[at-l] AT blah, blah, blah. Was Earls ... hike

trailr at aol.com trailr at aol.com
Tue Jul 5 13:21:41 CDT 2011

I took a blue blaze to bypass a flooded stream (bridge was under rushing water). At which time it became the official trail. 

Honor seems to be a thing of the past. I work retail, mostly I see "what can I get for nothing". Many people live their life by taking the path of least resistance... They hike that way too. 
Honor and effort.... What a concept. Sounds like a military academy... So mabe the military ISN'T so bad. ;-). 
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "giniajim" <jplynch at crosslink.net>
Sender: at-l-bounces at backcountry.net
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 14:00:17 
To: <at-l at backcountry.net>
Subject: Re: [at-l] Earl Shaffer's hike?

The ADTC doesn't use the terminology "as far as practicable."
The exact quote from the ATC web site is:
"We recognize blue-blazed trails or officially required road-walks as viable 
substitutes for the official, white-blazed route in the event of an 
emergency, such as a flood, a forest fire, or an impending storm on an 
exposed, high-elevation stretch"
Note the use of the term: "emergency".
The ATC has another requirement: "We operate on the honor system"

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Bullard" <jim.bullard at gmail.com>
To: "giniajim" <jplynch at crosslink.net>
Cc: <at-l at backcountry.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [at-l] Earl Shaffer's hike?

> Some thoughts:
>   - ATC doesn't recognize "Thru-hikes". They recognize 2000 milers defined
>   as hiking the entire trail as far as is practicable. They don't care if 
> you
>   did in in one season or 30. They don't care if when you finished the 
> trail
>   "X" years later was a different route than when you started. They 
> allowed
>   that Earl's detours were okay and they have allowed such for others 
> since.
>   The only recognition for a single season thru is the one you carry in 
> your
>   own head.
>   - A one season hike of the AT represents what is probably the most
>   individual freedom to do what one wants, when one wants & how one wants 
> in
>   their entire life. No parents, priests, bosses, no responsibilities to
>   significant others, etc. Just do what is necessary to survive and not be
>   obnoxious to others you meet on the trail. So why the urge to impose 
>   not just for yourself but in judgement of how others do it? You want to
>   pass/touch/kiss every white blaze, fine. Do it. But recognize that is 
> simply
>   fulfilling your own desire.
>   - The argument that someone else calling their hike a "Thru-hike" when 
> it
>   doesn't meet the standard you set for yourself somehow devalues your 
> hike
>   sounds remarkably like the argument that if gays are allowed to marry 
> that
>   will devalue marriages of heterosexuals. Or that those who don't follow 
> my
>   religion are going to hell. Thru-hiking is thru-hiking and love is love 
> and
>   belief in God is belief in God only if you are like me?
>   - This whole discussion is like a flashback to Trail Place. We just need
>   someone to propose trail monitors to insure thru-hiking purity and we'll 
> be
>   there.
> Jim Bullard
> http://jims-ramblings.blogspot.com/
> http://members.photoportfolios.net/Jim_Bullard
> http://jimbullard.zenfolio.com/
> http://picasaweb.google.com/jim.bullard

at-l mailing list
at-l at backcountry.net

More information about the at-l mailing list