[at-l] blazing frequently assumes "nice" conditions

[sloetoe at yahoo.com (Sloetoe)]

Walt Daniels wrote:
Most trails way over use turn blazes. Any turn less than close
to 90 degrees does  not need to be marked unless there is a
junction  (even a fairly obscure one). Even many switchbacks
where you have an almost 180 degree turn frequently do not need
blazes because the path is cut deeply into the hill.
The switchback is a good place to conserve paint if there is a
tree straight ahead from both directions where even in offset
blaze areas, you should paint only one turn with a non-offset
blaze instead of two offset turn blazes.

### FWIW, Walt, I agree mostly with you, "but."
Blazing frequently assumes "nice" conditions, as has been noted
with regard to daylight-versus-night hiking. Another *un*-"nice"
condition is sneaux -- even 12-18" can totally obscure the
treadway that Walt describes above. (Think of an open hardwood
forest with no leaves in the understory to suggest a trail, or
an open summit of southern bald or New England treeline...) Not
always that way, but all you need is once. And as long as the
ATC has seen fit to designate singletrack trail as the preferred
path (over historic logging roads, colonial byways, etc, with
broad, frequently treeless, beds), the more we have homogenious
monotone "tunnel" trail easier to lose in sneaux.

Anytime I come upon "pause" conditions, I find myself posing
"Wow. What if I'd come upon this beauty at night, or in the
rain?" That always makes me think poorly of either designers,
maintainers, or both. And conversely, where hiking in
sneaux/rain/darkness is a joy, you just want to *kiss* somebody
for being such a grand, spirited soul to go out of their way and
provide this wonderful resource (insert continuing walking
rapture here)...

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://mail.yahoo.com