The Speed Trap

[Just Bill]

So you're cruising along some country road, maybe even on your way to a trail head, and enjoying the drive. The road is windy, the scenery breathtaking and generally peaceful. Traffic is light and so is the population. Maybe a little road trip music is blasting, or maybe you've just got the windows down and you're breathing deep the clean air.


You take the turns clean at 55 MPH and make good time zipping along. You take the reduced speed curve noted as 45 MPH at 46 and as you come around the corner you spot three houses, a lonely looking gas station and a feed store. But this little hamlet is just another blip on your radar and you glide back up to speed as you cruise by.


A minute or two later you are yanked from your blissful drive as you note the cherries popping in your side mirror. You know what happened, you've seen it before. That blip on your radar wasn't the only radar blipping away today. So you ease down and slide to the shoulder. You pull out the insurance and reach for yer driver's license. Hoping to find a little sympathy and a warning from the uniformed fella approaching the car; you find only mirrored Ray Ban's reflecting your own pleading eyes.


Heads shake as some hidden sign in the aforementioned hamlet indicated that 35 and not 55 is the posted limit when you are "Downtown". Now luckily for you the curve slowed you down and the radar only clocked you doing 48 as you cleared the turn coming into town. Otherwise of course you'd have hit 20 over and we'd be taking a trip to the county courthouse for reckless driving. But thankfully, says the kind officer, you're just looking at a speeding ticket.


Now you'd like to bitch, maybe even add assaulting an officer to the not so friendly list of tickets, but we all know where that goes. So you nod yer head, surrender your license and take your scolding with a slight frown. The disingenuous but obligatory, "Just doing my job, have a safe day." closes the encounter.


Nobody minds much being caught fair and square, but something about a speed trap always leaves us feeling a bit cheated. We all know the law, abide when we can, but the speed traps tend to leave us a bit sour to say the least. It's a low blow, dishonorable law keeping really. While we like to think we pay this fella's salary, well sometimes this fella sees fit to pay it himself. Drum up a little revenue for the home team outta those "from away" who are passing though.


Likely as not, we won't hear all the facts. Or it may be some time before we hear any of them as the justice system generally moves with the speed of a country mule. And perhaps the fella in question has indeed been forced to consult a fancy city attorney to sort out the charges as he's found himself way over his head after a long drive.


There is a simple fact that is picture perfect, a fella did break the rules. And at least one of the tickets issued is perfectly valid. Nod yer head and take it with a slight frown.


Although this speed trap does leave us a bit sour now doesn't it.


Seems that some communication was had before that last bend in the road. That permits were issued; although the warnings and rules that accompanied them were spelled out clear as vermud. In fact it appears that the local constable could have easily handed down a stern warning before things escalated. That every opportunity to avoid disaster likely existed for both parties involved. In the good citizen travelling by and behind the mirrored Ray Ban's an eager anticipation was present in both sets of eyes.


A clean setup and eagerly anticipated outcome has given a fine opportunity for the sleepy hamlet to spread it's message to the country at large. Not that the message isn't needed, or in hindsight we couldn't guess the speed trap was coming. But still. A low blow, some dirty law keeping to say the least.


But all you can do is shake your head, frown a bit, and move on.


Now as it turns out, we do care what that little hamlet has to say. And just around their bend does sit a little spot that we like to visit. Need to visit really. So set the poorly executed delivery aside and take the message at face value. Excuse the poor manners and dirty tricks of this desperate little place. The rules are the rules, the law is the law. Even if they are playing a bit dirty, they are just doing their job.


Deep down they don't want to see the road closed just to ensure we all have a "safe" day.


Now the problem with a speed trap, what leaves us feeling cheated by it; it really didn't have much to do with the actual speeder at all. No real desire to do wrong occurred, no real crime to be fought. Simply a technicality easily walked into by any of us. Doubly so when it was laid out kindly for us to step in and tucked around a bend. No vicious blood thirsty maniac racing through town looking to run down the local kids; just a fella rolling by at the generally posted 55 enjoying the drive to the trailhead. With the windows down, taking in the scenery, breathing in the clean air.


On paper, a speed trap follows the letter of the law. In real life, all we can do is shake our heads. Frown a bit at the trap, but pay more attention to the town in which it occurred, especially since we've got a dear auntie in that town who likes cats and we'd all like to take at least one trip up with the kids to visit her.




Deep down, we all know the speed trap doesn't have anything to do with speeding.
So fer the speeder in question, let him take the ticket and move on.

[Another Kevin]

Deep down, we all know the speed trap doesn't have anything to do with speeding.
So fer the speeder in question, let him take the ticket and move on.

Well said. I've said before, too, that Mr Jurek stumbled into this battle by a momentary indiscretion. This wasn't his fight. He didn't choose it.

I care passionately about the underlying issues. I care not a whit for the fact that he committed a peccadillo in the public eye and inadvertently became the focus for a problem that's much bigger than he is.

And I don't call for him to apologize publicly - at least not until he gets some assurance from the authorities that he's paid his debt and the issue is settled. Otherwise, it's just too likely that they'll decide to stack criminal charges on top of the administrative violations and that any public apology will be used as an admission of guilt.

[CalebJ]

Well said, JB.

[kjbrown]

From the other side:

I sit on the side of the road looking to prevent another tragedy, last year a unattentive driver came around the turn outside of town and going 20 miles over the speed limit hit a small child ending his/her life. I remember that day like it was yesterday the mother screaming to do something as I arrived, looking and knowing that anything I do will be useless as the child's head is looking like paper pulp. The sobbing of the driver that was just out to have a good day on the trail on the outside of town and looking to get away from the 9-5 this week. I will never get that day out of my mind and I wake up screaming in the night thinking that it could have been my daughter that was walking and riding her bike down that road 10 minutes before this tragedy. My wife tries to understand and my daughter just knows that daddy has a bad dream sometimes. I haven't the heart to tell them that the training I go to each week is a councilor to help with the PTSD. All I know is that I need to keep watch over this small part of the world to help keep people safe that I care about. I don't like to sit here in this speed trap, I know that it is not fun for people that are going to the trail or just driving past my town, but it is all I can do.

I know that I am not as good telling as story or setting a stage as the OP, and I am not writing this with any criticism or any other thoughts then to show the other side because this story is true.

[Lone Wolf]

too long to read. what's your point?

[Malto]

too long to read. what's your point?

I believe it is a warning that there is a bush in central VA with a Ranger hiding behind it clocking hikers and ticketing anyone going over 2mph. Or did I miss the point?

[Mags]

I care passionately about the underlying issues. I care not a whit for the fact that he committed a peccadillo in the public eye and inadvertently became the focus for a problem that's much bigger than he is.



That's really what is is..isn't it? Both sides of this silly debate of Champagne Gate are, in my opinion, missing the much bigger issue.

As you so aptly put it Kevin, he was the flash point of this long smoldering fire.

Outside Magazine has a nice summary of the real issue IMO.
http://www.outsideonline.com/2001076/scott-jureks-champagne-problems?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebookpost

It is beyond Jurek and crystallizes an ongoing debate...

How best to preserve and protect the wild spaces while still allowing access?

[BirdBrain]

From the other side:

I sit on the side of the road looking to prevent another tragedy, last year a unattentive driver came around the turn outside of town and going 20 miles over the speed limit hit a small child ending his/her life. I remember that day like it was yesterday the mother screaming to do something as I arrived, looking and knowing that anything I do will be useless as the child's head is looking like paper pulp. The sobbing of the driver that was just out to have a good day on the trail on the outside of town and looking to get away from the 9-5 this week. I will never get that day out of my mind and I wake up screaming in the night thinking that it could have been my daughter that was walking and riding her bike down that road 10 minutes before this tragedy. My wife tries to understand and my daughter just knows that daddy has a bad dream sometimes. I haven't the heart to tell them that the training I go to each week is a councilor to help with the PTSD. All I know is that I need to keep watch over this small part of the world to help keep people safe that I care about. I don't like to sit here in this speed trap, I know that it is not fun for people that are going to the trail or just driving past my town, but it is all I can do.

I know that I am not as good telling as story or setting a stage as the OP, and I am not writing this with any criticism or any other thoughts then to show the other side because this story is true.


God bless you. Much is destroyed each day by people bending things just a little bit for their convenience. I drive the speed limit... all the time. I am on high alert all the time as the weapon I am in hurls down the road. It is not just about me and my appointment. Thank you for your speed trap. I mean this. It is not just a convenient statement. May God give you rest. You deserve rest. You are saving lives. You are helping people. You deserve peace. You are the solution.

[Just Bill]

From the other side:

I sit on the side of the road looking to prevent another tragedy, last year a unattentive driver came around the turn outside of town and going 20 miles over the speed limit hit a small child ending his/her life. I remember that day like it was yesterday the mother screaming to do something as I arrived, looking and knowing that anything I do will be useless as the child's head is looking like paper pulp. The sobbing of the driver that was just out to have a good day on the trail on the outside of town and looking to get away from the 9-5 this week. I will never get that day out of my mind and I wake up screaming in the night thinking that it could have been my daughter that was walking and riding her bike down that road 10 minutes before this tragedy. My wife tries to understand and my daughter just knows that daddy has a bad dream sometimes. I haven't the heart to tell them that the training I go to each week is a councilor to help with the PTSD. All I know is that I need to keep watch over this small part of the world to help keep people safe that I care about. I don't like to sit here in this speed trap, I know that it is not fun for people that are going to the trail or just driving past my town, but it is all I can do.

I know that I am not as good telling as story or setting a stage as the OP, and I am not writing this with any criticism or any other thoughts then to show the other side because this story is true.


Yer side of the story sits just fine with mine and believe it or not I had a thought of a tale similar to yours as I wrote this that I cut out. In a further irony we both told our tales with the same intent and I thankee kindly fer yours.

What I'm not a big fan of is vilifying the 100th driver through the trap as the reason for it, especially when we all know better. At the heart of each is a serious issue that affects some of us right to the core. But we still need to accept that most are just passing through. Past tragedy doesn't give us the right to take it out on today's passerby- only to be vigilant in pursuit of the true goal. In both cases, rather than a citation, telling the story to each person passing by of why the speed trap was set is likely more powerful and healing for all involved.

Nor am I much for continuing to beat down a fella for something well beyond his control or ability.

Yerself included.

[Slo-go'en]

As someone who lives in the country, I wish our local police would start doing speed traps again. I really hate being passed at 70 MPH on a double yellow line going down the hill as I slow down to make my turn off. Always some damn tourist from away in a big hurry to get someplace else.

