[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[at-l] Re: AT-L digest, Vol 1 #1041 - 32 msgs - OT
Kinda weird that you mention those two movies in one sentence. The Harrison
pic frozen lake scenes was filmed about 1 hour north of where I live and
about 2 - 3 hours from where the co-star (Adam Beach) of Windtalkers was
raised. Adam Beach was hilarious in the movie THE REZ.
J
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rogene Beers" <wolferrae@earthlink.net>
To: <at-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 3:05 PM
Subject: [at-l] Re: AT-L digest, Vol 1 #1041 - 32 msgs
> 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 b
e
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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!
>