing, rarely is found on the open summits and
ridges.
> Rather it is found on shaded slopes, protected from the sun and warming
winds.
>
> I  once  found the conditions Max describes along the southern shore of
Crawford
> Pond,  north of Whitecap. One May we were scouting ways to keep four-wheel
drive
> pickups  off  one  of the ponds sand beaches and discovered wet drifts
five feet
> deep  where the AT skirts the shore. Winter storms, sweeping across the
lake had
> evidently built up a huge mound of snow -- enough to last well into late
spring.
>
> Weary
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 11:39:11 -0400
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> From: saunterer@jimbullard.org
> Subject: [at-l] Re: Boy Scout Debate
>
> At 12:22 AM 06/16/2002 -0400, RoksnRoots@aol.com wrote:
> >     ~~~ If they started in May, they probably would have skipped
> > snowbound Katahdin. I'm sure they didn't ford the Kennybeck in May. It
> > would have been 6 feet deep! Even if they skipped Katahdin, I'm
> > interested in exactly what they did hike? It would still be a novel
hike...
>
> If, as this suggests, all you are arguing is that the scouts took a novel
> and lengthy hike on the AT, I've already stated that I believe that they
> probably did just that.  What remains is that there is no evidence that it
> was the first AT thru.  Based on  his story and the weather research I
did,
> I think he was remembering it wrong, it was not an end-to-end hike and
that
> is all I was addressing.
>
> My first position in the Dept of labor was as a UI Claims Examiner.  It
did
> not take me long to learn that memory is fallible and is colored by one's
> point of view.  I had many people (both claimants and employers) tell me
> stories that on first telling sounded totally plausible (more so than the
> AC article) only to have them fall apart on objective investigation.  The
> interesting thing was that even when confronted by contrary facts (when
> offered an opportunity to rebut) many would continue to be convinced that
> they remembered it correctly.  These were short term memories of events
> (days or weeks) not reconstructions of something that happened over a half
> century earlier.  I can think of things that I did 40+ years ago as a
scout
> or with friends when I was about 14/15 and I have to agree with Weary.  I
> don't recall enough details to say for sure just how far I walked or even
> the route we took.
>
> The story of Max Gordon and his companions' trek is an intriguing footnote
> to AT history but without any supporting evidence that it was an
end-to-end
> hike that's all it should be, a footnote.  It does not rate being listed
as
> the first end-to-end hike.
>
> sAunTerer
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 25
> To: at-l@backcountry.net
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 11:59:30 -0400
> From: Lamar Powell <hopefl@juno.com>
> Subject: [at-l] Father's Day
>
> I sent this to the list a few years ago. I've been thinking about my Dad
> today, his influence on my life and his shortcomings. He was an excellent
> example for me and my brothers. I miss him a lot.  Hopeful
> *****************
> This is long and just possibly, but most likely not trail related so feel
> free to delete.
> I was cleaning my boots and decided to check the condition of an older
> pair I have. I'm a pack rat I guess. I got to wondering how many pairs of
> boots I've owned and why I get (in the words of my wife) emotionally
> attached to them.
> There is a larger connection represented by my boots, a connection to a
> world within a world, one that I do dearly love. Some time back the
> question was asked as to why we love to hike, how we came to love the
> woods. I was introduced to the "woods" by my Dad. We used to walk over
> our fields and pasture and woods, just to walk over them. He imparted so
> much to me that as my years unfold, I am still discovering that I
> developed this attitude or that one, because of my father's influence.
> When I was in fourth grade, my Dad got me a pair of "combat boots." We
> bought many of our work clothes at a dry goods / hardware / feed /
> military surplus store in our community. The boots he got me were just
> like the ones he wore, some he had brought home from WW2. Mercy how I
> loved those boots, I was crushed when I finally out grew them.
> On one of our walks along the creek on our place, I asked him if he wore
> those boots in the war. After a pause, he just quietly answered no and
> let the subject drop. Most of what I learned about my father's
> experiences in WW2, I learned from my mother. Dad would tell funny
> stories from his army days but nothing else. My Dad was a combat
> engineer. Putting a pontoon bridge across a river, they came under fire.
> Many of them went into the frozen river, Dad was one of them. He suffered
> terrible frost bite, among other things. It hurt his circulation in his
> legs for the rest of his life. Dad told my mother that his rescuers cut
> his clothes and boots off of him to keep him from freezing to death
> before he was taken to an aid station.
