The Negative Effects of FKT's

[fiddlehead]

The only negative effect I see of these record attempts is that it will increase the numbers on and around the trail.
(and continue to upset those looking for the "wilderness experience") (which is already somewhat of a rarity on the AT)
Lots of other trails out there.

The movies are even more guilty.
Wait. It's going to get worse.
Speed hikers will be the least of your worries.

Soon to come: daily limits (like the PCT now has), lotteries, fees, more fees, more ridge runners, charging stations, more crime, maybe even hot dog and coke stands at the road crossings. (for profit). and lastly (and the worst to me): More Rules!

[Sarcasm the elf]

So has anyone from BSP said anything about this photo, or is this all just speculation? (honest question)

[rickb]

So has anyone from BSP said anything about this photo, or is this all just speculation? (honest question)

Good question.

BTW, the letter they sent to the ATC spoke of "disrespectful drinking of alcholol and use of recreational drugs in full view of the summit"

Not:

A classic champagne celebration with the bottle brought out by the one armed guy the Park Rangers all read about and probably saw portrayed on NetFlix with this famous runner taking a few ceremonial swigs.

But who knows, it could have torqued them off.

Of course this was so predictable, it would have bee super easy for them to say "Hey Guys, We understand it's a big day but we'd appreciate you not doing the champagne thing". And they would have done it differently.

[johnnybgood]

Looking at this from my perspective a misstep, ( appro analogy here ) was taken my Scott & his crew once his accomplishment was cemented in history. OKAY I have no problem with a little bubbly, but I do understand , rules are rules and they are there for a reason...BUT ....lets move on folks .
I'm sure everyone here has done indefensible self-serving acts at some point in their life . I stake claim to many.
1) Going forward from this point ; future FKT attempts will likely see BSP make necessary a crew of their own to more closely monitor activities within park boundaries. 2)Make signs visible for all entering the park, not only speed record seekers but every long distance hiker who has intentions of making their own bit of history with a ascent of Katahdin.

[Malto]

There are so few FKT attempts....... they are a non-issue for "traditional" hikers.

[Sly]

Good question.

BTW, the letter they sent to the ATC spoke of "disrespectful drinking of alcholol and use of recreational drugs in full view of the summit"

Not:

A classic champagne celebration with the bottle brought out by the one armed guy the Park Rangers all read about and probably saw portrayed on NetFlix with this famous runner taking a few ceremonial swigs.

But who knows, it could have torqued them off.

Of course this was so predictable, it would have bee super easy for them to say "Hey Guys, We understand it's a big day but we'd appreciate you not doing the champagne thing". And they would have done it differently.

Wow, I didn't realize it was Aaron Ralston who handed Scott (and probably brought) the bottle. From what I could tell, after popping it, he only took one long sip, and held it during an interview the rest of the time. Nothing outrageous. If all AT hikers behaved as well as SJ and his crew I don't think BSP would be writing letters to the ATC.

[rickb]

Wow, I didn't realize it was Aaron Ralston who handed Scott (and probably brought) the bottle. From what I could tell, after popping it, he only took one long sip, and held it during an interview the rest of the time. Nothing outrageous. If all AT hikers behaved as well as SJ and his crew I don't think BSP would be writing letters to the ATC.

http://www.runnersworld.com/trail-ra...e-speed-record

[fboggess]

Max Patch to Hot Springs. I will be section hiking that later this week and want to check on any concerns along the way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sly]

http://www.runnersworld.com/trail-ra...e-speed-record

Flashbacks to the Fugitive.

[Scrum]

Wow, I didn't realize it was Aaron Ralston who handed Scott (and probably brought) the bottle. From what I could tell, after popping it, he only took one long sip, and held it during an interview the rest of the time. Nothing outrageous. If all AT hikers behaved as well as SJ and his crew I don't think BSP would be writing letters to the ATC.

