Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44
  1. #1

    Default A brief history of kids under 6 allowed above treeline at Big K

    article-2493372-194B572C00000578-343_634x727.jpg Buddy Backpacker: 5 Years Old

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-01-2016
    Location
    Chattanooga, Tennessee
    Posts
    938

    Default

    "Allowed" is not the same thing as photographed.

    Even if these kids were allowed in the past, it appears, from reports, that current rules do not permit it.

  4. #4

    Default

    favorites-1-of-112-59.jpg images (3).jpg images (12).jpg maxresdefault (1).jpg Thru-Hiking-the-Appalachian-Trail-with-Kids.jpg prec-e-dent noun 1. An earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or GUIDE to be CONSIDERED in subsequent similar circumstances.

    I'm not sorry. I happen to think that kids should be allowed to have amazing adventures outdoors and we as adults should challenge them to do so - not discourage them from doing so.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Time Zone View Post
    "Allowed" is not the same thing as photographed.

    Even if these kids were allowed in the past, it appears, from reports, that current rules do not permit it.
    Really? If no one stopped them then they were what? Allowed.

  6. #6

    Default

    The real world is there is not a guard assigned to each trail at Katahdin. The average hiker heading up Katahdin especially the Hunt trail is highly unlikely going to see a park employee. Thus it comes down to either someone deliberately ignoring the rules, not being aware of them or special permission from the park authority. A high profile hiker most likely is going to be informed of the rules in advance and therefore they most likely will be aware of them.

  7. #7
    Registered User egilbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-18-2014
    Location
    Lewiston and Biddeford, Maine
    Age
    58
    Posts
    2,643

    Default

    Just won't let it go, will you?

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rockit Mann View Post
    Really? If no one stopped them then they were what? Allowed.
    But if something happens to you and/or your toddler which results in a rescue, your in a world of S**t and will cost you plenty.

    They don't just make up these rules to make life difficult for certain people. They are implemented because some irresponsible parents have caused problems with trying get their young children up there. Or getting them down, which is always harder on especially steep and rocky trail. Thru hikers are a small percentage of the people who climb Baxter peak.
    Follow slogoen on Instagram.

  9. #9

    Default

    Please stop encouraging/celebrating activities that violate Baxter's rules. The relationship between BSP and ATC is strained enough already.
    Teej

    "[ATers] represent three percent of our use and about twenty percent of our effort," retired Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    12-19-2005
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    3,536
    Images
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rockit Mann View Post
    Really? If no one stopped them then they were what? Allowed.

    So---if no one stopped me from killing someone, then that's allowed too?

  11. #11
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,028
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TJ aka Teej View Post
    Please stop encouraging/celebrating activities that violate Baxter's rules. The relationship between BSP and ATC is strained enough already.
    The ATC is involved?

  12. #12
    Registered User soilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-29-2010
    Location
    Chillicothe, OH
    Age
    66
    Posts
    559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rockit Mann View Post
    170810-family-hiking-baby-index.jpg Ellie: Fifteen Months Old
    According to their blog Ellie did not summit but stayed in Millinocket.
    More walking, less talking.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TJ aka Teej View Post
    Please stop encouraging/celebrating activities that violate Baxter's rules. The relationship between BSP and ATC is strained enough already.
    Just out of curiosity, under whose authority are you able to dictate BSP policy, or for that matter characterize the "strained relationship" it has with the ATC? Are you a BSP employee? An ATC employee? Or, given your aggressive drive to control what is said or not said here, are you an affiliate of WB? We are meant to believe that you speak for Baxter State Park? Who are you then?

