the down side of Scott Jurek's record AT hike-- Baxter state park condemnation

[Sly]

this all reminds me of the ever reoccuring argument about why the AT is so "poorly blazed" in the white mountains. too many of just don't get that the world does not revolve around one trail and that the whole thing could cease to exist today and places like the smokies, shenandoah, the whites and baxter would keep on as if nothing major had happened. its not all about the AT, not even close.

watch, to prove my point i promise at least one person will try and argue that without the AT one or all of these places would suffer...

The White Mountains is a National Forest which the AT is clearly entrenched. It's up to the AMC to mark the trail. The AT isn't about to leave the others you mentioned either being NP's

[BirdBrain]

Thru's are not an asset to Baxter. They are a tolerated liability. Baxter will do better without them.

[MuddyWaters]

Thru's are not an asset to Baxter. They are a tolerated liability. Baxter will do better without them.

I believe its clear they would save 20% of their manpower budget without the AT hikers.

[tdoczi]

The White Mountains is a National Forest which the AT is clearly entrenched. It's up to the AMC to mark the trail. The AT isn't about to leave the others you mentioned either being NP's

you simultaneously completely missed and completely proved my point.

i reference the argument about the blazing in the whites because it shows the same attitude- the notion that any of these places has some higher responsibility towards the AT, and by extension, to hikers of the AT. its the same attitude that many of us cop towards the huts and hiker' alleged "right" to stay at them. to me, both of those things and the ignoring of the rules at BSP and then blaming it on the rules themselves being unreasonable are all part of the exact same lousy, narrow mindset too many of us have.

[Another Kevin]

If he has not broken the law, they can't fine him. It remains to be seen whether he arranged for everybody to be there and exceed the group limit. Some people may have been there without his knowledge and he therefore should not be legally accountable for them. Especially if he did try to keep his personal group size under 12.

We don't know what the littering charge referred to. It could have been they lost the cork or forgot a cup. Personally I wouldn't expect that Scott could spell his name at that point but if he left litter he left litter and should be fined for it if he did.

BSP has specific media permit rules located here http://www.baxterstateparkauthority....diaPolicy2.pdf.

No, com'n.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legi...Asec501-A.html

I agree that the authorities have rather blown the affair out of proportion, but they're not required to have a sense of proportion.

Does violating the group size limit require mens rea, or would negligence suffice, or is it even strict-liability? If the crowd gathered and Mr Jurek didn't tell them to disperse, does he assume liability? Or does the argument "they were there. If he weren't there, they wouldn't have followed" hold water? There are few precedents.

The first item in the definition of 'disorderly conduct' is 'loud and unreasonable noise.' I'd think a prosecutor COULD hold that the whooping and halloaing at the record-time finish was loud and unreasonable.

And it's possible to read the media permit rules in such a way that posting a YouTube video from your phonecam is prohibited:

"For the purposes of this policy ‘media projects’ include any projects internally orexternally generated including, but not limited to, written, audio, photographic,paint, and film mediums creating product by either for-profit or non-profit entities,involving the use or application of talent, professional crew, props, product orservice advertisement and intended for commercial profit and/or copyrighted orproprietary public distribution (groups or individuals other than family andfriends)."

YouTube videos go to the whole world, and those who post there know it. YouTube adds product and service advertisements to them. And all media is born copyrighted, no formalities required.

I think such a reading would be just plain silly, but in the current climate, I suspect that a prosecutor and judge could be found who would advance that interpretation. Certainly it's an identical argument to that used by the FAA to classify video from amateur drones as "commercial aviation."

It really would depend on whether they got a hangin' judge.

But all that's a sidelight. The message from BSP is clear. A-T hikers are no longer welcome. No matter how well-behaved, we are too numerous. Even if we were not too numerous, our failure to police the ill-behaved among us has spoilt it for us all.

We all ought to honour their wishes. It's common courtesy. That's why I shall never visit Baxter. And I'm sure that if anyone from BSPA is reading this, they approve wholeheartedly of my staying away.

I'm ashamed of us all, myself included.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. -- W.B. Yeats

[Coffee]

There's no reason for anyone willing to follow the rules to avoid BSP.

[Solent]

I see parallels to Deflate Gate.

