[pct-l] Fw: Re: Scott and Joe hiking closure

[patti kulesz]

Well Kent how bout I forward this to everyone so they can give their opinions too....then I won't look like a "god" to u anymore...
 


 

patti

--- On Sat, 7/26/08, Kent Spring <kjssail at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Kent Spring <>
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Scott and Joe hiking closure
To: peprmintpati88 at yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, July 26, 2008, 1:24 AM







PAtti -
 
I always enjoy seeing these flames on the PCT-L.  Calling people assholes is a real nice touch.  I suppose someone died and left you the "God of the PCT" title.  
 
I tried to say, but you apparently have trouble reading anything subtle, that there are closures that are done where hikers really do need to stay away, such as the frogs and active fires.  
 
However, you must really believe that the authorities in the forest service always get it right, and never just use a ban for everyone, when what they really want to keep out is the motor vehicles.  
 
I guess if you want to make judgements about two hikers with-out ever hearing from them, then you will just go ahead.  If you want to make judgements about me, then the same goes.
 
see ya, and hike your own hike, Kent

--- On Thu, 7/24/08, patti kulesz <peprmintpati88 at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: patti kulesz <peprmintpati88 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Scott and Joe hiking closure
To: kjssail at yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, July 24, 2008, 11:11 PM






the closures are not just for the safety of the hikers and fire fighters....the frog closure should be obvious, but just incase it wasn't. They are endangered and need to be in a safe habitat. People walking through, picking them up...accidentally stepping on them...doesn't keep them safe...therefore people need to stay out. As for the areas where the old fires where...that's b/c the area needs to grow back and people trampling through it off trail, etc will just keep it fom growing back...not to mention that it can and will eventually cause land slides in areas that would not have occured had people stayed out like they were told.

So yes I am judging those guys....I think they are assholes too. Everyone else obviously agrees...or havent you been keeping up? Stay out of the closure areas or I'll send my ranger friends after you!



patti

--- On Wed, 7/23/08, Kent Spring <kjssail at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Kent Spring <kjssail at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Scott and Joe hiking closure
To: pct-l at backcountry.net
Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 1:07 PM

Hi -

I guess that I would agree with some of the sentiment in this note, although I
can't agree totally.  I hiked the section from Campo to Kennedy Meadows
this year before needing to leave the trail due an injury.  During the time I
was on the trail we faced three "official" trail closures, two for
previous fires and one for habitat of endangered frogs.  

I can see where hikers have no business in active fire scenes.  That
 helicopter
that dropped water might have dropped fire retardant - which might have been
serious, plus hikers could either endanger themselves or the fire fighters.

However, these closures due to "old" fires were very questionable and
apparently aimed at keeping off-road vehicles at bay, but hikers get caught in
the wide brush of Forest Service policy.  The result is that hikers were put at
risk by being told to take a long road walk, where they exposed to many
vehicles.  Yet the hikers who went thru the area said that the trail was in
fine shape, and there were no risks to either them or the habitat.

I think that the FS/gov't needs to take a much more nuanced approach.  They
should keep hikers out of areas where they really don't belong.  Yet the
authorities should still understand that hikers are not the same as off-road
vehicles or other users in their destructive ability, and thus can safely hike
areas
 where some "users" are excluded. 

It would appear that Scott and Joe were wrong to go thru an active area, but we
should let them answer for themselves before we convict them….

Kent

> From: "Will Hiltz" <will.hiltz at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Scott and Joe hiking closure
> 
> I'm sorry- am I the only one who has a problem with
> this?
> 
> Fire closures are for everyone are they not?  As stewards
> of the trail,
> shouldn't scott and joe be striving to display proper
> respect for the rules
> and regulations of the trail, especially considering they
> are role models
> and particularly well-known along the trail?  Won't
> this increase the
> likelihood of other thrus doing the same thing and becoming
> less respectul
> of wilderness regulations/bear can laws/closures/LNT
> practices etc. because
> they
 think they're "experts"?  I know we all
> think Scott and Joe are
> super-awesome and hike really quickly but do we as a
> long-distance
> community, want to be seen as a group of hikers that view
> themselves "above"
> restrictions?  In case it isn't clear, no I don't
> think going for the record
> exempts them.   A record-breaking pace hike isn't any
> more important than
> someone trying to get from mexico to canada for the first
> time.  Or should
> we all be ignoring fire closures?
> 
> 
> YITOOD,
> 
> Easy
> 



      

_______________________________________________
Pct-l mailing list
Pct-l at backcountry.net
http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l