[at-l] Rick's good thoughts re the AT and thru-hikes

[icw@xxxxxxxxxxx (Clark Wright)]

Rick has written a darn good post with some perspecive that I had not
really considered - every inch is indeed important when you are thinking
about it from the perspective of the organization that is vested with
the responsibility to legally protect every inch, and every viewshed,
and every related pollution source, and every related issue of drainage,
maintenance, access, relations with various landowners and governments,
etc.  Here's to the ATC, and its related land trust organization!

thru-thinker

rick boudrie wrote:

>> but I don't recall any of the early hikers obsessing over whether they
>> walked every bit of *THE OFFICIAL TRAIL*.
>
>
> Earl Sheaffer did at least to some extent.  In his report to the ATC
> he went
> out of his way to inform them that he may not have followed the official
> route in the Whites, because his maps did not arrive on time.  He further
> explained that he took alternative routes that were just as long. His
> tone
> definitely indicates to me that he was thinking about "THE OFFICIAL
> TRAIL".
> In fact, I think it may be because of internet discussion regarding
> Earl's
> hike, that the ATC saw fit to add the bit about "an honest effort even
> if..." to thier current written requirements.
>
> The thing is though, the 2000 Miler award is not handed out by the
> AT-L, the
> ALDHA or any other group other than the ATC.  Its thier deal.  Pointedly,
> its not about thru hiking, but about walking the entire Trail over any
> amount of time and in any way.  For the ATC, EVERY foot of the AT is
> important.  Important for reasons that go way beyond any kind of hiking
> recognition. Is it any wonder that thier 2000 Miler award is for
> walking it
> all, rather than having a amazing hiking adventure that covers almost
> all of
> it?
>
> Now, it seems clear by both postings here and the reality of people who
> apply for that award that the ATC's current written requirments are a
> point
> of agravation.  Some good arguments have been made as to why the ATC's
> posted requirements are flawed.  Rather than ignore that reality, why not
> work to see that the ATC's written requirements are changed.  Perhaps the
> ALDHA could help promote a good modification along those Jim likes.
>
> Its OK to change requirements, and I see no reason why we can't demand
> the
> ATC do the same to match Jim's approach.  Change is good.  (How many
> on this
> list were delighted when Life Saving Merit Badge was no longer
> required for
> Eagle).
>
> Clearly a whole lot of thru hikers want to be listed as 2000 Milers for
> whatever reason.  Why not get the written rules changed to reflect those
> hikers' real-world interpretation of them?  And to allow the rare thru
> hiker
> whose conscience won't allow him to sign an application  because he
> blue-blazed back in Georgia, the same oportunity to be listed as his
> peers
> who "have different interpretations".  Hell, all this could be a
> non-issue
> if the ATC would just loosen up.  Lets demand that.  We are all members,
> right?
>
> Just to be clear, I am not trying to be sarcastic.
>
> But lets not forget that the 2000 Miler award was never just about
> hiking.
> It was about the Trail, and the fact that every mile of the Trail is
> important.  So if we do get the ATC to change the requirements which
> seem to
> state that one should walk the entire white-blazed footpath or make an
> honest effort to do so, lets just keep in mind that all of the Trail is
> important.  Even the parts that one decides not to walk.
>
> RIck B
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
> http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>> 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!
>
>