Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

the baxter debate continues

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • socks wrote:

      max.patch wrote:

      jimmyjam wrote:

      I saw where Jennifer Pharr Davis is now on the ATC board.
      i really like JPD but i think this is a serious mistake.
      Not a mistake but a serious one, do tell. Me, I could care less, it's a non-issue for me, but I am curious why it is a mistake?
      following is atc policy:

      *****

      ATC Policy on the A.T. Experience and Non-Hiking Recreational Uses of Trail Lands

      Adopted by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy in 1997

      The Appalachian Trail is, first and foremost, a footpath open to any and all who travel on foot. Itssole purpose as a recreational resource is to provide an opportunity for “travel on foot throughthe wild, scenic, wooded, pastoral, and culturally significant lands of the AppalachianMountains.” Except in isolated instances where historically recognized nonconforming uses areallowed by legislative authority, the footpath of the Trail should not be used for any otherpurpose. This policy is intended to provide a framework within which other recreational uses willbe evaluated. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy may develop additional policy direction forspecific uses as needed.

      The lands acquired and managed for the Appalachian Trail, and lands designated within theA.T. management zone, not only protect the footpath itself, but provide primary protection of theTrail experience. The Trail experience, as used in this context, is intended to represent the sumof opportunities that are available for those walking the Appalachian Trail to interact with thewild, scenic, pastoral, cultural, and natural elements of the Appalachian Trail environment,unfettered and unimpeded by competing sights or sounds and in as direct and intimate amanner as possible. Integral to this Trail experience are:

      • Opportunities for observation, contemplation, enjoyment, and exploration of thenatural world;

      • A sense of remoteness and detachment from civilization;

      • Opportunities to experience solitude; freedom; personal accomplishment; selfreliance;and self-discovery;

      • A sense of being on the height of the land;

      • Opportunities to experience the historic and pastoral elements of the surroundingcountryside;

      • A feeling of being part of the natural environment; and

      • Opportunities for travel on foot, including opportunities for long-distance hiking.

      Other recreational uses of these lands should be considered compatible if they do notrequire any modification of design and construction standards for the Trail footpath or Trailfacilities; cause damage to the treadway or Trail facilities; require an engine or motor; oradversely impact the Trail experience or the cultural, natural, or scenic resources of theTrail.

      *****

      supported speed hikes with their accompanying circus atmosphere are inconsistent with current atc policy. i believe the atc needs to make a statement discouraging supported speed hikes as being inconsistent with board policy. as much as i admire JPD as a person, and believe she will continue to be a positive ambassador for the trail, the fact that her claim to fame is as a supported speed hiker makes it even more unlikely that the atc will address this issue.
      2,000 miler
    • max.patch wrote:

      socks wrote:

      max.patch wrote:

      jimmyjam wrote:

      I saw where Jennifer Pharr Davis is now on the ATC board.
      i really like JPD but i think this is a serious mistake.
      Not a mistake but a serious one, do tell. Me, I could care less, it's a non-issue for me, but I am curious why it is a mistake?
      following is atc policy:
      *****

      ATC Policy on the A.T. Experience and Non-Hiking Recreational Uses of Trail Lands

      Adopted by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy in 1997

      The Appalachian Trail is, first and foremost, a footpath open to any and all who travel on foot. Itssole purpose as a recreational resource is to provide an opportunity for “travel on foot throughthe wild, scenic, wooded, pastoral, and culturally significant lands of the AppalachianMountains.” Except in isolated instances where historically recognized nonconforming uses areallowed by legislative authority, the footpath of the Trail should not be used for any otherpurpose. This policy is intended to provide a framework within which other recreational uses willbe evaluated. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy may develop additional policy direction forspecific uses as needed.

      The lands acquired and managed for the Appalachian Trail, and lands designated within theA.T. management zone, not only protect the footpath itself, but provide primary protection of theTrail experience. The Trail experience, as used in this context, is intended to represent the sumof opportunities that are available for those walking the Appalachian Trail to interact with thewild, scenic, pastoral, cultural, and natural elements of the Appalachian Trail environment,unfettered and unimpeded by competing sights or sounds and in as direct and intimate amanner as possible. Integral to this Trail experience are:

      • Opportunities for observation, contemplation, enjoyment, and exploration of thenatural world;

      • A sense of remoteness and detachment from civilization;

      • Opportunities to experience solitude; freedom; personal accomplishment; selfreliance;and self-discovery;

      • A sense of being on the height of the land;

      • Opportunities to experience the historic and pastoral elements of the surroundingcountryside;

      • A feeling of being part of the natural environment; and

      • Opportunities for travel on foot, including opportunities for long-distance hiking.