You can see 2 bottles in this interview, one in his hand and one on the left side of the picture in the background. He takes a few swings, and also pours a cup for someone else, during this 20 minute interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vog3AjgzQLY

Yes, AR handed him a bottle. SJ sprayed about half of it in the air, and chugged about 1/4 of it, as shown in this video. http://www.runnersworld.com/trail-ra...adbpr=14882900

None of what is shown should cause anyone to believe that SJ was intentionally flaunting BSP's rules, or disregarding the heightened sensitivities of BSP officials about thru hikers, including concerning the use of intoxicating substances. See p. 4 of Bissell letter: http://www.baxterstateparkauthority....%20scanned.pdf

Rather, I think everyone can agree that SJ and his team were ignorant of the rule. Mistakes happen, even by people who have assumed the role of AT Ambassadors. In fact, if you watch the first video, you can hear Scott speak of the trail and the AT community with reverence and respect. Which leads me to believe that he will be an outstanding ambassador for the AT, and that he never would have touched the bottle of Champaign if he had know it would be problematic.

Having said that, of course it would be great if SJ made some type of a statement acknowledging that a mistake was made and encouraging long distance hikers and runners to respect all rules of BSP so as to preserve peace and harmony with that entity. Maybe even make a contribution to BSP that equals the amount of a fine for drinking in public in the park.

Let's keep this in perspective though and cut Scott a little slack. I think he and his run did a lot more good for the AT than harm. He encouraged and will continue to encourage, many new people to explore the trail or other wilderness areas, as well as explore their own limits. That is a very good outcome from this FKT effort.

[rickb]

Flashbacks to the Fugitive.

Yup. Did you notice how quickly he disappeared after committing his crime ....

[Pedaling Fool]

I never knew there was a "no alcohol" rule on Big K, until I read it on here. Seems like everyone drinks up there, not making excuses, but it's not as if the rangers inform you or you see some big sign.

I think this is a non-issue, but probably so do-gooder will make it a big issue later on, by big issue, I mean much more than simply venting on a AT forum.

[BirdBrain]

Here are the do-gooders that have the ability to do much more than vent on this site.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...7MZS9YHPehRLMA

I would think those that are aware of the coming impasse would do more than invoke a Bart Simpson defense. I am sure the free spirits on this site think I am shocked and dismayed at Scott's celebration. I am not. This is the equivalent of doing 56 in a 55. What I am dismayed by (not shocked) is the attitude of those that know that Baxter could shut this down tomorrow. If we want Katahdin to remain part of the AT, it is incumbent upon the hiking community to help ebb this tide. However, if we just want to feel good in our alternate reality, then I guess we can promote technicalities.

Okay. I have said too much. I am quite certain those entrenched in their alternate reality think that people like me are the problem. I am not their problem. The authors of the attached letter are their problem and the people with their heads in the sand are the problem the authors are trying to reason with.

[Driver8]

i'd rather see few speed hikers every other year than the thousands of wannabe thru-hikers that flock to georgia every spring creating a mess. the ATC should not promote thru hiking any more. FK timers are not the problem

That's a strong point, LW. I'm conflicted on it. I agree with the sentiment and spirit of your remarks as I read them. At the same time, the more people get out and enjoy the outdoors, respectfully and responsibly, the better, both for their health and for increased respect and appreciation for wilderness and green spaces. And it some start out kinda sloppy, I hope they learn and grow in time into more responsible stewards.

[Driver8]

I've never wanted to live the nomadic lifestyle of trail life, but for thems that do, I get it...I do. But your right, somthing has to change, it's not the same as 30 years ago, the numbers have increased to levels that have to be considered. This is nothing more than a self serving activity of "all in one shot" known as a thru-hike.

I don't like some of the excessive tendencies of thru-hiker culture. The commonly observed and reported snobbery toward day- and section-hikers among many, the loud parties and excessive drinking and drugging.

At the same time, I think of my friend, Steve Silva, now in western Maine about 250 miles from K summit. Joker4Ink here and Not Yet at trail journals, Steve's been what you might call a model thru-hiker. Thoughtful, considerate, quiet and respectful. He's worked hard at his hike, and he and his wife Nikki, home working and paying the bills, have sacrificed a lot, planned a lot, and made an excellent effort happen which has left minimal trace.

I would never want to see people like Steve and like so many fine hikers I've met here who have thru'd responsibility denigrated as self-indulgent.

ANY hike, of any length, in some sense, is self-indulgent. One could always rather be attending to someone else's needs than hiking, whether it be for a day or for six months, whether the someone else be family, friend, or someone at a homeless shelter. It's one of the biggest things which ends thru attempts - something happens back at home and the hiker needs to be there more than out in the wild, not matter how badly she or he wants to continue the hike.

But the wonderful benefits to the hiker, and to the community who shares the hike with the hiker, are, as we all here know, no small thing and one need not list them here and now.