I drive the speed limit +5 if safe, I slow down to the speed limit when going through the little hamlets - which really drives the tourist behind me crazy and at first opportunity speed past me, often on a double yellow line. And I just think to myself - go ahead, you hit the moose at 65-70 MPH ya dang fool. It seems no matter how fast I drive, who ever is behind me wants to go faster.

[BirdBrain]

These analogies keep exaggerating the issue to make it sound like things are just arbitrary. This was not just a Joe 6pack cruising through life and getting clubbed. This was a highly publicized event that should have made every attempt to be above reproach. If Joe 6pack gets a ticket because of stupidity or ignorance or choice, he can expect anonymity. If Joe 6pack gets sponsors and has the thousands of people watch him speed, he should expect a bit less anonymity. If Joe 6pack is warned and then does the same violation and is a sponsored celebrity and acts like he did nothing... well, I would expect the internet to blow up.

[GreatDane]

I slow to the posted speed limit in small towns out of respect for the people who live there. I know how I feel when some idiot drives like a maniac through my neighborhood full of kids, pets, and elderly people (older than me!), whether or not there is an incident. If it means that the guy behind me has to slow down, and might not cause an accident, so much the better. How that applies to the BSP issue, I'm not sure, except that having a little respect for other people and attempting to understand why the rules are in place (whether or not you agree with them or how they are or are not enforced) generally makes for a better place to live (and hike). IMHO.

[Pedaling Fool]

I really don't care about the analogy, but a real question. How exactly is a speed trap set? Maybe I should drive more and cycle less ;)

Personally, I can't think of why they are a bad thing (not really knowing how they are designed). But, to put things in perspective, speeding is also my pet peeve, I'm sick of how many people not just speed, but go way above the speed limit. Set them traps!

Speeding has become an accepted way to drive and really is only enforced for revenue purposes, no one really wants to solve the problem and it is a problem because so many of the accidents are from speeding. In fact it's not really accurate to call many of the "car accidents" accidents, rather it's recklessness, period. And we've all seem to be alright with that.

People are not only dying from these "accidents", but there are many more injuries that are much like what you see in war, yet it doesn't get near the attention, despite there being in the many many thousands of people affected. Just Crazy!

[Another Kevin]

These analogies keep exaggerating the issue to make it sound like things are just arbitrary. This was not just a Joe 6pack cruising through life and getting clubbed. This was a highly publicized event that should have made every attempt to be above reproach. If Joe 6pack gets a ticket because of stupidity or ignorance or choice, he can expect anonymity. If Joe 6pack gets sponsors and has the thousands of people watch him speed, he should expect a bit less anonymity. If Joe 6pack is warned and then does the same violation and is a sponsored celebrity and acts like he did nothing... well, I would expect the internet to blow up.

Because of the intensity of BSPA's response, he cannot say, "I made a mistake and I'm sorry." That statement would be greeted with only derision - and no amount of restitution would ever satisfy. Moreover, such a statement could be construed as an admission of guilt if some eager prosecutor in Maine decides he's going to try to put the guy away for a charge like 'felony criminal mischief.' Given the lack of restraint so far - and issuing a press release over a couple of tickets is hardly an ordinary response to an administrative violation. I'd certainly worry about further prosecution if I were in his sneakers. Making him a felon over what is fundamentally a well-publicized indiscretion would surely be punishing him for the sins of a thousand others who preceded him.

Moreover, even without the champagne, I don't see how the hike could have been 'above reproach.' I actually believe that BSPA was looking for a flashpoint to draw attention to their legitimate grievances. Had it not been the champagne, it would have been party size - and someone as prominent as he would accrete well-wishers and hangers-on and not be able to get rid of them, leading inevitably to a too-large party even if he had started up the mountain alone. The sponsored hike would also be 'unauthorized commercial activity' (and if they were very vindictive, any trademark visible on any of his gear could be construed as 'sponsorship'. That's surely the way it works for spectators at the Olympics. He wouldn't have had to seek sponsorship.) I'm sure he didn't have direct control over the media people, and he could have been accused of that even if the media people stayed away themselves but subsequently bought some random spectator's phonecam footage. In short, they were going to get him for something - simply because he's famous and they knew it would be newsworthy.

They were probably justified in singling him out arbitrarily - which they did with the press release, not the citations. The justification is in using it as a way to call attention to the problem of the A-T being an insupportable burden to the park. But that's not about Mr. Jurek, except as one of hundreds or thousands of other hikers, a great many of whom are considerably less well-behaved than he. It's a real problem, and it deserves to be addressed.

They have demonstrated that Mr. Jurek is not above the law by citing him. Anyone less prominent would be able to make amends by paying the fines and moving on with life, hopefully having learnt a lesson.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/John_Waller_in_pillory.JPG
THE INTERNET RESPONDS TO A FAMOUS PERSON'S PECCADILLO

[BirdBrain]

This ascribes a lot of intent on Baxter. Baxter had a duty to dispel the very public perception by Scott's actions that Katahdin is party central. I do not believe Baxter is hoping to crusify him. I believe an apology would be welcome and would have healed much. There is nothing in Baxter's history that would suggest that they are hoping to litigate beyond the fines and dispelling the bad advertising. On the contrary, Baxter has been very patient. Ascribing this intent is unwarranted and furthers the perception that Baxter is the bad guy. They do not deserve such an opinion. We are not going to agree on this one. The thought that an apology could be valuable to an over zealous prosecutor is silly. There is already a film record of the offenses. The film shows the alcohol. The film shows it being spilled. The very existence of the film is a violation. None of this would be that big if he was not sponsored and warned. An evil Maine lawyer would not need an apology if he was bent on destruction. The film admits what any redundant information an apology could reveal.

[Just Bill]

What's worst of all is there could have been two good guys.


Really good guys.

[colorado_rob]

Yet ANOTHER Scott Jurek thread ? Yikes. I sure got suckered into reading this one by the title......

[BirdBrain]

Well I am equally pissed that people continue to ascribe all kinds of wild intent to Baxter. All Scott had to do was to say that he was exhausted and not making perfect decisions and in retrospect should have done it different. That explanation is likely the truth and would have been credible. Had that happened, we would not he here. Instead people continue to dump on Baxter and Maine. The gasoline is the insults continually hurled at Maine and Baxter because they rightfully said that katahdin is not a bar to a very public display that said otherwise. There is nothing nice about equating Baxter to speed traps or crazy cat ladies. I put these things on ignore as fast as they come up. And yes, I react every time someone pisses on Baxter or Maine.

And by the way, I am not the one that keeps creating fairy tales designed to make a person (who was warned but yet ignored the warning) into the sweet innocent hero, while ascribing evil intent to Baxter.

And another I hate Maine thread goes on ignore.

[Lone Wolf]

i agree with JB in post #16. BSP shoulda done something many years ago. they look like the ass now. go Scott! :)

[Lone Wolf]

And another I hate Maine thread goes on ignore.
oh puhleeze! :rolleyes:

[Malto]

This thread isn't about cars? :confused:

[MuddyWaters]

As the class of 2015 begins trickling in, they are likely more aware of rules there than ever before. No thanks to ....

Mission accomplished

[rocketsocks]

I had no idea it was such a conspiracy, it's all so clear to me now. :rolleyes: Way to vilify a partner who has bent over backwards to help hikers for decades...DECADES!

[imscotty]

Imagine a different story;
BSP reaches out to SJ and the media involved. Explains the issues facing the trail as a whole, BSP in particular. They make a simple, heartfelt offer, our way or the highway and Scott being a generally decent if not exceptional guy by all accounts agrees. They team up, carefully coordinating the message. Scott has a private moment on Big K, with Jenny and his crew photographer only.

Bill,

I think that BSP was very accommodating when they issued the media permit which included a restriction that they stay 500' off the summit. This would have allowed Scott (and other hikers) his peaceful moment with Jenny on Big K, the two of them could have taken a picture or two, and then moved on. I think one of the biggest sources of anger for BSP (and their harsh reaction and FB posting clearly demonstrates anger), comes from this blatant disregard for BSP's regulations and for the resource. The Media/ Sponsors blatantly and very publicly just flipped them off. It am sympathetic to SJ, I think the punishment brought on him far exceeds what is appropriate for his actions, but when you lay down with dogs, you are going to get fleas.

[Lone Wolf]

I think one of the biggest sources of anger for BSP (and their harsh reaction and FB posting clearly demonstrates anger), comes from this blatant disregard for BSP's regulations and for the resource. The Media/ Sponsors blatantly and very publicly just flipped them off. It am sympathetic to SJ, I think the punishment brought on him far exceeds what is appropriate for his actions, but when you lay down with dogs, you are going to get fleas.

i've said it it a dozen times. hikers walkin' into BSP are not aware of the basic rules. BSPs fault for not posting them. in fact "back in the day" rangers at daicey pond accepted packages from hikers with champagne in them. bad rangers. Jurek did no wrong. hundreds before him did the same thing. at least he white-blazed the whole way there, didn't get hostels and motels off limits, didn't trash shelters and campsites, etc. BSP and the entitled mainers are to blame for this mess. just my opinion :)

[Water Rat]

BSP does have the rules posted at Katahdin Stream Campground...right next to the AT as it goes through the campground and leading to the Hunt Trail. They are located on a board that says "INFORMATION." While this might not be posted as the thrus come in to the park, it is posted before all of them head up the Hunt Trail. In fact it is within the line of sight, as one looks at Katahdin.

[Just Bill]

If Joe 6pack is warned and then does the same violation and is a sponsored celebrity and acts like he did nothing... well, I would expect the internet to blow up.


Bill,

I think that BSP was very accommodating when they issued the media permit which included a restriction that they stay 500' off the summit.

Not to pick on you Scott. BB, maybe...
I have seen many posts about "being warned", and it's safe to assume after Mr. Bissell stating it on facebook that the "500'" restriction is on the books.

What I cannot find anywhere is any statement made outside of this site that said warnings occurred.
What is the source for these comments?
Or is it simply an assumption that has been repeated until it became fact?

You would think that Mr. Bissell would have pointed out someone warning Scott if said warning occurred. If nothing else it's a compelling nail in the coffin.
Did I simply miss it? Can someone post it?

[Just Bill]

Also have yet to see any media permits granted with the 500' restriction listed.

Fer the record... I'm all for BSP.

What I'm having a bit of trouble with is Mr. Bissell and some of the people involved.
I'd like to think we can separate the two.

[lzeplin]

Please someone save anguish of having to decipher all of this thread. What happened to Scott?

[SeaNymph]

What a great story from the other side. Thanks.

[Another Kevin]

hikers walkin' into BSP are not aware of the basic rules. BSPs fault for not posting them.

One minor quibble. "No drinking alcohol in public" is the law in the whole State of Maine, not just BSP. Should BSP post every other state law, too?