      Other recreational uses of these lands should be considered compatible if they do notrequire any modification of design and construction standards for the Trail footpath or Trailfacilities; cause damage to the treadway or Trail facilities; require an engine or motor; oradversely impact the Trail experience or the cultural, natural, or scenic resources of theTrail.

      *****

      supported speed hikes with their accompanying circus atmosphere are inconsistent with current atc policy. i believe the atc needs to make a statement discouraging supported speed hikes as being inconsistent with board policy. as much as i admire JPD as a person, and believe she will continue to be a positive ambassador for the trail, the fact that her claim to fame is as a supported speed hiker makes it even more unlikely that the atc will address this issue.
      Wondered about that too, makes sense to me, seems trail runnin' (FKT events) are here to stay....which I really don't mind long as they don't get out of hand with sponsorship and big money.
    • Trillium wrote:

      speed walking the trail is still recreating by foot. I don't see how it is contrary to ATC mission. Those who are supporting speed walkers still access the trail by foot; their vehicles aren't allowed on the trail.

      Just playing devil's advocate.

      I don't see the problem either. Walking the trail is walking the trail, or in those immortal words 'hike your own hike'. Maybe the ATC needs to understand that...
      --
      "What do you mean its sunrise already ?!", me.
    • Trillium wrote:

      speed walking the trail is still recreating by foot. I don't see how it is contrary to ATC mission. Those who are supporting speed walkers still access the trail by foot; their vehicles aren't allowed on the trail.

      Just playing devil's advocate.
      I agree. Running or speed walking the trail are acceptable methods. I think it comes down to disliking something or someone because they are not doing it the way that is considered normal.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123
    • read the ATC policy. there is no question that supported speed hikes are outside of policy. there is no debate here.

      there are really 2 options.

      1. if you believe supported speed hikes are detrimental to the stated purpose of the AT -- and what we have seen thus far is a slippery slope as to what lies ahead -- then you will support the ATC in issuing a statement denouncing this type of activity.
      2. if you believe anything goes as long as it is via foot travel, then you need to contact the ATC and urge them to revise stated policy to reflect current and future useage.
      however, inasmuch as the ATC to reluctant to get involved in controversial topics, i believe option 3 will be selected -- do nothing, say nothing.
      2,000 miler
    • max.patch wrote:

      read the ATC policy. there is no question that supported speed hikes are outside of policy. there is no debate here.

      there are really 2 options.

      1. if you believe supported speed hikes are detrimental to the stated purpose of the AT -- and what we have seen thus far is a slippery slope as to what lies ahead -- then you will support the ATC in issuing a statement denouncing this type of activity.
      2. if you believe anything goes as long as it is via foot travel, then you need to contact the ATC and urge them to revise stated policy to reflect current and future useage.
      however, inasmuch as the ATC to reluctant to get involved in controversial topics, i believe option 3 will be selected -- do nothing, say nothing.
      I really don't care what the ATC policy is. If it's legal to run, walk or crawl the AT then someone should be allowed to do it. A supported speed walk is no different then 99% of hiker's method of doing the AT. It's going from one road crossing to the next on foot and using support like cars, shuttles, hiker feeds, etc.

      Too many organizations getting into too many people's lives for my taste. The ATC should concern themselves more with trail maintenance and less with telling people how they should hike. If supported hikes are a problem then maybe it's time to remove the shelters, huts, lodges, etc because these are all detrimental to the wilderness experience in my view.

      Oops! Never mind. I shouldn't put my values ahead of other hikers values.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123
    • I read the policy that you quoted. Perhaps my reading comprehension is not up to your standards but I did not see anywhere that would imply supported speed hikes being detrimental. Please explain what you mean.

      I personally would never do a speed hike, supported or not. I personally do not understand the reason to do such a hike. However, just because I choose to hike a different way doesn't mean that others should not be allowed to do so.

