View Full Version : Probably the end is near?
bangorme
08-23-2015, 10:32
One of many articles in Maine newspapers questioning the continuance of Baxter State Park being part of the AT. My prediction, within five years the terminus will be some place else, or there will be no designated "thru-hiker" camping in the park.
http://bangordailynews.com/2015/08/21/outdoors/what-would-gov-baxter-do-ex-park-director-shares-thoughts/
bangorme
08-23-2015, 10:36
Oops, meant to include this:
http://bangordailynews.com/2015/08/21/outdoors/rise-in-appalachian-trail-hikers-causes-tension-in-baxter-state-park/
Lone Wolf
08-23-2015, 15:04
http://bangordailynews.com/2015/08/23/outdoors/organizations-prepare-for-increased-use-of-appalachian-trail/
Uncle Joe
08-30-2015, 11:39
Unfortunately, the Jurek incident is being used to spearhead a lot of this. The rangers betrayed an agenda. They were willing to let him open the champaign so that they could seize the moment, it appears. The truth is the incident has nothing to do with the issue at hand because the group of reporters pale in comparison to the number of visitors that go there. Given the attitude and behavior of the Baxter land-keepers moving the terminus might not be a bad thing.
bangorme
08-30-2015, 23:24
Unfortunately, the Jurek incident is being used to spearhead a lot of this. The rangers betrayed an agenda. They were willing to let him open the champaign so that they could seize the moment, it appears. The truth is the incident has nothing to do with the issue at hand because the group of reporters pale in comparison to the number of visitors that go there. Given the attitude and behavior of the Baxter land-keepers moving the terminus might not be a bad thing.
That's a goofy theory, to be perfectly honest. But, at least you'll be happy when the trail ends at the Abol Stream store, which I'm hearing is one of the plans on the table.
Starchild
08-31-2015, 07:23
If Baxter closes the trail at their entrance, it would seem like this would come into play:
In the event of a trail closure or a safety hazard (such as a swollen stream, a forest fire, or an impending storm on an exposed ridge) hikers may take alternate routes (including by vehicle) and still receive official 2,000-miler recognition. (From ATC website)
So ending in a 'Just get to K anyway you can', free for all.
Either that or pop the champain cork as soon as you are denied entry, just make sure the spray lands on the Abol side and not BSP side, try not the spray the ranger that told you that they will not let you pass. Abol would be a much easier place to party with the store nearby.
That's a goofy theory, to be perfectly honest. But, at least you'll be happy when the trail ends at the Abol Stream store, which I'm hearing is one of the plans on the table.
Well not so goofy from SJ telling which was that he was told by a ranger it was OK to do as long as there were no children present, then they fined him when he followed the instructions of that ranger.
Traveler
08-31-2015, 08:15
If you think BSP recollections are incorrect, what makes you think Jurek's are any more accurate? I suspect neither is fully accurate.
Rather than a conspiracy or a stab in the back, the conflict between accounts seems to me more likely a case of one ranger on the ground taking a relaxed attitude and the boss sitting in the office going ballistic after the fact when he sees photos, videos, and press coverage of what went on…which was not that different than what goes on every single day all summer…except for the press coverage.
bangorme
08-31-2015, 08:49
If Baxter closes the trail at their entrance, it would seem like this would come into play:
In the event of a trail closure or a safety hazard (such as a swollen stream, a forest fire, or an impending storm on an exposed ridge) hikers may take alternate routes (including by vehicle) and still receive official 2,000-miler recognition. (From ATC website)
So ending in a 'Just get to K anyway you can', free for all.
Either that or pop the champain cork as soon as you are denied entry, just make sure the spray lands on the Abol side and not BSP side, try not the spray the ranger that told you that they will not let you pass. Abol would be a much easier place to party with the store nearby.
Well not so goofy from SJ telling which was that he was told by a ranger it was OK to do as long as there were no children present, then they fined him when he followed the instructions of that ranger.
I couldn't care less when, how, or if people "pop the cork" or consider the AT completed. There would be no "free for all," because everyone would enter through a gate and need a reservation to camp (quite hard to get btw). All that would need be done is close the trail and restore it to its natural state (remove the improvements AT hikers need like stairs, log bridges over swamps, etc). Within a very few years you'd never know there was a trail there. In the beginning, there would be some yahoos that would storm on and get lost, but that would stop after they got the bill for being rescued and citing them. The dog fiasco could be solved by requiring notarized documentation from a psychiatrist. Otherwise, I'm sure someone would be happy to kennel dogs at Abol.
Rather, than do that, what I'd like to see is a redefinition of the concept of "thru-hike" to eliminate Katahdin. That could be accomplished by charging a fee to enter the park by the AT large enough to fund placing an officer there (e.g. $100), then limiting it to 10 hikers a day. This plan would mean that people would be forced to do the Katahdin as a section hike and eliminate most of the problems.
As far as Mr. Jurek's story, let him fight it in court.
MuddyWaters
08-31-2015, 08:51
Rather than a conspiracy or a stab in the back, the conflict between accounts seems to me more likely a case of one ranger on the ground taking a relaxed attitude and the boss sitting in the office going ballistic after the fact when he sees photos, videos, and press coverage of what went on…which was not that different than what goes on every single day all summer…except for the press coverage.
Yep.
One ranger . or several even, might be willing to turn a blind eye
That in no way changes Maine law or BSP policy.
They were obviously told to enforce the regulations, due to the publicity surrounding this event. Publicity that SJ created himself.
Had it all been kept on the down low, no cameras, no crowds, I would bet there would have been ....no problem.
bangorme
08-31-2015, 08:55
Rather than a conspiracy or a stab in the back, the conflict between accounts seems to me more likely a case of one ranger on the ground taking a relaxed attitude and the boss sitting in the office going ballistic after the fact when he sees photos, videos, and press coverage of what went on…which was not that different than what goes on every single day all summer…except for the press coverage.
I doubt this. This issue has been in the local media for quite some time. Yesterday there was another article in the Bangor Daily News. No ranger winked and OK'd a party on the summit.
BirdBrain
08-31-2015, 09:10
I doubt this. This issue has been in the local media for quite some time. Yesterday there was another article in the Bangor Daily News. No ranger winked and OK'd a party on the summit.
The story of a ranger winking and OK'ing a party on the summit is based on hearsay. Scott said someone said that someone said it was okay. Yet that flimsy hearsay is accepted as immutable fact and a reasonable defense to a video taped violation of park rules and Maine law. Some actually think that is a winning defense in court. Some people are idiots. I would suggest that only a troublemaker and idiot would fight such a clear violation.
Okay... I have had my rants. Time to clean up what is visible to me. Time to use that beloved ignore thread option. The board has been infected again.
TJ aka Teej
08-31-2015, 12:41
Jurek's foolish lie that 'someone said it was OK,' is nonsense. The staff at the campground, who reportedly cited the drivers for speeding and entering a closed parking lot, were there to ensure the circus complied with the rules.
Rather than a conspiracy or a stab in the back, the conflict between accounts seems to me more likely a case of one ranger on the ground taking a relaxed attitude and the boss sitting in the office going ballistic after the fact when he sees photos, videos, and press coverage of what went on…which was not that different than what goes on every single day all summer…except for the press coverage.
Yep, that's been my theory all along.