[imscotty]

My presumption is when the permit was applied for, this special condition was added. The BSP permit info page notes that this may be done... "Specific conditions and restrictions related to existing resource protection, recreation management and public safety policies will be noted on the permit. "

When you apply for any permit, the rules are almost always spelled out as part of the process. This seems to be the case for media permits at Baxter as their website states... "After review by Park staff, approved media activities will require a completed media permit signed by the Park Director and the Permittee. This final permit will include alisting of relevant Park Rules and Policies and other specifications and details relevantto the approved media activity. "

Permits I have applied for usually involve signing a form that says you acknowledge and will abide by the rules and conditions. I presume that happened in this case. I do not believe ignorance can be used as an excuse in the case of the media permit. I think they were told the rules, and just did not care.

[rocketsocks]

Also have yet to see any media permits granted with the 500' restriction listed.

Fer the record... I'm all for BSP.

What I'm having a bit of trouble with is Mr. Bissell and some of the people involved.
I'd like to think we can separate the two.Now I'll share a truth, I too find the FB arraignment a bit odd, no doubt about it. Here nor there though...

[imscotty]

Please someone save anguish of having to decipher all of this thread. What happened to Scott?

LZeplin, step away from this abyss. Save yourself.

[Just Bill]

This thread isn't about cars? :confused:


Please someone save anguish of having to decipher all of this thread. What happened to Scott?

This thread is about cars.

[rocketsocks]

What a great story from the other side. Thanks.


LZeplin, step away from this abyss. Save yourself.
yup, run away, run away. :D

But in a nut shell Scott and Baxter State Park were both flogged in the public court of opinion, while scott received a ticket for littering, as I understand it..."and the all moved away"~Arlo Guthrie

[rocketsocks]

...and consumption of alcohol..."and they all moved back"~Arlo Guthrie

[imscotty]

yup, run away, run away. :D

But in a nut shell Scott and Baxter State Park were both flogged in the public court of opinion, while scott received a ticket for littering, as I understand it..."and the all moved away"~Arlo Guthrie

Are you equating this to the Alice's Restaurant Massacre? A brilliant connection.

[rocketsocks]

Are you equating this to the Alice's Restaurant Massacre? A brilliant connection.Eggsactly........;)

[rocketsocks]

Honestly, I'm done getting all crazy over these threads, it's outta our hands. I see it one way, somebody else may see it another way, no biggie, we just disagree, and that's all, we don't even have to agree to disagree...we just disagree.

[imscotty]

there ain't no good guy,
there ain't no bad guy, ....

[rocketsocks]

there ain't no good guy,
there ain't no bad guy, ....at the expense of jacking the swag of an old friend...Yar :D

[Just Bill]

"Specific conditions and restrictions related to existing resource protection, recreation management and public safety policies will be noted on the permit. "

This final permit will include alisting of relevant Park Rules and Policies and other specifications and details relevantto the approved media activity. "

Permits I have applied for usually involve signing a form that says you acknowledge and will abide by the rules and conditions. I presume that happened in this case. I do not believe ignorance can be used as an excuse in the case of the media permit. I think they were told the rules, and just did not care.

Devils advocate mainly here. But isn't that two items in favor of the media?
If permits were granted per park regulations they should have contained the 500' rule and relevant special conditions listed on them?
You'd think if the permits did read that way Mr. Bissell woulda slapped pictures of these permits for all to see on FB right?

I haven't seen the actual permits posted, only the rules for obtaining them posted/cited.

I don't disagree really, and my permit experiences are similar (although being honest they usually come with a verbal review from the ranger when I picked them up). If anything most rangers I have dealt with go out of their way to avoid any ambiguity or potential for problems.

I could easily presume that the permit did not list the big K restrictions as well. It is reasonable to assume with two park guidelines noted that such a critical item would have been noted to any and all media- both on the permit and verbally.
Again, a willful violation fits the narrative better, so why wouldn't it be pointed out?

I also note toast video, and the 20 minute video interview posted that occurred afterwards.
We can assume per Mr. Bissell that at least one ranger was there to witness the celebration since Scott and company walked down with the tickets.
So the ranger stood there, let the group accumulate. Watched Scott fumble the illegal beverage. Peel off the cork wrapper. Let him shake it up. Let him open it.
Then stood there patiently while they filmed a 20+ minute video and whatever else.

Then managed to speak up just in time to issue tickets before he headed down?

“We really don’t think that the top of Katahdin should smell like a bar,” Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell said. “He hiked down with the summons.”
http://www.pressherald.com/2015/07/16/marathoner-who-broke-appalachian-trail-record-cited-by-baxter-state-park/

From the same article-
“I felt it was important to tell the story as we see it, and as trustees of the park it is important for us to protect that wilderness experience,” Bissell said. “These folks who came to the park, that’s not really their priority at all.”

Ignorance is no excuse. Agree.
Scott broke the booze rule. Agree.

But I'm not really buying the story told.
I was quick to side with BSP, quick to dismiss what I knew about Scott. Quick to side with wilderness over people. Still am really.

But this people problem is a problem.
This is the person that the ATC is attempting in good faith to negotiate with?

[imscotty]

Hmm, when you put it that way, it sort of sounds like... a speed trap.

Some speed traps are for 'revenue enhancement.' I do not think that is the case here.

Sometimes speed traps are set up when locals complain about people speeding through their neighborhood with no regard to their safety or enjoyment. The cops make an example of s few speedsters and pretty soon the passer throughs get the message and drive more respectfully... for a while.

Sometimes the 100 people in front of you did way worst things than you ever did. Does not matter, you were the one caught, pay your fine. Hard to find comfort to be used for the public service of deterring others. Not much to do but move on and watch the speed trap disappear in your rearview mirror. You won't fall for that trap twice, but are you still a speedster? Maybe yes, maybe no.

[BirdBrain]

Not to pick on you Scott. BB, maybe...
I have seen many posts about "being warned", and it's safe to assume after Mr. Bissell stating it on facebook that the "500'" restriction is on the books.

What I cannot find anywhere is any statement made outside of this site that said warnings occurred.
What is the source for these comments?
Or is it simply an assumption that has been repeated until it became fact?

You would think that Mr. Bissell would have pointed out someone warning Scott if said warning occurred. If nothing else it's a compelling nail in the coffin.
Did I simply miss it? Can someone post it?

http://news.mpbn.net/post/ultra-marathoners-mt-katahdin-celebration-irks-maine-park-officials

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php/112787-Baxter-State-Park-s-response-to-Scott-Jureks-finish-on-Katahdin?p=1989284&viewfull=1#post1989284

Of course this likely does not trump your contrived speed trap scenario. Baxter should have warned them again at the bottom of the Hunt in case they forgot. Then the ranger should have stopped the celebration to save poor Scott. Instead the evil ranger hid behind a tree and yelled AHA, I GOT YA'.

[egilbe]

http://news.mpbn.net/post/ultra-marathoners-mt-katahdin-celebration-irks-maine-park-officials

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php/112787-Baxter-State-Park-s-response-to-Scott-Jureks-finish-on-Katahdin?p=1989284&viewfull=1#post1989284

Of course this likely does not trump your contrived speed trap scenario. Baxter should have warned them again at the bottom of the Hunt in case they forgot. Then the ranger should have stopped the celebration to save poor Scott. Instead the evil ranger hid behind a tree and yelled AHA, I GOT YA'.

Yeah, you know if there was a tree within a mile of the summit. Musta been that huge cairn of rocks silly people lug up there.

[BirdBrain]

Yeah, you know if there was a tree within a mile of the summit. Musta been that huge cairn of rocks silly people lug up there.

Well he had to be hiding behind something. After all, this was a trap. Or maybe Scott's sponsors hid the warnings from our hero. No. That does not make sense. Denico must be lying and Bissell must have ordered him to lie. Ya'. That's it. Damn the video evidence. We know what really happened behind the scenes. Our hero was trapped by evil people.

Pleeeze!!

I have met the rangers of Baxter. They are good people. When someone ascribes malice to good people just to bend reality to their narrative, I am going to say something. I don't care who that person is or what anyone thinks of me. Quite frankly, Bissell is of the same mold. Scott was warned to not make Baxter Peak party central. He did it anyways. Bissell is defending against that notion and I am quite certain he does not care that it is against your rock star or that it hurts someone's feelings that thinks that behavior is fine. No one is bigger than the rules, especially when they have been warned.

[Just Bill]

http://news.mpbn.net/post/ultra-marathoners-mt-katahdin-celebration-irks-maine-park-officials

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php/112787-Baxter-State-Park-s-response-to-Scott-Jureks-finish-on-Katahdin?p=1989284&viewfull=1#post1989284

Of course this likely does not trump your contrived speed trap scenario. Baxter should have warned them again at the bottom of the Hunt in case they forgot. Then the ranger should have stopped the celebration to save poor Scott. Instead the evil ranger hid behind a tree and yelled AHA, I GOT YA'.

Maybe not a trump card, but I fold my hand nonetheless.
And to quote yer most famous tale teller, "Thankee Sai".

Though the story now reads more like they built a road that ran right over a cliff and waited for him to drive off just to prove they needed a guardrail.

To steal right back from my ol' friend Beener, "Here nor there though..."

All around it's too bad.

Scott could have pulled one more rabbit out of his ass, put the brakes on and saved the day, but I suppose that was one miracle to many. He's just another ignorant NOBO after all. He'll pay his fine and ride off to runnerland retirement.

BSP could have seized the opportunity and made many friends, but if they just want to close the door not much point in being neighborly. Tough work ahead for the ATC.

"The Cat Lady" was written in defense of the park, and "The Speed Trap" in defense of Scott. Looks like they are both just wishful thinking.

No good guys.

If there is a silver lining I guess Muddy said it best.


As the class of 2015 begins trickling in, they are likely more aware of rules there than ever before. No thanks to ....

Mission accomplished



All I hear is a sad song in full stereo-

Inside you're pretending
Crimes have been swept aside
Somewhere, where they can forget

Divine upper reaches
Still holding on
This ocean will not be grasped

All for nothing
Did you really want
Did you really want
Did you really want
Did you really want

Refuse to surrender
Strung out until ripped apart
Who dares, who dares to condemn

All for nothing
Did you really want
Did you really want
Did you really want
Did you really want

Portishead, "Mysterons"

<em>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtxA_MP-9oE

[rocketsocks]

Agree a huge opertunity has been lost, perhaps the "Summit meetings" will prove more fruitful. What a quagmire this whole thing has become, one big bowl of confussion.