* Great athlete
* Athlete's association with group that flaunted rules in past
* Controling authority with total authority but ineffectual using it
* Controlling authority that looked to "catch a big fish" to further its agenda
* Controlling authority not interested in preventing problem beforehand -- what's the gain in that?
* A good guy paying the price caught up in **** for no fault of his own

Tongue in cheek? Somewhat, but in both cases it's all about agendas and then making the "facts" fit the case that the Big Dogs are trying to make. That people in power at BSP are playing this game is sad, and does not bode well for what comes next.

The other potential parallel with Deflate Gate is that one or a few individuals in control of a important organization can do some really dumb things. That does not bode well for what comes next, I think.

I agree, this is what it seems like to me.

Yes Scott messed up and I acknowledged that. I was not referring to inviting someone in your house to mess it up, I also don't believe Scott would intentionally trash your house. Is he not human too, to make mistakes when not intended?
To Donde, BirdBrain, and Sarcasm the elf, I was trying to say that BSP could have done something before Scott showed up, whether that's an interview or an article or whatever to put not only a spotlight on Scott but themselves as well to gain a profit in anyway they can (they did mentioned in their letter they are very limited on resources). Donations, volunteers, more "respectful" visitors and what not. Would this have changed the outcome of Scotts finish? Maybe. Instead, we get this, IMHO, a poor statement on a problem that has been happening for a long time all coming down on one guy to further their own plan.

[MuddyWaters]

What if it started a movement?
Recognition of a problem often does.

There is no legitimate way gsmnp can allow thruhikers priveleges, particularly non documented thruhikers at that, it doesnt allow everyone else. The end of unlimited thruhiking is coming, killed by popularity.

[Sly]

There is no legitimate way gsmnp can allow thruhikers priveleges, particularly non documented thruhikers at that, it doesnt allow everyone else. The end of unlimited thruhiking is coming, killed by popularity.

It already does. Thru-hikers only need to have a permit (same as everyone else), but they don't need a schedule of shelters through the park, and can tent at the shelters if full.

[BirdBrain]

Last post before I put a couple more threads on ignore. Baxter is not enamored with coolness. It is not part of the vision to advertize or make special allowance for cool people. Baxter is not ESPN. Baxter does not want this kind of circus.

[MuddyWaters]

It already does. Thru-hikers only need to have a permit (same as everyone else), but they don't need a schedule of shelters through the park, and can tent at the shelters if full.

Im quite aware, im saying it is a convenience that by all logic, is likely not legal for the federal government to give to one preferential user group, an undocumented group at that.

Doesnt take much anti thruhiker backlash to start repealing the niceties afforded them

[Dogwood]

As much as I recognize BSP's legitimate concerns in its two clearly stated concise well written letters/statements and as much as I'm not a gung ho FKT thrill seeker myself it seems a bit of a stretch to say Jurek and his team flaunted BSP rules.

flaunt
flônt,flänt/
verb
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]

• display (something) ostentatiously, especially in order to provoke envy or admiration or to show defiance.
  [COLOR=#878787 !important]"newly rich consumers eager to flaunt their prosperity"[/COLOR]
  

  synonyms:

  show off, display ostentatiously, make a (great) show of, put on show/display, parade; More

  
  
  
  
  • dress or behave in a sexually provocative way.
    
    
  
  
  
  

[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]




[COLOR=#878787 !important]Choose languageAfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijani BasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianBurmeseCata lanCebuanoChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEsto nianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGre ekGujaratiHaitianHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIce landicIgboIndonesianIri****alianJapaneseJavaneseKa nnadaKazakhKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMac edonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMo ngolianNepaliNorwegianNyanjaPersianPolishPortugues ePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSinhalaSlovakSloveni anSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTe luguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshYi ddishYorubaZulu[/COLOR]


[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]





I've personally witnessed some rather selfish and truly disrespectful displays of behavior from FKTers and FKT wanna bees on the AT, PCT, JMT and Kalalau Trail. I would not place Jurek in that group. Some things his team possibly could have done better in BSP but during a 46 day nearly 2200 mile well documented and public FKT his team and him, from all that I can tell, handled themselves well overall.

[MuddyWaters]

As a very very public figure, he is being made an example of.

At minimum, BSP telegraphs that they wont tolerate rule breaking to a wide audience due to jureks media coverage.

At worst, they use it as fuel to remove the AT, which they see as untenable in the future due to growth anyhow.

Either way they win.

