[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [at-l] hiking,dogs,bootleggers

bluestreak wrote:

> Hello all, I had an experiance this weekend hiking that I would
> like to share & get some feedback on. I am a volunteer trail 
> maintainer and have adopted a trail in the Whites of NH. There are 
> 2 bootleg campsites (read illegal/unauthorized by the WMNF Forest 
> Service) on this trail. I have been discussing with the section
> leader the feasability of filling them in and eliminating them. I
> am resisting because I think as long as these two sites exist it is
> likely that they will get used as opposed to making a new one & 
> impacting a larger area. Also it is likely that if I fill them in
> someone will just go in & clear them again.I am also biased in that
> I would rather camp off trail myself as to stay at an AMC run tentsite
> or shelter.Also this trail is just off the AT & offers that alternative
> to thruhikers if they know about it.

In what way are they illegal or unauthorized? Do they violate the
guidelines regarding distance from streams and shelters? If so then
smite them. Otherwise, why do anything? If people want to sleep
among garbage and Schumer that's their business. 

> However this Saturday I was doing some traill maintenance and as I
> approached one of the sites I was greeted by two large unrestrained 
> growling,barking dogs who followed me menacingly & would not leave
> me alone. 

Unless the owner is nearby trying to call the dogs, spray the
bastards. Use something with a dye in it.

> I aproached the tent on the site & found no one around. 


> I finally got far enough away from the site that the dogs turned and
> went back. I met several other hikers on the trail who were also
> harrased and visibly upset. 

Why? Doesn't everyone love dogs? They're just as cute as yuppie
toddlers running free in a drinking establishment.


> Anyway on my way back down the trail I found that the campers
> had gone but left quite a mess including unburied feces from both
> man & beast (a good argument to filter water). It made me think
> more about the value of filling these sites in and making a strong
> effort to keep them that way. What do you in the group think? Fill
> them in or leave them? Why? 

Do I infer correctly from the above that these sites are 1) readily
visible from the trail and 2) too close to a stream? That being the
case, I think they should be obliterated as best as possible. If
you're worried about people re-establishing the site or impacting
a larger area, consider offering them a nearby alternative site
that's "legal." That way, you can at least partially dictate the
nature of the impact. A flat spot with a fire ring and big log to
sit on can be a powerful inducement, even if it is 200 feet from
the water.

> What do you do when aprroached by an unrestrained dog especially one
> that seems threatening? Do you just accept it as part of the hiking
> experiance, does it bother you at all and if it does how do you handle
> it?

Unrestrained dogs aren't just an issue on the trail.


mfuller@somtel.com; Northern Franklin County, Maine         $
The Constitution is the white man's ghost shirt.  }>:-/> --->

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