[Lone Wolf]

BSP did this by design

[perdidochas]

As someone who lives in the country, I wish our local police would start doing speed traps again. I really hate being passed at 70 MPH on a double yellow line going down the hill as I slow down to make my turn off. Always some damn tourist from away in a big hurry to get someplace else.

I drive the speed limit +5 if safe, I slow down to the speed limit when going through the little hamlets - which really drives the tourist behind me crazy and at first opportunity speed past me, often on a double yellow line. And I just think to myself - go ahead, you hit the moose at 65-70 MPH ya dang fool. It seems no matter how fast I drive, who ever is behind me wants to go faster.

I go under the speed limit in small southern towns--I have FL tags, and I don't want to pay the FL driver in the South tax..... One note--if a town has it's speed limits in multiples of ten, it's more likely to be a speed trap.

[rocketsocks]

BSP did this by design


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHv5jgXz9I8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHv5jgXz9I8

[Dogwood]

That's really what is is..isn't it? Both sides of this silly debate of Champagne Gate are, in my opinion, missing the much bigger issue.

As you so aptly put it Kevin, he was the flash point of this long smoldering fire.

Outside Magazine has a nice summary of the real issue IMO.
http://www.outsideonline.com/2001076/scott-jureks-champagne-problems?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebookpost

It is beyond Jurek and crystallizes an ongoing debate...

How best to preserve and protect the wild spaces while still allowing access?

Yes and No. What factors in is the character and quality of the access as well. BSP knows very well where this increased interest in speed attempts is likely heading - a greater circus like commercialized atmosphere - in direct conflict with BSP management's mandate. They sought to limit it here with Scott Jurek's FKT as an example of some things NOT to do.

REALLY, ATers need NEED NEED to cease assuming others should be required to bend to their increasingly demanding whims!

[Dogwood]

Could it be the AT hiking community overall is the most self absorbed hiking community ever encountered? If so, does that dubious title need to remain associated with this community indefinitely? Do we all understand the deep implications of shouldering such a label? WE have the capability and opportunity to represent ourselves to a much higher standard.

Here's a question recently posed that every hiker should ask themselves, "what do I have of value that I can contribute to elicit a positive change?":confused: What do I want my hike to represent? :-? How am I going to be remembered after the hike?:-? What legacy am I contributing to for those that hike after me?:rolleyes:

HMM?

[Another Kevin]

Could it be the AT hiking community overall is the most self absorbed hiking community ever encountered? If so, does that dubious title need to remain associated with this community indefinitely? Do we all understand the deep implications of shouldering such a label? WE have the capability and opportunity to represent ourselves to a much higher standard. Here's a question recently posed that every hiker should ask themselves, "what do I have of value that I can contribute to elicit a positive change?" What do I want my hike to represent? How am I going to be remembered after the hike? What legacy am I contributing to for those that hike after me? HMM?

This is precisely why I shall most likely never visit some of the most stellar places Out There. I'm acutely aware of the impact of too many hikers, and cannot think of any contribution that I can make with my personal presence that I could not make without a visit. This is usually guided by the land management. When the emphasis is "we must tread lightly," I still come. When it switches to "we must limit our numbers," then I ask myself, "what could I do in a visit that another hiker could not do as well or better?" and stay away, because I do not have an answer to any of your questions that would set me apart from anyone else who wishes to visit.

Of course, there are exceptions. When doing trail maintenance, I go where I am sent. (The next place is likely the Giant Ledge-Panther-Fox Hollow trail in the Catskills, if my knee is enough better by the time the group is going. The prickers surely need to be cut back.) Sometimes I use trail mapping as an excuse to get a permit and go where I otherwise would refrain. OpenStreetMap needs all the help it can get, and only a few hikers contribute. But these are both things where I can point to something and say, "that is an improvement for others, that wouldn't exist had I not done the work." If a landowner or managing authority pleads to reduce numbers, that's how high a bar I set for myself. Merely teaching (casting false pearls before real swine), writing (at too great length), photographing (with no great distinction) and setting an (imperfect) example are not enough. Any other conscientious hiker would do those things. I'm not making a contribution in doing those things that would be greater than the contribution I would make by leaving the place to others and to Mother Nature, and going elsewhere.

I'm saddened that it appears to have come to that with Katahdin. I should like very much to have seen it for myself, and now I appear to have missed any chance that I had to answer your questions to my satisfaction.

[BirdBrain]

Maybe not a trump card, but I fold my hand nonetheless.
And to quote yer most famous tale teller, "Thankee Sai".

Though the story now reads more like they built a road that ran right over a cliff and waited for him to drive off just to prove they needed a guardrail.

To steal right back from my ol' friend Beener, "Here nor there though..."

All around it's too bad.

Scott could have pulled one more rabbit out of his ass, put the brakes on and saved the day, but I suppose that was one miracle to many. He's just another ignorant NOBO after all. He'll pay his fine and ride off to runnerland retirement.

BSP could have seized the opportunity and made many friends, but if they just want to close the door not much point in being neighborly. Tough work ahead for the ATC.



And once again we have the evil Baxter setting a trap while the miracle worker did not save the day by going the extra mile. Funny how the inexperienced 97% does not seem to have a problem avoiding this cliff, while the miracle worker does even though the miracle worker was warned about the cliff. Maybe.... just maybe the miracle worker could learn something from the 97% who by the way do not get a special warning about the cliff. Maybe... just maybe there is no cliff. Maybe all we have is self absorbed entitled people that need to admit their error and stop blaming other people for their own arrogance. Get in realville. Baxter and Maine are not all hot to close their doors. They just want people to play by the rules. It is that simple. No need for radical change in the trail, just a radical change in the mindset of those that don't like rules.

[Dogwood]

I did not forget that question you posed to me AK. I did not ignore it. I actually embraced it. I consider your question one of the BEST questions EVER asked! It's a question that not only every AT hiker should ponder but all hikers everywhere all trail users everywhere if they have the least bit of concern other than for just themselves.

It's a question that has been pondered and acted upon by every trail maintainer the majority who do so as unpaid volunteers, every member of a trail club, every Wildlife Officer, every trail angel, every hostel owner/manager, every National Park Ranger, ............etc.

It's about time more AT hikers spend more time pondering this question and acting rather than simply being so self absorbed!!!

I whole heartedly believe the whole of the hiking community, including myself, not only have value but potentially extensive value, value to add to BSP and the rest of the world. I KNOW BSP knows this too! They are sincerely hoping we all represent ourselves as such. Call me an optimist but I'm not a pie in the sky optimist. I'm also a realist. I recognize great potential for positive change within the AT hiking community. I am not saddened. I am joyful for the immense opportunity as a member of this same community. This is what we can live for. This is what we can make our hikes represent! HYOH --- DAMN WELL RIGHT, KNOWING OUR HIKES ARE NOT JUST IMPACTING OURSELVES!

[BirdBrain]

I whole heartedly believe the whole of the hiking community, including myself, not only have value but potentially extensive value, value to add to BSP and the rest of the world. I KNOW BSP knows this too! They are sincerely hoping we all represent ourselves as such.

I fully agree. That is what is so maddening about these wild accusations that paint BSP as selfish stewards glad for the opportunity to close a door. The majority of visitors to Baxter are not Mainers. Baxter values all visitors. They just expect people to follow the rules. There is a reason thru's get in free. There is a reason they have day packs that they provide for thru's at the ranger station at the bottom of the Hunt. It isn't because they want to lock thru's out. They value all hikers and expect all hikers to respect the rules.

[Dogwood]

I fully agree. That is what is so maddening about these wild accusations that paint BSP as selfish stewards glad for the opportunity to close a door. The majority of visitors to Baxter are not Mainers. Baxter values all visitors. They just expect people to follow the rules. There is a reason thru's get in free. There is a reason they have day packs that they provide for thru's at the ranger station at the bottom of the Hunt. It isn't because they want to lock thru's out. They value all hikers and expect all hikers to respect the rules.

Exactly. It's also part of the very real underlying intent behind the BSP Facebook comment and the letter to the ATC and AT community made public several months back. BSP values hikers all hikers even AT hikers even hikers/visitors not from Maine! BSP is trying to do the AT community right! Yet, to some extent we're fumbling all over ourselves assuming an indignant, arrogant, self absorbed, childish, intolerant, stiff necked, and ignorant posture, that if allowed to continue, will spill over to greater conflicts elsewhere.

[mrcoffeect]

As far as I can tell, both parties are responsible for this mess. Scott and his crew broke some rules and should take their punishment like a man without complaint. BPA let the devil in the pantry years ago when they were eager to have the trail end in their park.

[mrcoffeect]

you all seem to forget this wasnt forced on BPA, like some areas of the trail in the south.

[BirdBrain]

I am willing to accept that. Scott Jurek and BPA are about equal. :D

[BillyGr]

One minor quibble. "No drinking alcohol in public" is the law in the whole State of Maine, not just BSP. Should BSP post every other state law, too?

The only thing is that some (many?) might not be aware it's a state law. Think of all the signs along any (major) road when you enter a state with state specific rules - maybe something similar for the trail at border crossings?

[Lone Wolf]

BSP isn't state property. they could waive that "law".

[George13579]

What's sad (and kind of strange) is it sounds like the Baxter folks never tried to speak to Scott or Jenny personally when they arrived.
A simple "Hey Scott and Jenny, the summit must have a semi-reverent atmosphere" would have been enough.

Instead Jensen Bissell "was in contact" with Cliff Bars and Brooks Sneakers days before the event and these companies "agreed to do those things."

I would like to know the nature of these contacts and the nature of these agreements.
Were they email exchanges with customer service at these companies?
Did Bissell actually have phone conversations with people at these companies who would then communicate with Scott and Jenny?

Denico claims that "they agreed to do those things"
If that is not the full truth then Denico could be in some hot water for lying about these companies and Jurek.

here's the quote:

http://news.mpbn.net/post/ultra-marathoners-mt-katahdin-celebration-irks-maine-park-officials

"I knew about this before the event. We told them they've got to obey certain rules," says Doug Denico. Denico heads the Maine Forest Service and is chair of the Baxter State Park Authority, which oversees the park according to strict rules to keep it "forever wild."

In the days before Jurek's ascent, Denico says the park's director, Jensen Bissell, was in contact with some of the ultra-marathoner's corporate sponsors.

"Jensen was perfectly clear on what was expected of them. And they agreed to do those things," Denico says. "You know, it had to do with, I guess, how many cameras, how many people, no drinking and all those things. 'Cause, you know, what people expect when they go to the summit- they don't exepct a party atmosphere. They expect a semi-revent type atmosphere."

[BirdBrain]

That took longer than expected. Let's review:

Denico says they were warned and they agreed to the rules.

We have video evidence that they did not abide by the rules.