[TheCheek]

The more important discussion to be had by the AT community, and thru hikers in particular, is not BSP vs Scott Jurek Inc. It is how the LNT values of the culture has eroded. This event simply condensed the bigger issue into a flashpoint.

I thru hiked nobo in 2005. I live away from the AT and rarely get to visit. Last year my father in law did about 2/3 of it so I was able to see what 9 years has done. Things weren't great in 05 but wow it was a circus in 2014 by comparison.

The wilderness hiking experience the AT may have once provided decades ago has long since been replaced by an entirely unique, amazing, challenging, but not wilderness, AT experience. It consists of things like making lifetime friends with other hikers, struggling with finding where you fit along the spectrum of purist thru hikers, learning yogiing, growing past being a gear head, dealing with other hikers in the beginning who, while maybe insecure, like to talk big about their miles, learning how to take the trail a day at a time, hitting snow in the Smokies, maybe figuring out clever slack packing opportunities, meeting some of the trail community legends, timing the weather with your nero resupply town stop, slogging through hundreds of miles of heat and humidity with almost no great vistas, maybe staying in your first hostel, getting a ride forward or backward for trail days, the list can go on and on. All fine and good things, but notice I did not say wilderness....

AT - A footpath for those who seek fellowship with other hikers, fitting in a few trail magic extravaganzas along the way, and an occasional competitive feat doesn't roll off the tongue but at least is a bit closer.

Most anywhere along the trail that is a designated wilderness area, especially those in the south, would simply be better off with the AT not passing through. Brasstown, Nantahala, and Blood Mountain come to mind. How has the AT benefited the wilderness and thr goals of the wilderness protection system in any other of the two dozen or so wilderness areas it passes through? Poor LNT ethics among some hikers has made overuse one of the biggest threats to many of these protected areas.

Either the trail culture needs to change or the trail location. The two are currently too often incompatible.

[Alligator]

I agree that the authorities have rather blown the affair out of proportion, but they're not required to have a sense of proportion.

Does violating the group size limit require mens rea, or would negligence suffice, or is it even strict-liability? If the crowd gathered and Mr Jurek didn't tell them to disperse, does he assume liability? Or does the argument "they were there. If he weren't there, they wouldn't have followed" hold water? There are few precedents.

There was a picture I saw of the group he hiked up with, it looks like there were 12 people with him and maybe slightly more. Seems like they should have ticketed his whole immediate group if they felt that there was a violation. They singled him out. They are all responsible adults, there's no permit with a group leader bearing responsibility. In my view they would all be wrong.

The first item in the definition of 'disorderly conduct' is 'loud and unreasonable noise.' I'd think a prosecutor COULD hold that the whooping and halloaing at the record-time finish was loud and unreasonable.

Absolutely no chance in hell would this ever happen. It is common for thruhikers to whoop and cheer when they reach the sign. Nearly twenty years ago I was on and in the vicinity of Hamlin Ridge in the park on a fall day. It was the first time I was in the park so I asked somebody what the cheering was for. They pointed in the distance and I could see a hiker approaching the summit. Everybody was cheering when the hiker got to the sign. You could hear it on the next ridge where I was standing. Whatever noise they were making, they were making it because Scott just broke a world record. It would have had to have been Scott making the noise anyway for the charge, what are they going to do, arrest the crowd for cheering?

And it's possible to read the media permit rules in such a way that posting a YouTube video from your phonecam is prohibited:

"For the purposes of this policy ‘media projects’ include any projects internally orexternally generated including, but not limited to, written, audio, photographic,paint, and film mediums creating product by either for-profit or non-profit entities,involving the use or application of talent, professional crew, props, product orservice advertisement and intended for commercial profit and/or copyrighted orproprietary public distribution (groups or individuals other than family andfriends)."

YouTube videos go to the whole world, and those who post there know it. YouTube adds product and service advertisements to them. And all media is born copyrighted, no formalities required.

I think such a reading would be just plain silly, but in the current climate, I suspect that a prosecutor and judge could be found who would advance that interpretation. Certainly it's an identical argument to that used by the FAA to classify video from amateur drones as "commercial aviation."

It really would depend on whether they got a hangin' judge.

I wasn't arguing that point, just providing a link. I think it would be silly too. They haven't done it, I do not think they will, and I not going to be silly and argue this.

