Ranger waiting for The Crawfords

[rickb]

Is it true that the there was a BSP Ranger waiting at the top of Katahdin (ahead of the Crawford Family) on the day they headed up to tree line with their own hand-made sign?

[Tundracamper]

Whether there was or not, whenever I think of the BSP rangers, I’ll picture Barney Fife with his silver bullet.

[hikewithgravity]

The Crawfords did not go all the way to the top. They elected to stop at the treeline and remain together as a family.

[imscotty]

HikeWIthGravity, I believe RickB understands that point. He is asking a different question.

I wonder if the BSP officials were really expecting a 'Scott Jurek Moment' and were surprised when it did not happen? If so then it confirms that BSP's opinion of AT thru-hikers must be pretty low.

I am glad the Crawfords did the right thing.

[Starchild]

Isn't it is not uncommon to have a ranger at the summit? Yes they could have been being richards about it and send one up just to cause trouble.

[Puddlefish]

The park takes their charter and stewardship of the land seriously. They have every right to enforce their rules. This is fine.

The family finished their hike within the rules of the landowners/stewards. Responsible hikers will respect the rules of of the landowners, or risk losing access for all hikers to that trail. The family hiked their own hike as far as they could do so, without intruding on anyone else's hike. Good for them. I commented once when I first learned of their hike. I said then that I expect them to get as far as they get, just like any other hiker starting a through hike.

They got as far as they got, that's awesome. I assumed they achieved their goal. They hiked their own hike, without intruding on anyone else's hike. I don't actually follow any AT journals, so I'm assuming they're happy. I get plenty of drama and inspiration from my own life.

Everyone won.

[MuddyWaters]

If you want to have notoreity, then publicly break rules and post on facebook, youtube, etc. Expect attention from BSP from now on.

1. Yes, at thru hikers are a pain to BSP, well documented

2. When episodes of rule breaking are shared on social media, it propagates it, makes ignorant others think its OK.

Heading off such instances saves them 10x the trouble in future.

[TJ aka Teej]

Isn't it is not uncommon to have a ranger at the summit?
There are trail stewards on Katahdin, 1-2 weekdays, 2-3 weekends.
I believe this unnecessary post is about an ignorant comment made the dad.
He thought he's so important the Park would assign a LE Ranger just to them.
His 15 mins are up, let's hope his fans stop spamming the forum soon.

[TJ aka Teej]

If so then it confirms that BSP's opinion of AT thru-hikers must be pretty low.
Even though:
Baxter has a trail runner assigned just to them, built an info kiosk just for them, adds staff at KSC just for them, built the Birches just for them, built a station on the Ranger's porch just for them, provides loaner day packs just for them, and also just for them - no advance reservations required and a discounted camping fee.

It's a shame ATers acquire a poor opinion of the Park based on gossip and the rantings of self anointed trail legends.

[rickb]

There are trail stewards on Katahdin, 1-2 weekdays, 2-3 weekends.
I believe this unnecessary post is about an ignorant comment made the dad.
He thought he's so important the Park would assign a LE Ranger just to them.
His 15 mins are up, let's hope his fans stop spamming the forum soon.

I had no idea that one was likely to see Trail Stewards on the top of Katahdin these days. In the half dozen time I have been up, I have never seen ione.

I am getting old, I guess (and time flies).

One thing is for sure though— the park took notice of the Crawfords well before they entered the Park.

It was no coincidence that their post about AT hikers with a two year old having recently called the park and settling on a plan to take turns summitting was made last Wednesday 8/7. As I recall you followed up with a post here telling us that it was the Crawfords.

That’s not important, of course. Of the 400+ replies most everyone made the same mistake, and after the Crawfords really reached tree line, BSP did Acnowledge that their post was not about the Crawford. Geesh.

In any case, as an insider can you share how the Trail Monitors have been handling scofflaws on the summit? Have there been many this year? Are they educating, or writing tickets?

[Rockit Mann]

There are trail stewards on Katahdin, 1-2 weekdays, 2-3 weekends.
I believe this unnecessary post is about an ignorant comment made the dad.
He thought he's so important the Park would assign a LE Ranger just to them.
His 15 mins are up, let's hope his fans stop spamming the forum soon.