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TNhiker View Post
    So---if no one stopped me from killing someone, then that's allowed too?
    Seriously? Yeah. Clearly if it were as big a deal as it is being made out to be in preparation for the arrival of the Crawfords then there wouldn't be hundreds of pics of kids atop Katahdin. Will TeeJ of BSP be laying in wait to intercept the Family of eight, or will they just summit like everyone else? Because it seems like that plenty of exceptions have been made to this "rule" before. It also seems like someone is impersonating a ranger on here too. And no, I'm not letting it go because, well, why should I? This is a real and timely AT issue for an AT forum right? I'd like to know what's going to happen and if some petty tyrant is going to crush kids dreams cause they can then we're going to work on adjusting a BS and useless rule that's only really enforced to punish the types of folks who should be encouraged to hike - not discouraged.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rockit Mann View Post
    Seriously? Yeah. Clearly if it were as big a deal as it is being made out to be in preparation for the arrival of the Crawfords then there wouldn't be hundreds of pics of kids atop Katahdin. Will TeeJ of BSP be laying in wait to intercept the Family of eight, or will they just summit like everyone else? Because it seems like that plenty of exceptions have been made to this "rule" before. It also seems like someone is impersonating a ranger on here too. And no, I'm not letting it go because, well, why should I? This is a real and timely AT issue for an AT forum right? I'd like to know what's going to happen and if some petty tyrant is going to crush kids dreams cause they can then we're going to work on adjusting a BS and useless rule that's only really enforced to punish the types of folks who should be encouraged to hike - not discouraged.
    I highly doubt Rainier dreams of summiting Katahdin.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RuthN View Post
    I highly doubt Rainier dreams of summiting Katahdin.
    Having met Rainer, I would venture to guess he envisions himself standing on the summit of Katahdin with his family. He's an amazing kid who has a very good handle on what's going on.

  17. #17
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,028
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADK Walker View Post
    Having met Rainer, I would venture to guess he envisions himself standing on the summit of Katahdin with his family. He's an amazing kid who has a very good handle on what's going on.
    In fairness to the folk as BSP, the vision of even the most capable of parents passing an infant/toddler up (and then down) that one short section of the Hunt Trail (we all know it) like a sack of potatoes would be a bit disconcerting.

    Putting everythkmg else aside, I can see why it is difficult for any one individual to sign a waiver to most any policy put in place (at least in part) in the name of child safety.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-18-2010
    Location
    NJ
    Age
    44
    Posts
    3,133
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb View Post
    In fairness to the folk as BSP, the vision of even the most capable of parents passing an infant/toddler up (and then down) that one short section of the Hunt Trail (we all know it) like a sack of potatoes would be a bit disconcerting.
    does anyone know if Acadia NP has any regulations regarding small children hiking the beehive or the precipice? no dogs are allowed on ladder trails, don't recall ever hearing about rules against children.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slo-go'en View Post
    But if something happens to you and/or your toddler which results in a rescue, your in a world of S**t and will cost you plenty.

    They don't just make up these rules to make life difficult for certain people. They are implemented because some irresponsible parents have caused problems with trying get their young children up there. Or getting them down, which is always harder on especially steep and rocky trail. Thru hikers are a small percentage of the people who climb Baxter peak.
    Well said! But you forgot to mention the mindlessness of making rules for everyone based on the actions of "some irresponsible parents". With that sort of logic we will need to outlaw nearly everything.

    The best course of action is to allow parents to parent their own children. It is ok for us to think we know better. It is not ok to infringe on others just because we think we know better.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rockit Mann View Post
    Just out of curiosity, under whose authority are you able to dictate BSP policy, or for that matter characterize the "strained relationship" it has with the ATC? Are you a BSP employee? An ATC employee? Or, given your aggressive drive to control what is said or not said here, are you an affiliate of WB? We are meant to believe that you speak for Baxter State Park? Who are you then?
    I don't believe there is a special "authority" designation for someone who fully understands the regulatory landscape of BSP or other parks and places from educating someone who is ignorant of them. Rule and Regulations of BSP are easily found and written in plain language for easy comprehension. The characterization of a "strained relationship" with BSP and the ATC is not TJ's but one that has been of concern to both organizations and hikers alike for a number of years, culminating in a recent letter from BSP to ATC regarding thru hiker issues.

    If you need to quibble with rules, perhaps sending some questions to BSP about rules you disagree with will help you navigate these waters as opposed to casting aspersions toward those who are trying to help you understand them. Encouraging or championing breaking of the rules at BSP (or other parks and places) is not only repugnant, but against forum policy.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •