Re: [at-l] AT Past Present, etc.

[bullard@northnet.org]

At 01:31 AM 2/14/99 EST, DaRedhead@aol.com wrote:
>I think it is very true.  It *is* hiking that single thread of dirt,
whichever
>route it takes on any given year, that binds you together.  
..clip..
>I don't see any way to expand the wilderness experience on the Trail anymore.
>I can only hope we retain our individual freedom in hiking the Trail. 

I took the original post to be a suggestion that expanding the definition
of a GA==>ME hike to include parallel trails was a way to incorporate more
of a 'wilderness' experience. Red seems to have a philosophical objection
to anything but the 'single thread of dirt' but that strikes me as a narrow
(no pun intended) definition. After all, if one walks all the way from GA
to ME by trail, does which trail any particular 10, 15 or 20 miles followed
matter that much? Did that hiker not also walk 2000+ miles and arrive at
the same place? Wouldn't the differences in route be grist for conversation
in fellowship when hikers paths crossed? Couldn't the varieties of
experience that could be shared bind the hikers together as much as the
common ones?

Fallingwater sees a danger in the pattern of increasing traffic in that it
could lead to regulation which would limit individual freedom on the trail.
In some sections (He notes the Smokies and the Whites) it has already
begun. I hike mostly in the Adirondacks. The Dept. of Environmental
Conservation last year proposed a management plan for the High Peaks
section which has seen similar growth in usage. The plan proposed permits
that would be issued from only one location and only in person during
normal business days and hours (Mon. - Fri. 9AM - 5PM). In the end the
proposal didn't fly, this time. How long will it be before the increasing
level of usage on the AT inspires similar proposals?

When I finally manage to get my life to a point where I can thru-hike I'd
hate to be told that a permit system was in place with a 5 year waiting
list. I am not averse to the idea of taking a blue (pink, yellow or any
other color) blaze trail that would be more interesting, offer better views
or more solitude as my mood of the moment requires as long as it took me to
the same place farther up the trail. If having some of the hikers take
alternate routes part of the time lessened the impact and reduced the
pressure for bureaucratic restrictions I'd see that as a good thing. At the
same time I'd like the 2000 miler patch in recognition that I had walked
all the way from GA to ME. 

It seemed to me that Fallingwater was arguing for that kind of flexibility
as a means to preserve freedom rather than to risk regulations/restrictions
in order to maintain a narrow definition of the 2000 miler. It has already
been observed that today's thru-hiker isn't following the same trail as
those of years past yet all who complete the journey qualify as 2000
milers. Is it really such a stretch of fellowship or definition to have
hikers who finished in the same year  but may have walked different
sections now and then also be considered to be 2000 milers as well? Is one
2000+ mile GA to ME hike really less worthy of the recognition than the other?

Awaiting the flames of purity,
Saunterer

* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================