      My only beef is with those trail runners who think that they automatically have the right of way all the time and that we slower, smell the roses hikers should jump off the trail at the first indication that they are coming.
    • max.patch wrote:

      socks wrote:

      max.patch wrote:

      jimmyjam wrote:

      I saw where Jennifer Pharr Davis is now on the ATC board.
      i really like JPD but i think this is a serious mistake.
      Not a mistake but a serious one, do tell. Me, I could care less, it's a non-issue for me, but I am curious why it is a mistake?
      following is atc policy:
      *****

      ATC Policy on the A.T. Experience and Non-Hiking Recreational Uses of Trail Lands

      Adopted by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy in 1997

      The Appalachian Trail is, first and foremost, a footpath open to any and all who travel on foot. Itssole purpose as a recreational resource is to provide an opportunity for “travel on foot throughthe wild, scenic, wooded, pastoral, and culturally significant lands of the AppalachianMountains.” Except in isolated instances where historically recognized nonconforming uses areallowed by legislative authority, the footpath of the Trail should not be used for any otherpurpose. This policy is intended to provide a framework within which other recreational uses willbe evaluated. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy may develop additional policy direction forspecific uses as needed.

      The lands acquired and managed for the Appalachian Trail, and lands designated within theA.T. management zone, not only protect the footpath itself, but provide primary protection of theTrail experience. The Trail experience, as used in this context, is intended to represent the sumof opportunities that are available for those walking the Appalachian Trail to interact with thewild, scenic, pastoral, cultural, and natural elements of the Appalachian Trail environment,unfettered and unimpeded by competing sights or sounds and in as direct and intimate amanner as possible. Integral to this Trail experience are:

      • Opportunities for observation, contemplation, enjoyment, and exploration of thenatural world;

      • A sense of remoteness and detachment from civilization;

      • Opportunities to experience solitude; freedom; personal accomplishment; selfreliance;and self-discovery;

      • A sense of being on the height of the land;

      • Opportunities to experience the historic and pastoral elements of the surroundingcountryside;

      • A feeling of being part of the natural environment; and

      • Opportunities for travel on foot, including opportunities for long-distance hiking.

      Other recreational uses of these lands should be considered compatible if they do notrequire any modification of design and construction standards for the Trail footpath or Trailfacilities; cause damage to the treadway or Trail facilities; require an engine or motor; oradversely impact the Trail experience or the cultural, natural, or scenic resources of theTrail.

      *****

      supported speed hikes with their accompanying circus atmosphere are inconsistent with current atc policy. i believe the atc needs to make a statement discouraging supported speed hikes as being inconsistent with board policy. as much as i admire JPD as a person, and believe she will continue to be a positive ambassador for the trail, the fact that her claim to fame is as a supported speed hiker makes it even more unlikely that the atc will address this issue.
      Or maybe the atc does plan to address the issue and wants a well-rounded board rather than stacking the board to favor one way of thinking?
      Lost in the right direction.
    • max.patch wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      me, warren and b. jack should be on the ATC board
      i know you're trying to be funny, but jack would be an excellent addition to the board.
      experienced, passionate, and has the ability to communicate both verbally and in written form.a grray
      I really appreciated it when he told me section hiking the entire AT was harder than a thru hike.

      I have also heard he is a great Jeopardy player.
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • As one comment noted, a very one-sided article. The fourth estate is supposed to be keeping an eye on the establishment, not bowing down to them.

      But, if they want to move the terminus, move it to Vermont or New Hampshire. Leave Maine out of it completely.
      --
      "What do you mean its sunrise already ?!", me.
    • LIhikers wrote:

      You know, I can understand both sides of this disagreement.
      I wish they would move the northern terminus to New Hampshire.
      Then I'd be done with the northern half of the trail, and that would be a good thing :)
      I wish they'd move the halfway point to Ohio. Make it a lot easier for me to spend weekends on the trail. :thumbup:
      *

      For once I'd just like to hear myself say, "Great job, self! Why don't you just take the day off."
    • LIhikers wrote:

      I have a son who lives in Mansfield, Ohio.
      Would that work for you? Then I could hike the AT when I visit him.
      For sure. Mansfield is about 1.5-2 hours south of me. I'd travel that just to reach the A.T. every week (at least!) ^^
      *