This equals Denico might be in big trouble. Nothing about Scott because Scott obviously is innocent.

Sound like delusional groupie speak to me.

[CalebJ]

BirdBrain, have you considered the possibility that two parties can share a little responsibility here? Every time anyone suggests that Scott might not be solely at fault for this entire business, you write a diatribe about how idiotic we are to blame everything on BSP and that we all believe he's above the law and innocent. No one is suggesting anything of the sort. Is it possible that we're not the delusional/confused ones here?

[George13579]

Not a groupie here:
Scott and Jenny basically "winged it" the whole way and, as a result, they were not aware of the existing tension between Baxter and the AT.
For that they are at fault.
If they had done a little research they would have known about this tension and could have done something positive to reduce it.
Scott broke at least the alcohol rule - maybe some other rules.
Again, he is at fault and should pay the fine.

The focus of my post above is on the "warning" and the approach Baxter chose to take:

1. Why didn't they just speak to Scott and Jenny personally?
2. What was nature of these contacts and the nature of these agreements?
3. Were they email exchanges with customer service at these companies?
4. Did Bissell actually have phone conversations with people at these companies who would then communicate with Scott and Jenny?

This could have turned out some much better:
Either Scott or Baxter could had proposed that Scott and Jenny do a PSA commercial advising AT hikers to respect Baxter State Park and have a semi-reverent atmosphere on the summit.
And to save the celebrations for the parking lot.

[BirdBrain]

No. I just happen to believe the authority and the visual evidence. Any other narrative is unwarranted assumptions and accusations. I have not ascribed anything to anyone beyond those things. I have not called Scott a liar because he has not spoken. Those in love with the rule breaker make up all kinds of wild fanciful scenarios that ascribe evil intent.

[CalebJ]

Fine. You believe the visual evidence. So does everybody else. That's not in question. We're all seeing the same thing. He opened a bottle of champagne and broke on of their rules. Everybody knows it, everybody accepts it. He should (and may already have) pay the fine. You keep saying that people are denying it, but as far as I can tell that's not happening. I certainly accept that it happened.

Past that, it really does get problematic.
1) Littering citation: For champagne spray?
2) Group size. You can't charge somebody for a group size that was never his group to begin with. If I walk into the wilderness with ten people, and three people stop to talk to me at a trail intersection, I'm not magically violating LNT principles by leading a group of 14 people into the woods.
3) Media permit. He/somebody may have violated this, but the details are incredibly murky. Even the article you linked earlier effectively cites hearsay as to who Bissell spoke to and what he said. Nobody seems to know what transpired, certainly not you or me.

If you -actually- know something, this would be a good time to discuss it. If you're purely guessing and continuing to pour gasoline on a fire, STOP. You're just part of the continuing problem. This is supposed to be a community that works together to appreciate the outdoors and protect it. The ATC, BSP, and Scott Jurek each have a history of doing precisely that. Let's figure out where to go from here, not try to crucify any of the individuals for something that may or may not have even happened.

[Just Bill]

The simple fact is that there is nothing for either side to be proud of.

The delusion is simple: Which group is being targeted for compliance.

Many of us see the woods as our church, and have no problem behaving properly on any area of the trail.

Many of us at worst treat the woods with the courtesy we would expect extended to any host. We follow the golden rule and treat others as we expect to be treated.

Some in these groups are ignorant of special issues that differ in each area of the trail. Simply getting the word out to the folks in the group above is enough. This group is so receptive to this message that you might find many who feel as Another Kevin does.

We are not speaking of the majority, nor of the ignorant minority in that group.

The minority who is the target is easily trivialized or categorized into many derogatory names.
They are generally younger, but not always. In any area there are those who live on the fringe of society, who defy all authority and rules out of simple principal. A place like the AT is a magnet for such folks.

Some in this group are actually deeply high minded in their resistance; Mr. Thoreau not the least of which. A band like Rage Against the Machine, or an organization like Anonymous spring to mind as well. These folks have power in their ideals that captivates the other groups in the fringe.

Some in this group are simply infatuated with the WILDerness. Wild west anything goes cowboy mentality. They seek the lawless, the ruleless. They are simply pirates on the open sea. Cowboys on the frontier.

A growing number in this group are those disenfranchised with society at large, government, and life. The recent economic downturn has caused a surge in college aged people with useless degrees, those laid off and underemployed all seek the woods for many reasons. Our good friend Sai Schaffer the first in a line of broken people looking for a place to put the pieces back together.

The delusion going on is that these groups can be simply quashed. That coming down hard and making an example of folks will teach them a lesson. When in fact the harder you stomp the faster they squirm and the harder they will rebel.

There are really only two things that reach this group:
A badass.
Seriously. This group respects those who do badass things, who fit their story of triumphing over "the world". Those who summon their individual will, power, and raw strength to do amazing things. This is a group that will only listen to those who they see as "better" than.

Ideals.
At the heart of this group is a simple search for something great to follow. An idea that brings order to the chaos and makes them want to be part of something. They seek a transformative experience on the trail. But this experience has no shape or direction.

Those of us who see the woods as church hope that simply getting them in the door will lead to some "come to jesus" moment. Sometimes it does. Sometimes it just provides enough peace to sort things out and find some direction.

You may say what you wish in regards to Scott. The simple fact is that he did not step up.
He is a badass, who may have made a powerful ally in this fight. He may still.

You may say what you wish in regards to BSP. The simple fact is that they did not step up.
Thier ideal is the highest, but it was not shared or expressed in a manner that would infect the group that needs it most.

Thier narrative is a story that many of those folks could identify with. A park that was set up by a man who stood up to all opposition, paid his own way, out lawyered, out governed and flat out beat the MAN at his own game. A place that stands up to the crush of corporations, greed, money, even the government. That built a legacy of rebellion against these things that stands today.

If you had a respectable badass extolling the virtues of this place it would turn into a temple open to all. A place every group fought for and respected.

I don't give a crap about Scott. He's no buddy of mine nor my hero. I prefer the Kirk's and Williamson's. Don't care much for supported trips at all truth be told.

Though even in his short interview, posts, etc you could see and hear that the trail infected Scott. That he found the higher community and sense of belonging to the trail.

But I do care about what he could have been, in fact if one were to look dispassionately, he's already been that fella in other venues.

I don't give a crap about Jensen or any of the individuals involved. They are just employees, though I have no doubt they are decent enough folks doing a difficult job. A job they just made much harder for themselves, but I guess the vision and foresight of a Baxter is rare.

It's unfair to expect too much from either side.
They are just people who blew a big opportunity while chasing personal agendas.
No man is an island, and even an island is subject to the whims of the ocean.

The biggest problem with firing a warning shot, no matter how highly justified or righteously fired it is;
The other party just sees someone with a gun in their hand.









Although if there is a ray of hope in this regard, Jennifer Pharr Davis did step up.
She has been named to the ATC board of directors. She is a badass with high ideals.
Though I will reserve my optimism.
If nothing else because she likes to travel light and I don't want to dump my hopes on her shoulders.

Todays song-

"Helplessness Blues"
Fleet Foxes


I was raised up believing I was somehow unique
Like a snowflake distinct among snowflakes, unique in each way you can see
And now after some thinking, I'd say I'd rather be
A functioning cog in some great machinery serving something beyond me

But I don't, I don't know what that will be
I'll get back to you someday soon you will see

What's my name, what's my station, oh, just tell me what I should do
I don't need to be kind to the armies of night that would do such injustice to you
Or bow down and be grateful and say "sure, take all that you see"
To the men who move only in dimly-lit halls and determine my future for me

And I don't, I don't know who to believe
I'll get back to you someday soon you will see

If I know only one thing, it's that everything that I see
Of the world outside is so inconceivable often I barely can speak
Yeah I'm tongue-tied and dizzy and I can't keep it to myself
What good is it to sing helplessness blues, why should I wait for anyone else?

And I know, I know you will keep me on the shelf
I'll come back to you someday soon myself

If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm raw
If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm sore
And you would wait tables and soon run the store

Gold hair in the sunlight, my light in the dawn
If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm sore
If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm sore
Someday I'll be like the man on the screen

[Chair-man]

If BSP's objective is to get the word out that they are serious about rule breaking they accomplished it by nailing a high profile thru hiker/runner like Scott. It's unfortunate Scott & his group had to be the fall guys but they knew the rules or should have known them.
I think we'll see less booze celebrating on the summit now because of the publicity but how can BSP expect thru hikers, who just spent the last 4 to 7 months trekking to the sign, not to celebrate?

[BirdBrain]

I will try to step aside after this. I have zero credibility in that regard. I have great admiration for every steward and authority that has made it possible to enjoy my selfish walks. I do not place a rule breaker on even footing with those people or entities. I give deference to those that provide. I do not grasp the concept that we should assume great intent of one person over those that have provided for many decades. I am thankful for the good people that make my walk possible and will be on their side in a conflict... not the one person... no matter how much people think he is cool. I have great respect for Scott's accomplishment. I even used him as an example in a recent inspiration thread. I challenge anyone to quote one post mine that vilifies his accomplishment. There are many that say the otherwise about his accomplishment. In regards to his action in Baxter, he screwed up. I am not going to disparage the intent of those that seek to undo the damage done by Scott in his very public display. Many other people act as if Scott and Baxter deserve equal consideration. They do not. Baxter and the trail at large are much more important.

[Another Kevin]

As much as I've complained, I have a lot of sympathy for Mr Jurek.

I imagine him, running up the mountain, physically entirely spent and sleep-deprived, possibly even suffering from hallucinations as well as various physical complaints. He finds himself on the summit. All of a sudden he dimply realizes that he's there (at that moment he probably doesn't know if he's afoot or on horseback!) and gets handed a bottle by a well wisher while congratulatory cheers ring out around him. (You surely don't think he carried it up himself in that little hydartion pack?) It's just like the end of a major race, and his habits from being so many times a race winner kick in. He does the champagne ritual, hardly knowing where he is or what he's just accomplished, much yet what damage it might do. He gets a few tickets for it.

And by the time that he's had a few days to regroup, the flames have been fanned so high that he has no way out. Anything he can say, even an abject apology, will only fan them higher - "Oh, he's just saying that because he's in trouble! He doesn't mean it!" "Oh, he's just making excuses for himself!"

And it is clear that simply paying the fine and getting on with life will not be an option, either.

His reputation is so good in the running community that he could have been a great advocate for the trail. Now for the rest of his life, anything he does in the way of advocacy will be discounted by those who may be passionate advocates themselves, but who need to punish him forever for a momentary lapse.

If the story is about him, everyone loses.