> I'm 52 years old and I wonder if there are enough years left to me in
> which to grow into the man that my father was. He was best man at my
> wedding. I asked him to be best man simply because he was the greatest
> man I had ever known. I am very aware of Dad's short comings but the love
> he had for his family made us love him back. Love covers a multitude of
> sins and shortcomings. I learned so much from his life about how real men
> should act. He was honest and forthright. I heard what he said and I
> watched him make good on his commitments. He was physically strong. He
> would toss us all about when he wrestled with us boys but when his arm
> was around my shoulders, I felt tenderness. He couldn't sing worth a
> flip, I know because I sat beside him in church. He was dedicated to his
> family and his financial responsibilities. I saw him go to work even when
> he was ill. We were not rich by any stretch but we had enough. Dad farmed
> and worked a job and every week he gave his whole check to Mom. She gave
> some money back to him for his weekly expenses. My father's manliness was
> bigger than his pride. Concerning money, Dad taught us that if we
> couldn't be happy with little then we couldn't be happy with the whole
> world. He once told us, "Don't worry about how you're gonna make ends
> meet, worry about where you want'm to meet."
> Dad taught us about ecology years before I even knew there was such a
> word. He pointed out a snake in the corner of our tool crib and told me
> to leave him alone. He said old Mr. snake was the best rat trap we had on
> the place. Once I was helping him peg down the chicken wire fence. I
> asked if it wouldn't be easier to kill the fox. "Nope," he replied, "it's
> easier to fix the fence. I wont give him any chickens but he can have all
> the rabbits in the garden." We had chickens and pigs and calves, we had
> varmints like the fox and snake and rabbits. About all these, he told us
> to take life judiciously because we could take it, but we could never
> give life back again. Before we reached our teenage years all us boys
> were excellent marksmen. Dad not only taught us these skills but he
> taught us the responsibilities that we had every time we picked up a gun.
> I learned to take responsibility for all my actions because I watched my
> father take ownership for all of his.
> All my boots are cleaned up and put away now. They make me think of so
> many lessons for life and bring back many memories. Dad has been gone
> since 1970 but I still think of him often. I still remember a pair of
> boots I wore to follow his over fields and woods. Thanks Dad.
> Hopeful
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:12:30 -0400
> From: Jim Lynch <jplynch@crosslink.net>
> To: saunterer@jimbullard.org
> CC: at-l@backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Re: Boy Scout Debate
>
> I agree that it should not be listed as an end-to-end hike, but
> saunterer brings up an intriguiging notion.  Perhaps this hike was the
> first lengthy trek of sections of the AT by a recreational party, that
> is, someone other than the founders who first laid it out, Myron Avery
> and others.  This alone would make it worthy of study and research.
>
> saunterer@jimbullard.org wrote:
> > ............
> >
> > The story of Max Gordon and his companions' trek is an intriguing
footnote
> > to AT history but without any supporting evidence that it was an
end-to-end
> > hike that's all it should be, a footnote.  It does not rate being listed
as
> > the first end-to-end hike.
> >
> > sAunTerer
> >
> --
> James P. ('Jim') Lynch
> jplynch@crosslink.net
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:19:44 -0400
> To: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> From: Raphael Bustin <rafe.bustin@verizon.net>
> Subject: [at-l] Check Writing Spree (Where the Mouth is)
>
> Lightened up the checking account this morning and feeling virtuous...
>
> ATC  $50
> World Wildlife Fund $25
> Nature Conservancy $25
> e Environmental Defense $25
> John Tierney for Congress $25
> National Wildlife Federation $25
> Defenders of Wildlife $25
> Oceana $25
> Church World Service $25
>   (landmine eradication)
> ACLU $25
>
> Apolitical as they are, ATC will always have a special place..
>
> rafe b
> aka terrapin
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 28
> From: "Texas Twelve-Step" <texas12step@hotmail.com>
> To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine land prices
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:24:25 -0400
>
> Raphael Bustin wrote:
> > Weary wrote:
>
> >> There is not a government in the world that does
> >> not reserve for itself the right to take private
> >> land for what it perceives is the common good.
> >> Frankly, I find it hard to imagine a society that
> >> could function without giving government this right.
>
> >> Probably humans first formed governments to regulate
> >> the distribution and use of land. It is a role that
> >> continues to this day and will continue until humans
> >> finally are eliminated from this earth.
>
> I'm not asking folks where the power originates, but
> rather what makes it *right.* Is this really your
> best argument in answer to that question? Slavery
> was once defended along very similar lines, but I
> doubt any of you would agree that slavery could be
> morally justified because of its popularity throughout
> almost the entirety of mankind's history.
