[pct-l] Water Caches

Mon Mar 26 21:39:17 CDT 2007

Of this thread, I think Tom's posting reflects the closest thing to what I
understand as reality.  Let me tell you my take as a soon to be thruhiker.
I have talked to many people and read much about this journey and I think I
represent some sort of an average Joe hiker.

I plan to get good intel on the caches ahead of time and updated intel
before departing any town stops or other locations where information might
be available.  If I feel the intel is solid, recent, reliable and that the
quantity of water reported is flush...  I am going to assume it will likely
be there and I will use the cache as an expected subsidy.  I will not push
the envelop and expect to get all of my water for the next leg there.  Just
like I would not push it to any other water source that is not a sure thing
(e.g. a stream known to be fairly low).  I will carry enough of a reserve to
get me out of trouble, though not as much as I may want or need for the next
entire leg.  Enough "To get me out of trouble" may mean enough to go on but
not with great comfort, it may mean enough in reserve to go back to a
previous water supply, or enough to get down a long side trail. 

I do not consider the existence of water caches in the So Cal desserts
cheating in any way.  I am using all kinds of support for my trip.   For
example, I am depending on people at home to mail me food to locations where
buying food is not a convenient option.  This is in essence a "food cache"
put right in a place where it is most convenient for both the cache stocker
as well as the hiker.  I suppose I could just carry enough food from the
last grocery store to get all the way to the next one without using the
convenience of the kind person shipping me my "food cache", but I'd rather
not.

Now, if this is not how most people today use these caches PLEASE let me
know.  If the cache is really only used as an emergency back-up 99% of the
time based on malfunctions or complete miscalculation, please inform me.  If
using the caches in the respect I have outlined above is out of line with
the current hiker culture and I would be abusing the privilege, please
educate me.  Honestly though, from everything I have read (and I have read a
shit-load) I thought this was the general function.

BillB

-----Original Message-----
From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
On Behalf Of Tom Reynolds
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:34 PM
To: stillroaming; pct-l at backcountry.net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Water Caches

This issue has been debated for years.

  You are incorrect in ststing: "Water caches exist for emergency use only.
This is my most basic understanding." 

  True, one should not COUNT on a water cache but they are for more than
emergency use. They are designed to make Section A a little bit easier and
in fact, for most thruhikers, they do.

  Take the San Felipe Hills cache, a Sierra Club cache. Hikers should carry
enough water to make it to Barrel Springs but "even an extra quart at the
halfway point is a real luxery" was the consensus nine years ago. There were
some objections to this because the San Felipe Hills was seen as a
"rite-of-passage" and the water cache made it less so.

  Take the Scissor Crossing cache, an ADZPCTKO effort. There is water at
Scissors Crossings but it is ugly, cattle fouled water. If the cache is not
empty the thruhiker can carry good water. More importently, the thruhiker
can tank-up resting under the tree at Scissors as opposed to laborusly
processing bad water to get ready for the 22 shade-free miles to Barrel
Springs

  Take the cache before Oreflame Canyon, an ADZPCTKO effort. In the old days
one hunted for water in several off-trail locations. (One led to an
incident) Sources were, in fact problematical and possibly trespassing was
involved for some sources. Today, that's what one must do if the cache is
empty. However, if the cache is full today's thruhiker can skip that
routine.

  As always, purists can skip the water cache just as they can the ADZ.

  Tom

  PS: We do not pander the least resistance, as you say. We provide an
option. Some how the thruhiker mentality and least resistance approach seems
an oxymoron

stillroaming <pct at delnorteresort.com> wrote:
  First a question: Why are emergency, last resort water sources widely
advertised?

Water caches exist for emergency use only. This is my most basic
understanding.

With that basic understanding, the locations and status of caches should
remain anonymous. The very act of making this information public encourages
folks to use them. "If I didn't get enough water, I know a caches exists up
the trail." That is my twisted logic. By advertising the cache you pander to
the path of least resistance in all of us.

Further, why would you ask for assistance in stocking a cache, when you
don't expect a hiker to carry an extra gallon for their own needs? It's just
crazy! (that gallon is used by the time they reach gate 3. it's half gone
half way there)

Advertising/supporting a cache, for whatever reason, is a major
moral/ethical repsonsibility. Especially this year. I hope you can live with
that responsibility.

Scott Parks

------------------------------------
Trails : http://Postholer.Com
Journals : http://Postholer.Com/journal 

_______________________________________________
pct-l mailing list
pct-l at backcountry.net
unsubscribe or change options:
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l

_______________________________________________
pct-l mailing list
pct-l at backcountry.net
unsubscribe or change options:
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l