But all that's a sidelight. The message from BSP is clear. A-T hikers are no longer welcome. No matter how well-behaved, we are too numerous. Even if we were not too numerous, our failure to police the ill-behaved among us has spoilt it for us all.

We all ought to honour their wishes. It's common courtesy. That's why I shall never visit Baxter. And I'm sure that if anyone from BSPA is reading this, they approve wholeheartedly of my staying away.

I'm ashamed of us all, myself included.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. -- W.B. Yeats

I think everybody should follow the park rules as well. I am not absolving him, I was giving him the benefit of the doubt as that's the way the system works. He was not proven guilty of anything. The park's response was vindictive the more I think about it. BSP LEO gives Scott 3 citations. It's not picked up in the news and they were unhappy about it and took to that wonderful place to vent sour grapes--Facebook. That's an uncommon thing BTW for law enforcement to do. They usually go with the allegedly's and stick to the facts and they generally don't try to pillory the individual outright before they get to see the judge. It's that whole innocent before proven guilty thing. Not seeming to be the case here in how they are treating it. Yeah they are trying to get the AT out of the park. A few months back I wrote that I thought the park was not handling their interaction with the ATC with reasonable bearing. Same again here IMO.

[Driver8]

I think everybody should follow the park rules as well. I am not absolving him, I was giving him the benefit of the doubt as that's the way the system works. He was not proven guilty of anything. The park's response was vindictive the more I think about it. BSP LEO gives Scott 3 citations. It's not picked up in the news and they were unhappy about it and took to that wonderful place to vent sour grapes--Facebook. That's an uncommon thing BTW for law enforcement to do. They usualley go with the allegedly's and stick to the facts and they generally don't try to pillory the individual outright before they get to see the judge. It's that whole innocent before proven guilty thing. Not seeming to be the case here in how they are treating it. Yeah they are trying to get the AT out of the park. A few months back I wrote that I thought the park was not handling their interaction with the ATC with reasonable bearing. Same again here IMO.

Excellent points here. I would guess that the dynamic peakbagger referenced early in this thread may be at work - certain, shall we say, Judge Smails-like constituents of BSP piped up to the park with their displeasure about the champagne celebration and the park's management found themselves, previously having been unfazed or at least willing to shrug it off, as they do reportedly most every hiking group which spirits some alcohol into the park to celebrate their bikes.

A few screaming calls and emails from a handful of multimillionaires and from lawyers threatening to sue the park under the terms of the trust, and we see the park very publicly embarrass itself as it has.

[Driver8]

Sorry, lost my train between edits I think it's clear what I meant - BSP jerking its knee her under heat and legal threat.

[Donde]

Im quite aware, im saying it is a convenience that by all logic, is likely not legal for the federal government to give to one preferential user group, an undocumented group at that.

Doesnt take much anti thruhiker backlash to start repealing the niceties afforded them

Whoa dude are trying to make a 14th amendment case and invoke the equal protection clause? If so.. interesting.

Solent,

I'm sure Scott meant well and is not in fact the anti-christ, but he did it, so pay the fine and move on (which for all I know is exactly what he is doing). BSP has ticketed lots of hikers before and will in the future. I have to think that part of why they are making a big deal about this and publicizing it, is because Scott's finish was already publicized. If one publicizes one's rule breaking and there is no response what is the effect of that? When I get a ticket can I whine about how I learned it from watching Scott?

It will suck if BSP closes to the AT but oh well, they have a mission to accomplish and I wish them well with it, and I feel quite sympathetic after spending time with the PCT class of '15 and the AT class of '14. It's become about the party not the hike, which has nothing to do with Scott but oh well.

[rickb]

The White Mountains is a National Forest which the AT is clearly entrenched. It's up to the AMC to mark the trail. The AT isn't about to leave the others you mentioned either being NP's

Quibble time.

I am not 100% sure about this, but I believe that professional WMNF crews are responsible for marking the AT where it passes over the Presidentials.

The AMC does a tremendous amount of Trail work on and off the AT in the Whites, of course.

I just think that any work they do above treeline in the Presidentials would be in a supporting role to the National Forest Service which I believe has primary responsibility for that stretch.

Happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

[egilbe]

The trails that the AT follows through the Whites, pre-dates the AT. They were there first. The AT is just using pre-existing trails so they are marked accordingly. The solution to not being able to follow the AT through the White mountains is to buy a map.