[BirdBrain]

... All Scott had to do was to say that he was exhausted and not making perfect decisions and in retrospect should have done it different. That explanation is likely the truth and would have been credible. Had that happened, we would not be here....

...................

[Dogwood]

In this self appointed supposedly High Court of WhiteBlaze-----------------I OBJECT! I strongly object! Conjecture, conjecture, and more conjecture and speculation, speculation, and more speculation.

[Another Kevin]

All Scott had to do was to say that he was exhausted and not making perfect decisions and in retrospect should have done it different. That explanation is likely the truth and would have been credible. Had that happened, we would not be here..

As I said above, by the time he had a chance to actually be in his right mind to say anything, it was already too late. I'm betting that even the first interview or two found him completely addled and running on autopilot, with his support team filtering so that all he got was softball questions.

He deserved to get ticketed and pay the fine. He doesn't deserve to be pilloried from here to doomsday over it.

[Lone Wolf]

a ranger needs to hike up there every day from now til the end of hiker season and hang out and ticket champagne drinkers and dope smokers. real simplle

[fiddlehead]

They'll ban cameras next.
Or have they already?
.
We've seen our last NOBO record attempt for a long time. For a few reasons.
.
.
.
Maine: "the way life should be" Yeah right.

[jdx1177]

Ok I'm going to just say it.... It's that big elephant on the forum... Scott made a spectacle and mess out of this on purpose. What better way to protect your NOBO record than to sabotage any future one. Well played Scott, and to think people actually questioned your strategy throughout the whole 46 days. You knew all along you only had to beat that record by one second. Brilliant simply brilliant.
😁

[Dogwood]

The Scott Jurek Conspiracy? Pauleez! Impale me with a trekking pole. There is so much nonsense here. See ya.

[Another Kevin]

Ok I'm going to just say it.... It's that big elephant on the forum... Scott made a spectacle and mess out of this on purpose. What better way to protect your NOBO record than to sabotage any future one. Well played Scott, and to think people actually questioned your strategy throughout the whole 46 days. You knew all along you only had to beat that record by one second. Brilliant simply brilliant. (damaged emoji)

It's worth noting - because I've already heard a PM from one reader who took this message seriously, that WB's software, or some people's browsers, damage the emoji at the end of this message. The damaged character looks like this:

http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f601/grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes.pnghttp://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f601/index.htm

[jdx1177]

Ya sorry about that . That was just playing around. Meant to be taken as a joke.
I'm a fan Scott and I'm bummed this whole thing has set off such a long simmering debate.

[Just Bill]

Ya sorry about that . That was just playing around. Meant to be taken as a joke.
I'm a fan Scott and I'm bummed this whole thing has set off such a long simmering debate.

:D You should probably change your location too if you're going to make a statement like that. :eek:

If it makes you feel any better Kevin... for Scott personally, we both know nothing sells a book like a good controversy.

Likely his publisher is already calling thanking him for the sales bump of "Eat and Run"

Nobody better at spinning stuff than a good corporate marketing guy... they woulda come in handy.
Who knows- maybe 10% will go to BSP...
As long as the donation doesn't come too quickly. :dance:bse

[jdx1177]

Ha, never actually been there, but I do know you can't get there from here

[BillyGr]

If BSP's objective is to get the word out that they are serious about rule breaking they accomplished it by nailing a high profile thru hiker/runner like Scott. It's unfortunate Scott & his group had to be the fall guys but they knew the rules or should have known them.
I think we'll see less booze celebrating on the summit now because of the publicity but how can BSP expect thru hikers, who just spent the last 4 to 7 months trekking to the sign, not to celebrate?

They could celebrate with up to 11 people, just substitute a bottle of sparkling juice and you've fixed that issue also. Then go to a bar in town for the champagne and big group.

[BirdBrain]

They could celebrate with up to 11 people, just substitute a bottle of sparkling juice and you've fixed that issue also. Then go to a bar in town for the champagne and big group.

Hopefully this is a tempered enough remark to be accepted. Have you ever left a soda can out at a picnic? What kind of bug shows up? One of the issues with dumping sugary liquids on rocks is the yellow jackets that attracts. That is not a good scenerio for a hiker with allergies up on that remote hill. And yes, yellow jackets can be an issue up there. I know. Those with allergies should be prepared. Many hiking Katahdin are not prepared. No need to attract yellow jackets to the place all hikers up there go. Again, I hope this remark is tempered enough to be received.

[CalebJ]

Scott has responded (from his blog (http://blog.scottjurek.com/post/124919853524/reflections-on-the-appalachian-trail)):

When I arrived at the base of Katahdin, two park rangers counted my group and registered our number as within the authorized limit of twelve people. I stopped to pose for pictures with several large groups of people, including a trail work crew, to thank them for their support and invaluable efforts. There have been reports of a ballooning group size, but my group always remained at twelve. One friend decided to surprise me with a bottle of champagne. He asked the two park rangers at the trailhead if that was okay and was advised to keep it away from families and children. To him, that sounded like alcohol was acceptable within reason. When I reached the summit, two different park rangers watched my friend hand me the bottle to celebrate. We were not aware of any rules against alcohol and I own that- I should have been better informed. Neither of the rangers said a word about it. If they had, I would have immediately put the bottle away. No citations were issued to any of the people with alcohol and no warnings were given. It was only four hours later, after we had hiked down with all our trash and reached the parking lot, that I was surprised to be met by three more rangers who now issued me three summonses. I am certainly willing to accept responsibility for any rules that I may have broken, but I have yet to be fined.

Since then, the Park administration has chosen to paint a disparaging and inaccurate picture of what truly happened. Several objective parties whom I’ve never met tried to set the record straight with their own accounts of what they saw that day but the Park has removed those posts from its Facebook page. I’m not sure why a Park so opposed to media and fanfare decided to push to the media a view of what happened that was not accurate and a personal attack on my character.


I understand now that the Park has long standing issues with thru-hikers and the Appalachian Trail, so much so that the Park has even suggested that the AT should no longer have Katahdin as the terminus. This controversy has been brewing for awhile, eliciting healthy discussion when a letter from the Park to the Appalachian Trail Conservancy was posted online last year with a list of grievances.

[imscotty]

Thanks for posting this Caleb. Finally some meaningful information. From Scott's point of view, it sounds sort of like a 'Speed Trap.' Maybe the Cat Lady has gotten a bit cranky :)

Still, am trying to understand the motivations of the rangers, some let me put out some conjecture. Perhaps the rangers in the field let rules sometimes slide (there has been sone antidotal evidence to support this), and they were hesitant to rain on Scott's parade. Perhaps the big guy (Bissell) monitoring the situation hears reports from the ranger at the summit about the festivities and demands action be taken by those in the field, and summons are issued.

It is interesting to note that these are summons. Presumably Scott will have a chance to show up at a hearing to contest all this?

I was glad to see that Scott took responsibility for his actions. That is the correct thing to do, and the way he can hopefully move forward from this.

[BillyGr]

Hopefully this is a tempered enough remark to be accepted. Have you ever left a soda can out at a picnic? What kind of bug shows up? One of the issues with dumping sugary liquids on rocks is the yellow jackets that attracts. That is not a good scenerio for a hiker with allergies up on that remote hill. And yes, yellow jackets can be an issue up there. I know. Those with allergies should be prepared. Many hiking Katahdin are not prepared. No need to attract yellow jackets to the place all hikers up there go. Again, I hope this remark is tempered enough to be received.

Most of the sparkling juices also open like a soda bottle (rather than a cork), so spilling could be more easily avoided. Not to mention that no one has complained about people having any other kind of non alcoholic beverage there.

[jdx1177]

Wow thanks for posting that, gives some valuable perspective to what has been a one sided conversation.

[Just Bill]

Scott has responded (from his blog (http://blog.scottjurek.com/post/124919853524/reflections-on-the-appalachian-trail)):

Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell said. “He hiked down with the summons.”
http://www.pressherald.com/2015/07/1...er-state-park/ (http://www.pressherald.com/2015/07/16/marathoner-who-broke-appalachian-trail-record-cited-by-baxter-state-park/)

No citations were issued to any of the people with alcohol and no warnings were given. It was only four hours later, after we had hiked down with all our trash and reached the parking lot, that I was surprised to be met by three more rangers who now issued me three summonses. I am certainly willing to accept responsibility for any rules that I may have broken, but I have yet to be fined.

:-?:-?:-?:-?

I don't want to be a richard cranium about it...
Kevin said it best, "If the story is about him, everyone loses."
I would further amend that "him" to include Bissell.

Leave Scott alone. Call the trail community sufficiently warned.
My only concern remains the same- is there a satisfactory solution and a basis for a fair to all compromise for the trail as a whole?

[Sly]

Hopefully this is a tempered enough remark to be accepted. Have you ever left a soda can out at a picnic? What kind of bug shows up? One of the issues with dumping sugary liquids on rocks is the yellow jackets that attracts. That is not a good scenerio for a hiker with allergies up on that remote hill. And yes, yellow jackets can be an issue up there. I know. Those with allergies should be prepared. Many hiking Katahdin are not prepared. No need to attract yellow jackets to the place all hikers up there go. Again, I hope this remark is tempered enough to be received.

Fermenting alcohol and bees on the summit were noted as being a problem. And while I suggested "Baxter Approved" non-alcoholic beverages for celebrations apparently they may not help with the bees.

While the wording may be tweaked, this is what Jensen would like to see promoted in social media



Celebrate Quietly
Save Alcohol for Later
Hike in Small Groups

[Lone Wolf]

BSP officials. no backbone

[BirdBrain]

I do not like the word liar. Now that Scott has spoken, I will not be posting Scott did this type posts. To do so would be me saying Scott is lying. My posts in all these threads were in response to scenarios that basically said BSP, Jenson, and Denico are lying. Now that Scott has spoken, I am ready to concede that it is possible. Somebody is. However, you will find me equally offended if people ignorantly claim Scott's words are lies as have been with those that have assumed that the words of BSP have been lies. I believe Scott's words drag us closer to the truth. The words I find most revealing is that Scott has yet to be fined. Having an understanding of how Maine people think, I would not be surprised if no fine is ever levied. This was never about the people. This is about that hill. That hill is special. I am glad to hear Scott speak. However, I wish there was one sentence that recognized the real issues BSP faces. I am going on a long walk. I hope when I get back, I hope we are past this stuff.

[Sly]

BSP officials. no backbone

Apparently you and others are missing the point. As it is BSP resources are already being overtaxed and drained by AT Hikers. It's the hikers themselves and the increasing numbers that need to change.

[Dogwood]

Apparently you and others are missing the point. As it is BSP resources are already being overtaxed and drained by AT Hikers. It's the hikers themselves and the increasing numbers that need to change.