43450 Good BPM article by famous naturalist and triple crowner.

[rickb]

Even though:
Baxter has a trail runner assigned just to them, built an info kiosk just for them, adds staff at KSC just for them, built the Birches just for them, built a station on the Ranger's porch just for them, provides loaner day packs just for them, and also just for them - no advance reservations required and a discounted camping fee.
.

These are good points, and thru hikers should be greatful for the Park and the many hard-working people that care for it.

And most certainly not take it for granted.

That said, parks serve differnt visitors, well, differently.

At Baxter, the park has done some great things just for thrus. But other constituencies are not neglected either.

For some, they provide cut fire wood and karoseen lanterns and cabins (yes, at a cost). For others they staff backcountry sites.

For others they maintain som gr at car camping areas, and for many they provide interpretive programs. For still others, they open their roads in the winter for snow machines.

For still others they maintain canoes and some of the best cabins you can imagine — at prices that ar well below market (they always sell out)

And you can bet that for folks “in the know” many more examples of the great thing that BSP does for a wide variety of guests.

Thrus are lucky to be included on the list!

[gpburdelljr]

43450 Good BPM article by famous naturalist and triple crowner.

As near as I can tell, he is a self described “famous naturalist”.

[rickb]

As near as I can tell, he is a self described “famous naturalist”.

The only trail legend to weigh in on this — a real one, not imagined — is Warren Doyle.

For those not familiar with him, it’s worth a google.

Somewhere down the list will be a footnote about how he accepted a night in county jail rather than accept a small fine levied by the park som 40 years ago.

If your Googlefu is really good, you will find the famous letter he wrote from his cell, and poem.

Since this will “trigger” some here, I won’t post a link, but no matter what you think on the topic, Warren is definitely a part of AT lore.

[Starchild]

Even though:
Baxter has a trail runner assigned just to them, built an info kiosk just for them, adds staff at KSC just for them, built the Birches just for them, built a station on the Ranger's porch just for them, provides loaner day packs just for them, and also just for them - no advance reservations required and a discounted camping fee.

It's a shame ATers acquire a poor opinion of the Park based on gossip and the rantings of self anointed trail legends.
While some of this is appreciated (especially the birches and slack pack loner pack), all of that stuff is totally unneeded and is really a solution looking for a problem, as thru hikers could easily travel that last 15 (or so) miles on their own. It is taking a simple self sustaining process that thru hikers live and breath and adding layers of unneeded complications and that in the end is wasted resources and a less satisfactory solution.

[TX Aggie]

I wasn’t even following this family, didn’t know much about them until this whole BSP issue popped up. Personally, I don’t see how an age limit does anything to enhance “stewardship” of the land.

That being said, here’s a question I have: since BSP has created a limit to the number of AT thru hikers permitted to summit each year, does the family count against the total? By the park’s own rules the family didn’t summit, so they shouldn’t be counted against the maximum number of thru hikers allowed.

[capehiker]

His 15 mins are up, let's hope his fans stop spamming the forum soon.

I can’t wait. Hopefully their visibility will end sooner than later.

[D2maine]

I wasn’t even following this family, didn’t know much about them until this whole BSP issue popped up. Personally, I don’t see how an age limit does anything to enhance “stewardship” of the land.

That being said, here’s a question I have: since BSP has created a limit to the number of AT thru hikers permitted to summit each year, does the family count against the total? By the park’s own rules the family didn’t summit, so they shouldn’t be counted against the maximum number of thru hikers allowed.

there is no limit to the number of thru hikers allowed to summit only a limit to the number granted special access to the park, once that limit is reached any thru is able to summit following the entry rules everybody else follows.

[Uncle Joe]

Maybe someday the AT will bypass BSP. It sounds like it will make things easier for everyone, including BSP.

[rickb]

By the park’s own rules the family didn’t summit, so they shouldn’t be counted against the maximum number of thru hikers allowed.

I get what you are saying, but my guess is that every Crawford family memeber was required to fill out the Special AT Hiker Permission Card. Not sure about the toddler since he was not on foot and therefore may have been grandfathered under Pamola’s papoose clause.

As you probably know, these permits are mandatory whether you are a SOBO who makes CG reservations like the tradition car-supported camper, an AT hiker getting slack packed in from Millinocket, or any Katahdin hiker entering the park via the AT— whether after 2000 miles or just a few.

Once the park has accepted 3150 permits (2017 #) they still allow more to climb Katahdin. Its just that AT Hikers are forced to arrive by motor vehicle — and if they happened to reach KSCG on foot, they are told to find a ride out of the park and then come back in by motor vehicle another day.