I love hiking, as do most of us here. As with most things in life, it comes to striking a balance between the virtues of that part of our lives and the virtues and needs of other parts, and striving to minimize our negative impacts on the trail and on our planet and its other inhabitants.

As to FKTs, I agree that thru's and sectioners and day-hikers have a much bigger impact, which must be managed with care. There will always be the striving by a small few to be the fastest, and there will always be some who will admire and enjoy their quests. I see that as simply part of human nature.

[Driver8]

I am feeling the need to be redundant. As a native Down Easter, I vote to have the end of the trail be in a bog in the 100 Mile Wilderness. If idiots can't grasp that they are in a special place, let them get drunk in a bog. This rant has nothing to do with Scott. I still don't know what he had or who brought it. My rant is towards those that are telling Baxter to shove it. Kick them off BSP. They obviously are unteachable. Don't like what I am saying? Think it is only a few? Then get in the idiots faces before the AT loses Katahdin.

By the way, if Baxter ever says enough is enough, there is no authority that the AT community can appeal to. It is totally up to Baxter if another thru steps on that land. They are trying to plead with the AT community. It is astounding what the response is from some.

Point well taken, but ... Whenever I've hiked a high peak on the Long Trail corridor, you know what I've found? A caretaker from the Green Mountain Club there to protect the fragile environment there, to enforce the rules established for that purpose. Why doesn't Baxter do the same with K? With Hamlin and North Brother and OJI, for that matter?

I think it's unfortunate that Scott, whom I don't blame at all b/c I'm sure he was wiped mentally as well as physically, blatantly violated Baxter's rule on alcohol at the summit. Whoever was behind that big idea, it was a big dumb idea on their part.

But if a Baxter ranger had been there, that problem would've been solved. Pure and simple. If the GMC can do this, I so can BSP. Why don't that? Or do they? If a ranger were up there and OK'd it, then no one here has any basis to object, it's fair to say.

[Driver8]

If the GMC can do this, I so can BSP. Why don't that? Or do they? If a ranger were up there and OK'd it, then no one here has any basis to object, it's fair to say.

Meant to write: Why don't they? Or do they?

[Pedaling Fool]

Here are the do-gooders that have the ability to do much more than vent on this site.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...7MZS9YHPehRLMA

I would think those that are aware of the coming impasse would do more than invoke a Bart Simpson defense. I am sure the free spirits on this site think I am shocked and dismayed at Scott's celebration. I am not. This is the equivalent of doing 56 in a 55. What I am dismayed by (not shocked) is the attitude of those that know that Baxter could shut this down tomorrow. If we want Katahdin to remain part of the AT, it is incumbent upon the hiking community to help ebb this tide. However, if we just want to feel good in our alternate reality, then I guess we can promote technicalities.

Okay. I have said too much. I am quite certain those entrenched in their alternate reality think that people like me are the problem. I am not their problem. The authors of the attached letter are their problem and the people with their heads in the sand are the problem the authors are trying to reason with.

First off, I don't understand the point of your link, but I think it was to prove that alcohol is not permitted, but I don't think anyone made the argument that this is not a reality...

Secondly, you equate this to doing a 56 in a 55, well then, it truly is a non-issue.

Lastly, I believe you may be wound a little too tightly. Maybe you should just step away from the computer, for at least a week, and...I don't know, go for a run or something...

[MuddyWaters]

But if a Baxter ranger had been there, that problem would've been solved. Pure and simple. If the GMC can do this, I so can BSP. Why don't that? Or do they? If a ranger were up there and OK'd it, then no one here has any basis to object, it's fair to say.

The problem is, Baxter has drawn a line in the sand already.

They have no additional manpower to devote to AT demands
They have no money to hire additional manpower and no plans to do so
They made it clear that AT hikers are problems for them and they are tired of it, and at their limits of dealing with them.
They want the ATC to do something, but ATC is a gutless, toothless entity concerned with self-preservation (thru promotion and maximizing trail usage) not trail user experience or any hint of wilderness experience. Which is what Baxter is all about....for MAINE residents.

They made it clear if things dont change, they will consider removing the AT from the park

[Lone Wolf]

They are tired of AT hikers ignoring their rules

i've been on katahdin 10 times. never once did i see a sign or was given a pamphlet addressing park rules. rangers at daicey pond knew hikers had sent themselves bottles of champagne to take up the mountain.