Wait, that's too simple to understand. Can't we make it/do we need to make it more complicated than that? Can't we go round and round in circles debating tangents and minutiae over umpteen pages opining based on speculation and conjecture some more? Wait I have more that needs to be said.............................................. ....................................UGGGH!

[jdx1177]

Apparently you and others are missing the point. As it is BSP resources are already being overtaxed and drained by AT Hikers. It's the hikers themselves and the increasing numbers that need to change.
Not put words in wolf's mouth but I think he is referencing the fact that everything seemed "cool" with the Rangers, who could have intervened at any moment, but instead chose to ambush him in the parking lot. I personally don't think he was trapped, I have a feeling a person of higher pay grade got wind of what happened after the fact and got their hackles all up about it and decided this was the time to make an example.

[Just Bill]

Apparently you and others are missing the point. As it is BSP resources are already being overtaxed and drained by AT Hikers. It's the hikers themselves and the increasing numbers that need to change.

Bad tastes take a minute to wash out... but the next fresh spring is around the corner.

Sly-
You and Laurie P are the only ones here (that I know of) who have any first hand knowledge of what any of us actually care about- doing something positive for Baxter State Park. If at all possible, even if it's not ready immediately, a joint statement from ATC and BSP on what is to be expected moving forward would help. Even including who pays for what and where and if a special donations campaign is needed many like myself who don't live close enough to do something personally can still contribute if needed.

What you mention above from Bissell doesn't seem unreasonable at all.

No booze- hikers can deal with it.
Hell maybe a clever restaurant in Millinocket can put up a replica sign in the parking lot and run a "celebrate appropriately" promotion. In fact... kill two birds with one stone and have them sponsor or assist with a dedicated shuttle to clear hikers from the park and whisk them away to a bit more appropriate (and profitable) after party during peak season.

Small Groups-
12 folks is a lot of hikers. I understand the growing trail family mentality but 12 or less shouldn't be that hard...
If nothing else you'll have a hard time fitting more into your van on the way to party in Millinocket.;)
The word should also be passed that family should not join hikers. Period. It should be enough that you did your hike solo and with whatever trail family you found. You and the family can always come back another time... Numbers are high enough without multiplying every hiker by their family.

Celebrate Quietly-
Maybe ATC can dig up and re-issue that powerful image of the lone hiker on bended knee weeping at the sign. Promote the personal achievement and quiet satisfaction of a very personal journey.
(helps with the group thing a bit too?)

Make a push and stress that it is a special place, a cathedral, church, sacred ground.

While a bit harsh... if needed- remove the sign. Seriously. It's a pretty big space up there until you concentrate every visitor (hiker or thru) into a 3x3 area.

Mentioned elsewhere but...
The info sign at Abol bridge is a great idea. It would also be great to have a flip sign like they do at other parks at that "front gate" When the birches and park resources are full, BSP calls the store and they flip the closed sign. We all know, despite all reason or rationality behind it, how heartbreaking it becomes to take even one step in the wrong direction. Turning back folks for the night before they get to the park would lead to a better situation for all. (Especially once camping capacity is increased).

Can ATC continue mobilizing and partnering with all the local towns and business. There is a vast network of service partners who have strong motivations at the southern terminus. Perhaps the North end can be similarly mobilized.

The crowd that needs to be reached isn't reading this site, or perhaps any site. They aren't checking in with the ATC.

But no matter where they get the info or how much of the trail they actually hike on the way there...
Every hiker the ATC needs to inform visits the hostels, restaurants, bars, and liquor stores on the way to Big K. Monson and Millinocket have some financial skin in the game to an extent. If you have to reach the hikers "on the ground" that's the place to do it. Whether anyone wants to say it or not- that's the group we are targeting.

The bulk of the hikers will hear the news and do whats right if it is clearly spelled out in a joint statement.

That said... Probably wouldn't be too hard to get Attroll and a few other sites out there to slap a "welcome" style message from the ATC and BSP on thier websites once something is ready. It could be displayed for any new member and as a sticky in many prominent places. If nothing else the good response this year to the flip floppers and increasing awareness here will put a bit more peer pressure in the trail community as a whole to help them spread the word on the whole trail.

[Sly]

Responses are highlighted in red below.


Bad tastes take a minute to wash out... but the next fresh spring is around the corner.

Sly-
You and Laurie P are the only ones here (that I know of) who have any first hand knowledge of what any of us actually care about- doing something positive for Baxter State Park. If at all possible, even if it's not ready immediately, a joint statement from ATC and BSP on what is to be expected moving forward would help. Even including who pays for what and where and if a special donations campaign is needed many like myself who don't live close enough to do something personally can still contribute if needed.




Friends of Baxter wants to control the message via an Op-Ed. Hopefully that will be forthcoming.





What you mention above from Bissell doesn't seem unreasonable at all.

No booze- hikers can deal with it.
Hell maybe a clever restaurant in Millinocket can put up a replica sign in the parking lot and run a "celebrate appropriately" promotion. In fact... kill two birds with one stone and have them sponsor or assist with a dedicated shuttle to clear hikers from the park and whisk them away to a bit more appropriate (and profitable) after party during peak season.




There's a replica of the sign at the AT Lodge. In a get-together after the meeting, I suggested the party be there.

Small Groups-
12 folks is a lot of hikers. I understand the growing trail family mentality but 12 or less shouldn't be that hard...
If nothing else you'll have a hard time fitting more into your van on the way to party in Millinocket.;)
The word should also be passed that family should not join hikers. Period. It should be enough that you did your hike solo and with whatever trail family you found. You and the family can always come back another time... Numbers are high enough without multiplying every hiker by their family.



Families need an overnight accommodation or day pass (DUPR (http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/bsp_public/scripts/BSP_Public.exe/duproverview)) and if I'm not mistaken would be counted in a similar fashion as AT Hikers.

Celebrate Quietly-
Maybe ATC can dig up and re-issue that powerful image of the lone hiker on bended knee weeping at the sign. Promote the personal achievement and quiet satisfaction of a very personal journey.
(helps with the group thing a bit too?)




I hiked with that guy for about 700 miles in '98, "Backpacking Fool" awesome photo and suggestion



Make a push and stress that it is a special place, a cathedral, church, sacred ground.

While a bit harsh... if needed- remove the sign. Seriously. It's a pretty big space up there until you concentrate every visitor (hiker or thru) into a 3x3 area.



Yup, I also suggested that, get rid of the gathering spot. Eventually it needs to be replaced, perhaps with something smaller, or nothing at all

Mentioned elsewhere but...
The info sign at Abol bridge is a great idea. It would also be great to have a flip sign like they do at other parks at that "front gate" When the birches and park resources are full, BSP calls the store and they flip the closed sign. We all know, despite all reason or rationality behind it, how heartbreaking it becomes to take even one step in the wrong direction. Turning back folks for the night before they get to the park would lead to a better situation for all. (Especially once camping capacity is increased).




Thanks, I'm still trying to figure out how a sign-up sheet for the Birches would work best. Not mentioned and perhaps out of the question (in the eyes of BSP) would be to double the Birches (with outside donations) and have groups of 12 start an hour apart

Can ATC continue mobilizing and partnering with all the local towns and business. There is a vast network of service partners who have strong motivations at the southern terminus. Perhaps the North end can be similarly mobilized.

The crowd that needs to be reached isn't reading this site, or perhaps any site. They aren't checking in with the ATC.

But no matter where they get the info or how much of the trail they actually hike on the way there...
Every hiker the ATC needs to inform visits the hostels, restaurants, bars, and liquor stores on the way to Big K. Monson and Millinocket have some financial skin in the game to an extent. If you have to reach the hikers "on the ground" that's the place to do it. Whether anyone wants to say it or not- that's the group we are targeting.


Besides getting the word out to hostels, especially in the northern region and Monson in particular, also suggested was to find out which lean-tos in the 100 Mile Wilderness had cell service, have poster in each with numbers/instructions how to best reserve a spot at KSC or Abol Campground

The bulk of the hikers will hear the news and do whats right if it is clearly spelled out in a joint statement.

That said... Probably wouldn't be too hard to get Attroll and a few other sites out there to slap a "welcome" style message from the ATC and BSP on thier websites once something is ready. It could be displayed for any new member and as a sticky in many prominent places. If nothing else the good response this year to the flip floppers and increasing awareness here will put a bit more peer pressure in the trail community as a whole to help them spread the word on the whole trail.

Agreed

I'd also like to point out I was encouraged with the round table format broken into near, mid and long term solutions, as it hinted we have a few years to correct the problem. Obviously education of protecting wild places is key. One of BSP biggest fears is continued popularity and growth in thru-hiking, especially with AWITW coming out. Eventually thru-hiking permitting or passes may become mandatory. While the AT is a porous trail which would make it hard to permit all AT hikes, thru-hiking may be able to be controlled at BSP and Springer. If the ATC set the number of southern at 50 per days (same as the PCT) about 25% or 12 a day would make it to BSP. Of course grouping problems would still exist and need to be dealth with.

[Lone Wolf]

Not put words in wolf's mouth but I think he is referencing the fact that everything seemed "cool" with the Rangers, who could have intervened at any moment, but instead chose to ambush him in the parking lot. I personally don't think he was trapped, I have a feeling a person of higher pay grade got wind of what happened after the fact and got their hackles all up about it and decided this was the time to make an example.

thank you. pretty much what i meant

[Sly]

Not put words in wolf's mouth but I think he is referencing the fact that everything seemed "cool" with the Rangers, who could have intervened at any moment, but instead chose to ambush him in the parking lot. I personally don't think he was trapped, I have a feeling a person of higher pay grade got wind of what happened after the fact and got their hackles all up about it and decided this was the time to make an example.

OK, it was in response to Scott's rebuttal (without quotes) not to the post above his.

[Just Bill]

Sly-
On second thought- forget the picture, as powerful as it is.
Glorifying the sign as the destination rather than the mountain is the wrong message.

Loose the sign. Better it than the mountain.
Maybe the actual sign can be restored and relocated to Millinocket as further incentive to take the celebration elsewhere.

The Greatest Mountain should be enough reward in and of itself
Removal disperses the crowd, puts the focus back on the summit's beauty and fits the wilderness setting better.

I don't care who goes first on the initial press release- But I think all would agree that the strongest statement and final policy should be a joint statement directly from BSP and ATC. With any interested and relevant parties CC'd or noted.

There is too much ambiguity and randomly placed policy on both ends. One clean statement direct from the source sends the clearest message.

[Another Kevin]

Loose the sign. Better it than the mountain.
Maybe the actual sign can be restored and relocated to Millinocket as further incentive to take the celebration elsewhere.