This purpose of this is to protect the mountain after the yearly AT hiker limit is reached (has not happened yet), and protect the Wilderness values of the park.

It is a bit puzzling to me exactly how such stewardship really protects the Wilderness values of the park, especially since the plan would only go in effect at the end of the season (if ever), when the total number of people headed up Katahdin is well below its peak.

That said, this has ver happened, as the quota has yet to be reached. My guess is that if it does on some brisk October Day for the las few stragglers coming in, they will bend the rules out of common sense.

Unless they are worried about setting a bad precedent, of course.

[SoaknWet]

I can't wait for the movie! Then we will know the truth.

[Tundracamper]

My guess is that if it does on some brisk October Day for the las few stragglers coming in, they will bend the rules out of common sense.

Unless they are worried about setting a bad precedent, of course.

They didn’t “bend” the rules for this family. So what makes you think they would do so otherwise? I agree with the comment that the AT needs to be routed out of BSP. Sounds like the relationship is one of bare tolerance. Just end it.

[Speakeasy TN]

While some of this is appreciated (especially the birches and slack pack loner pack), all of that stuff is totally unneeded and is really a solution looking for a problem, as thru hikers could easily travel that last 15 (or so) miles on their own. It is taking a simple self sustaining process that thru hikers live and breath and adding layers of unneeded complications and that in the end is wasted resources and a less satisfactory solution.


Amazing thread highlighting the part of the community that thinks the AT must go to Katadin. Keep this attitude and the terminus will move. BSP goes above and beyond and ^^^ this is the attitude of way too many. Follow the rules and be grateful not an embarrassment.

[Don H]

IOnce the park has accepted 3150 permits (2017 #) they still allow more to climb Katahdin. Its just that AT Hikers are forced to arrive by motor vehicle — and if they happened to reach KSCG on foot, they are told to find a ride out of the park and then come back in by motor vehicle another day.

I'm wondering how making hikers leave by motor vehicle and expecting them to return another day by motor vehicle protects the wilderness.
Seems to me this would just increase traffic.

[Slo-go'en]

I'm wondering how making hikers leave by motor vehicle and expecting them to return another day by motor vehicle protects the wilderness.
Seems to me this would just increase traffic.

Because the number of vehicles allowed into the park is limited to available parking. if you show up in a car and the park is already full, you still don't get in. Anyway, why are we still taking about this?

[Starchild]

Because the number of vehicles allowed into the park is limited to available parking. if you show up in a car and the park is already full, you still don't get in. Anyway, why are we still taking about this?

Unless some has changed, yes you do. If you are dropping off a thru hiker and then leaving they let you right in, bypassing the line at the gate.

[Starchild]

Amazing thread highlighting the part of the community that thinks the AT must go to Katadin. Keep this attitude and the terminus will move. BSP goes above and beyond and ^^^ this is the attitude of way too many. Follow the rules and be grateful not an embarrassment.


Actually it does no such thing, the trail ends where it ends and will adapt as needed. I think you may see it as such because of how you feel about the issue and seeing it in places where it is not.

[rickb]

Because the number of vehicles allowed into the park is limited to available parking. if you show up in a car and the park is already full, you still don't get in. Anyway, why are we still taking about this?
Not really.

If the quota of hikers set by BSP is reached, it will be reached late in the season when there are relatively few hikers on Katahdin

Ergo, sending hikers who have reached KSCG out of he park and having them return the next day by motor vehicle seems a rather odd strategy if the goal is to reduce the density of hikers on Katahdin.

Peak hiking days are recorded in July and August.

Anyon know what the count is this year?

[Old Hiker]

Whether there was or not, whenever I think of the BSP rangers, I’ll picture Barney Fife with his silver bullet.

And no one ELSE thinks this comment is intensely disrespectful and uncalled for?

I wonder how he feels about his local LEOs?

I wonder how he'll feel when he has to call the "Barney Fifes" for assistance somewhere in the park?

[Tundracamper]

And no one ELSE thinks this comment is intensely disrespectful and uncalled for?

I wonder how he feels about his local LEOs?

I wonder how he'll feel when he has to call the "Barney Fifes" for assistance somewhere in the park?

Guess I just ruined my chances for a post on the Supreme Court. Dang!