>
> >> Several European Kings proclaimed their ownership
> >> of the lands that we now call North America. After
> >> numerous wars among themselves -- wars in which nary
> >> a king, but numerous land users died -- we gradually
> >> evolved into the present stand off.
>
> >> Perhaps 12-step could explain how a half millennia
> >> of wars, destruction of native peoples, and exercise
> >> of sheer government power somehow created an absolute
> >> right of untouchable private property rights.
>
> It doesn't, obviously; no more than the sordid history
> of the New World settlement justifies government takings
> today, as you imply.
>
> >> I agree a wise government needs to use its powers
> >> carefully. But I have no doubt that the power is needed
> >> and it's use for creating roads and trails and parks is
> >> appropriate.
>
> > I'm not in the habit of quoting posts verbatim, but I
> > have to say:  nicely said.
>
> > (And well worth repeating.)
>
> Indeed. Count on me to repost parts of it in the future.
>
> -TXIIS
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:24:23 -0400
> To: "Bob C." <ellen@clinic.net>, at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> From: Arthur Gaudet <gaudet@attbi.com>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Boy Scout Debate
>
> Assuming the trip lasted 121 days (from the article), and if they
> returned to school on Labor Day week... That puts the beginning of
> the trip on/about May 6, assuming Sept 4 as an average for Labor Day.
> (But I don't know any details about the Bronx schools calendar in
> 1936)
>
> On another point, Max Gordon told his story to ATN in 1994 but Ed
> Talone is the guy that "stirred up the dispute in early 2000, when he
> wrote a letter to the ATN arguing that a 1936 hike ... should be
> recognized as the first thru-hike." (this is from the Mar/Apr 2001
> ATN). Does anyone know Ed Talone? Perhaps he could be reached for
> further information, stuff that didn't get into the 1994 article, or
> stuff that Max shared only with him. I wonder why Ed advocated as
> much as he did for formal recognition.
>
> I'm also interested in the content of the letter sent to ATC in 2000.
> Was it published, anyone? if so, which issue, I'd like to read that
> also.
>
> Thanks for the discussion. --RockDancer
>
>
> >If  Max was mistaken and they had started in early May, not June,
> >and the season
> >was  so  cold  that  they waded through a lot of drifted snow
> >through Maine, the
> >scouts almost certainly did not start on Katahdin.
>
>
> --
> Arthur D. Gaudet        "Is walking down called hiking, too?"
> (RockDancer)                  -heard at the top of Mt Washington, NH
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 30
> From: "Texas Twelve-Step" <texas12step@hotmail.com>
> To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine land prices
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:26:24 -0400
>
> Raphael Bustin wrote:
> > Texas Twelve-Step wrote:
>
> >> If someone goes to a car dealer and flashes a dog-choking
> >> motherlode of bills while emphatically saying that he's
> >> just *got* to have a specific, unique car on the lot,
> >> you can bet that the dealer will charge a hefty, non-
> >> negotiable premium. The asking price for Saddleback was
> >> bloated because the buyer had a thirteen-figure annual
> >> budget and declared that it had legislatively compelled
> >> itself to purchase that particular piece of land.
>
> > Because the "buyer" was the US government, does that
> > give the seller the moral right to take shameless
> > advantage of the situation?
>
> No more than if the "buyer" were Bill Gates, Mother
> Teresa or David Lee Roth.
>
> And again, let's not dignify what occurred over the
> Saddleback corridor by treating it as though it were
> a trade between consenting parties. The dickering
> was over the amount of compensation for land being
> *taken,* with both sides playing their political
> cards for all they were worth.
>
> -TXIIS
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 31
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:37:02 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Marielle and Paul <hikers99@yahoo.com>
> To: at-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> Subject: [at-l] Re-Supplying in Maine
>
> We leave in 10 days to do our final 220 miles,
> Rangeley to Katahdin.
>
> We do not use mail drops and have been using the
> Companion to plan our food purchases and to decide on
> the amount of food to carry in each section.
>
> The Companion does not give any information about
> groceries in Caratunk. Can anyone give us information
> in that regard?
>
> As we will not have many miles under our belt when we
> reach the 100 mile Wilderness, we are uncertain as to
> our speed and the number of days of food we will need
> for that section. Although I tend to err on the "carry
> too much food" side, I would like information on
> whether we can count on the White house to supply our
> needs for the last portion. If they carry the standard
> pop tart and Lipton assortment, it would satisfy our
> needs.
>
> When we were at Abol Bridge a few years ago, it seemed
> that they had very little hiker type food. Any
> opinions on this?
>
> Thanks all
>
>
> Ma and Pa 99
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
>  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
>
> Stay on topic!
>
> End of AT-L Digest