I have an idea about this, that I've already shared in sketchy form: Relocate not only the sign, but the terminus. Push through the park in some way, so that Katahdin can be a stop on the trail, but emphasize that it is the climax of the story, not the end of it. Make it so that the hike isn't over until the hiker is back in civilization.

I actually have the outline for a fairly lengthy essay about this and what it would do to the psychology of a thru-hike. If it's feasible (I truly have no idea about the logistics - it may be entirely impossible), I think it could considerably improve the hiking experience, reduce resource pressure (by reducing the need to accommodate families, well-wishers and support people wishing to meet hikers in BSP), and displace the natural human need to celebrate the successful completion of a demanding pilgrimage away from the fragile wilderness resources of the park.

I hope to make the writing interesting enough that the essay can at least be a focus for discussions, even if its ideas are total hogwash. Perhaps I can spend some time writing rather than hiking, since it still appears that it may be a couple of weeks before my health lets me return to the trail.

[BirdBrain]

I like the suggestion of AK to have it go beyond Baxter Peak. It could go across the Saddle, down Hamlin, out Roaring Brook, and eventually end in Millinocket. Chimney Pond would be a very short blue blaze. It is a wonder that should not be missed. Moving the end to Millinocket would fix many logistics problems that Baxter and thru's deal with. It would be an easier spot to leave from and would bring business to that town. I do not like the idea if removing the sign. 97% of hikers would still like that sign there. The part of the 3% in favor of that should not have such a say. Just change the information on the sign.

[Another Kevin]

I do not like the idea if removing the sign. 97% of hikers would still like that sign there. The part of the 3% in favor of that should not have such a say. Just change the information on the sign.

Then change the wording, because "Northern Terminus of the Appalachian Trail" will no longer be what it is.

[BirdBrain]

Then change the wording, because "Northern Terminus of the Appalachian Trail" will no longer be what it is.

Correct. There are many other great hills along the way. I loved Moosilauke and the Bigelows. I don't see people celebrating on those peaks.Katahdin would be just one more awesome peak. Millinocket has places to drink and cheer. I will let them speak for themselves. Maybe they would.like the business. Maybe they would hate it.

[Just Bill]

No expert on it; but generally speaking one of the tenants of a wilderness area is minimal signage and blazes. Minimal human presence period. There's a survey marker there, and a cairn. That should be enough.

I too support the idea of continuing and/or rerouting the trail to assist if not completely create a "Day hike" in BSP.
If we are truly thinking long term, there is really no other possibility than to get folks through the park if possible.
My son is 5 this November. In just his upcoming potential window for hiking the trail solo (10-15 years) it is easy to foresee that no matter what we do is not sustainable for more than a few seasons... At some point we need to get at least half the hikers in and out on a day trip.

An up and over approach at the very least spreads the overnight guests out.
With a more direct route from the South entrance of the park as mentioned by Sly and others many could make it a day hike. Altruistically- perhaps even some fit hikers would volunteer to do so and reserve overnight spots for those who need them.


To be totally fair, even for a fit NOBO, the up and down 10-11 mile round trip regardless of the path taken is no joke. Realistically no matter how you do it there will always be hikers who cannot pass in one shot. Without looking I want to say that NOBO's barely make double digits on average in the Whites, it wouldn't be too big of a stretch to expect the same average even at the end.

Looking at it totally cynically- if you set it up so that Katahdin is part of a loop and not the actual terminus... you might find a few of the party crowd taking one last yellow/blue blaze to the party at the end.

BB- after the character/people issues are behind us...
You might find that many of us worship that place as deeply as any Mainer.

[BirdBrain]

I started my SoBo across Maine by doing the 15+ mile hike from Roaring Brook over Baxter via Hamlin. The NoBo's are pretty tough by the time they get there. A lot tougher than me starting out. I think the vast majority would enjoy it. Some would struggle.

[Another Kevin]

I too support the idea of continuing and/or rerouting the trail to assist if not completely create a "Day hike" in BSP.

If it's no longer the Northern Terminus, it might even be able to accommodate overnights. The load could be spread around several sites, with the trip no longer being an in-and-out, and there would likely be a corresponding drop in usage from family and friends staying in the park to pick up the hiker or go along for the final climb.

If it can't, then we wind up having to restrict it to the most athletic among the hikers, those who are confident that they can pass in and out in a single day, or else resort to controlling numbers by turning some away. Either way, it's the "not enough Katahdin to go around" scenario. In that scenario, I remain firmly resolved not to contribute to the problem personally.

[Sly]

I like the suggestion of AK to have it go beyond Baxter Peak. It could go across the Saddle, down Hamlin, out Roaring Brook, and eventually end in Millinocket. Chimney Pond would be a very short blue blaze. It is a wonder that should not be missed. Moving the end to Millinocket would fix many logistics problems that Baxter and thru's deal with. It would be an easier spot to leave from and would bring business to that town. I do not like the idea if removing the sign. 97% of hikers would still like that sign there. The part of the 3% in favor of that should not have such a say. Just change the information on the sign.

Your idea has merit but (most likely) if it comes down to it and the Trail is moved out of Baxter, a continuation from Abol bridge around BSP to trails end closer to Millinocket, with BSP and K a side trip, would certainly have advantages

[Just Bill]

The numbers game is the main problem...
I know there's a way to reserve a site like any other guest... but I would suggest that we promote hikers completing the hike solo. Unfortunately BSP will have their hands full simply with the hikers in the coming years, might as well get that outta the way now.

Depending on the routing, a cleaner drop off pick up would be good for a start.
Eventually I do like some kind of shuttle situation during peak season as well.
Much like the Kennebec developed a need to be staffed with ferry service, it seems that long term BSP may need a bus service to and from Abol and Millinocket.

Trail wide permit seems to be flat, but perhaps a $5 "ticket to climb" for hikers entering BSP could be created to help fund a shuttle program. Requiring a ticket gives the rangers a clear item to enforce.

Hikers wishing to overnight in the park can get in line like anyone else. And reservations should include names of guests so that rangers can enforce or prevent anyone glomming onto properly obtained reservations at the last minute.

The birches can remain for any true emergencies but should use should be discouraged.

If we have to go overboard for a few seasons to clean it up, better than than half-measures and still losing the park.

[Sly]

I do not like the idea if removing the sign. 97% of hikers would still like that sign there. The part of the 3% in favor of that should not have such a say. Just change the information on the sign.

When discussing the sign it was brought up the sign was first erected by the MATC (and continues to be) because of the AT. So, like it or not it's the 3%s sign.

[BirdBrain]

When discussing the sign it was brought up the sign was first erected by the MATC (and continues to be) because of the AT. So, like it or not it's the 3%s sign.

I stand correct and appreciate not being ignorant on the subject now.

[peakbagger]

Nice to see you have decided to adopt my proposal ;)

Depending on the routing, a cleaner drop off pick up would be good for a start.
Eventually I do like some kind of shuttle situation during peak season as well.
Much like the Kennebec developed a need to be staffed with ferry service, it seems that long term BSP may need a bus service to and from Abol and Millinocket.

http://whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php/112872-Potential-Solutions-to-the-BSP-issues

[Just Bill]

LOL, too many threads (yes I know I have one or fifty of them too).

Hopefully when things shake out here in a few days and the revelations and counter revelations are done with we can start to narrow it down to some solid ideas and possibly get some feedback on them from Sly and Laurie.

[Another Kevin]

The sign is nice to have, partly because of the long history of its being up there. (And I know that the sign itself has to be replaced every year or three... but The Sign has been there a long time).

But it's not essential. Around here there's a long tradition of taking a picture of your boots at a survey marker, waving to the world from a summit cairn, or signing the climbers' log at a canister.
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5324/9514568039_b33797f195_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/fuLDAx)
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5521/14108579485_1a4577997a_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/nuJa9r)
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7521/15673754056_7d617329e3_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pT361U)

[BirdBrain]

Your idea has merit but (most likely) if it comes down to it and the Trail is moved out of Baxter, a continuation from Abol bridge around BSP to trails end closer to Millinocket, with BSP and K a side trip, would certainly have advantages

By the way, the reason I suggested Hamlin is because other trails are more fragile and/or dangerous. The huge boulders of Hamlin would survive better than the loose rocks of other routes. Furthermore, the long in and out from Abol to Baxter Peak and back is not practical for one day. I suspect the biggest objection to an over Hamlin idea is that it would make the IAT too easy to happen. Baxter seems opposed to that concept.

[Sly]

I stand correct and appreciate not being ignorant on the subject now.

No problem....

[BillyGr]

Then change the wording, because "Northern Terminus of the Appalachian Trail" will no longer be what it is.
Perhaps, depending on the re-route, Northernmost Peak of the AT would work.

[Arden]

There was something in the Runner's World (I think that's where I read it) article stating that Baxter Park people are worried about the increasing number of thru hikers reaching their secluded destination. Could we be looking at the biggest AT re-route in history sometime in the future? What about the AT bypassing BP and continuing, as the IAT does, to Canada?
That is my intended route if Donald Trump gets elected president.

As for Scott, I am with him all the way. Whether or not he was "told" by one ranger that it would be ok to take the bottle of champagne to the summit, it's such a small issue overall. Perhaps BP will push the ATC to refuse to recognize Scott's record - if they even keep records like that. But whatever happens, Scott will always know that he accomplished what he set out to do, and what may or may not have happened at the end is irrelevant. I can easily understand anyone making a poor judgment after a strenuous activity. I get "loopy" after a marathon.

Arden

[Traveler]

There was something in the Runner's World (I think that's where I read it) article stating that Baxter Park people are worried about the increasing number of thru hikers reaching their secluded destination. Could we be looking at the biggest AT re-route in history sometime in the future? What about the AT bypassing BP and continuing, as the IAT does, to Canada?
That is my intended route if Donald Trump gets elected president.

As for Scott, I am with him all the way. Whether or not he was "told" by one ranger that it would be ok to take the bottle of champagne to the summit, it's such a small issue overall. Perhaps BP will push the ATC to refuse to recognize Scott's record - if they even keep records like that. But whatever happens, Scott will always know that he accomplished what he set out to do, and what may or may not have happened at the end is irrelevant. I can easily understand anyone making a poor judgment after a strenuous activity. I get "loopy" after a marathon.

Arden

The ATC doesn't recognize records of this type, so thats not an issue. BSP has no interest in any records of this type (or any that concern the AT), their only interest is to protect the wilderness inside their borders for the "people of Maine" which has come to include a vast number of people from outside the State.

[Sly]

No problem....

I suppose one question the sign does address is, that the sign is in fact the northern terminus of the AT (some said the cairn, while others thought it may be a USGS marker.