      For once I'd just like to hear myself say, "Great job, self! Why don't you just take the day off."
    • LIhikers wrote:

      You know, I can understand both sides of this disagreement.
      I wish they would move the northern terminus to New Hampshire.
      Then I'd be done with the northern half of the trail, and that would be a good thing :)
      Yeah, I am a big fan of Myron Avery, but sometimes I wish he was from NH or VT, instead of ME. :D
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General
    • My experience with Baxter State Park predates most of my AT miles. I tend to side with BSP in the latest bru-ha-ha. I have fond memories of nights at Chimney Pond, hikes over Knife Edge and Cathedral, and even Daicey Pond (years later) -- before the AT got rerouted away from there.

      I don't doubt that the enforcement is uneven. Yes, I can see how one might think Bissell was being a jerk. Jurek was using social media to the hilt, with 160 thousand followers. Bissell must have felt compelled to do the same to counter what he felt was potential damage to the park's image.

      Old timers at the park understand that it's regulated to the hilt. Strictly limited access. No stealthing anywhere. It used to be, and may still be -- you had to reserve those Chimney Pond slots in January. And we were more than happy to do so. Hiking in the Whites was what we did on ordinary weekends. Hiking at Baxter, however, was the hike of the season.
    • rafe wrote:

      My experience with Baxter State Park predates most of my AT miles. I tend to side with BSP in the latest bru-ha-ha. I have fond memories of nights at Chimney Pond, hikes over Knife Edge and Cathedral, and even Daicey Pond (years later) -- before the AT got rerouted away from there.

      I don't doubt that the enforcement is uneven. Yes, I can see how one might think Bissell was being a jerk. Jurek was using social media to the hilt, with 160 thousand followers. Bissell must have felt compelled to do the same to counter what he felt was potential damage to the park's image.

      Old timers at the park understand that it's regulated to the hilt. Strictly limited access. No stealthing anywhere. It used to be, and may still be -- you had to reserve those Chimney Pond slots in January. And we were more than happy to do so. Hiking in the Whites was what we did on ordinary weekends. Hiking at Baxter, however, was the hike of the season.
      I avoid that whole Jurek thing unless I'm trying to lighten up a topic that's getting pretty intense. But I will say that I absolutely love the concept of BSP, regardless of what has taken place lately or why. Further, I feel a bit privileged (even though I have yet to step foot there) because as I understand it (which is often far from reality) Thu-hikers probably have more leeway and more freedom for access than people that actually live in the state of Maine. As I understand it, some people have to make reservations for space at the beginning of the year or else - whereas we get to basically just stroll in to the place (space at the Birches withstanding) whenever we show up. Me thinks we outsiders have it pretty good at the moment. I just wish more of the "me-generation" hikers took that in to consideration (all along the trail, as well as arriving at BSP.)
      *

      For once I'd just like to hear myself say, "Great job, self! Why don't you just take the day off."
    • Well, unfortunately, I just read that one, too.

      Me thinks there's not alot going on in Maine. Or this theme has become required writing for some course at the community college or something. Seems like somebody else writes the same article every week.
      *

      For once I'd just like to hear myself say, "Great job, self! Why don't you just take the day off."
    • g00gle wrote:

      Well, unfortunately, I just read that one, too.

      Me thinks there's not alot going on in Maine. Or this theme has become required writing for some course at the community college or something. Seems like somebody else writes the same article every week.
      Well, I have some relatives in Maine, my dad who is from Maine wants nothing to do with them. One thing I learned quickly after visiting up there is that the people of Maine would rather do without the rest of us showing up in Maine.
      --
      "What do you mean its sunrise already ?!", me.
    • Every time Bissell opens his mouth he looks worse. He's going to loose in court because his rangers gave permission for the alcohol. Losing is court is going to be an embarrassment for him. His embarrassment is going to escalate the situation. He will either kick the AT out or go down in flames trying.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123
    • Rasty wrote:

      Every time Bissell opens his mouth he looks worse. He's going to loose in court because his rangers gave permission for the alcohol. Losing is court is going to be an embarrassment for him. His embarrassment is going to escalate the situation. He will either kick the AT out or go down in flames trying.
      I agree that losing in court will be a major problem for him.
      If they can't get a conviction every "entitled" hiker will think they have a precedent.
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.