Earl Shaffer's missing sections in 1948

[Jack Tarlin]

Actually, Majortrauma, Earl wasn't the kinda guy to go into hiding, and in any case, this would be a neat trick, as the man's been dead for almost a decade. (Meaning he's also not around to respond to any of this, which is kind of a blessing). And while there have ineed been some unkind and regrettable things said about Mr. McNeely, there have also been some equally unpleasant things said about the late Mr. Shaffer, who, as anyone lucky enough to have met him can attest, was a plain-spoken, unassuming, modest man, who for many, many years neither sought out nor expected the "Godlike status" that Majortrauma talks about. I hope it's possible to have this dialogue and discuss these matters in a civil way; neither McNeely nor Shaffer deserve some of the harsher comments I've heard here and elsewhere, especially Mr. Shaffer, who is obviously not in a position to respond.

[warren doyle]

For several decades, many in the ATC community took great pride in acknowledging that the AT was the longest, continuously blazed footpath in the world. Many of the hiking clubs used this as a prime motivator/mission behind all the hours of volunteer work they put it maintaining a clear and continuously blazed trail. I have walked 34,000 miles of continuous white blazes to honor these hard-working, good-intentioned volunteers and to also honor the person I see in the mirror.

[Sly]

Mcneely admits that he didn.t hike the existing trail in 1985 so if he has a thru-hiker's certificate It should be revoked by the ATC.

Ummm... there's no such think as thru-hiker certificate. The ATC awards 2000-Miler certificates, which are given if you honestly attempt to hike the entire whiteblazed trail. If you get lost, and find yourself up the trail, missing a few white blazes, only a purist would give you **** for not going back.

[rickb]

Though this new research is extensive for the section of Trail it covers, it does beg the question on how Earl Shaffer's journey may have deviated from the marked AT farther to the north-- if in fact it deviated at all.

I recall reading in what you call SR 48 (as published in an ALDHA directory some years back) Shaffer made a particular point about informing the ATC that he had not walked all the official Trail in the Whites because his maps had not arrived on time-- but that he walked substitute trails of equal or greater length. That impressed me.

So the ATC was clearly OK with the notion that one need not walk the entire footpath as such iconic AT walkers like Warren Doyle and Jack Tarlin might define it today.

But were there any other indications in either Earl Shaffer's contemporaneous journal or his later writings that he walked or rode around any other stretches of the marked trail in New England? Or even indications that he did so based on the distances traveled?

Do you think that it would have even been possible to walk the blaze-defined trail in 122 days (I think) in 1948 with the state of Trail as it existed at the time?

[thepathsproject]

My Report did not address what standards the AT community might apply to claimed thru-hikes. In Chapter 19, I noted that such an issue was beyond the scope of the Report. But several commenters have raised the issue of standards, and I'd like to comment.

Majortrauma (#136) noted that Shaffer's hike would not be ". . . a thru-hike by current standards . . ., but I wonder if that is true. As I understand it, the ATC now accepts claimed thru-hikes by a report only, with no inquiries as to the claim. That is what I got from the ATC comment in the Roanoke Times story, and from comments like that of Sly (#141). So if in the modern era a thru-hiker is recognized solely on the basis of a claim, then Shaffer's 1948 hike would have been accepted on his claim to have done so.

However, the problem for the Shaffer hike is that under those same modern standards his thru-hike was not the first, but rather ranks after the boy scout hike of 1936, based on that claim alone. So Shaffer can be listed as the first AT thru-hiker only by applying the more rigorous standard of requiring a claimed thru-hike to have a record that can be reviewed. As I understand it, that was the standard in 1948.

Shaffer's hike was, of course, accepted by the ATC in 1948. But that acceptance was based on Shaffer's report to the ATC in SR48, and SR48 did not disclose the full extent of Shaffer's voluntary off-AT travel. That can be seen by comparing his trip narrative in LBN, his narrative of decades later in Walking With Spring , and SR48 as he prepared it for the ATC. So when the ATC accepted his 1948 hike as a thru-hike, it did not know the full extent of his off-AT travel, his two motor vehicle rides in Virginia that carried him ahead on the AT, or of his apparent failure to start his hike at Mt. Oglethorpe (although if he made that error he problably didn't know about it until 1949).

So, would the ATC Board have approved Shaffer's 1948 hike if it had been aware of all the information Shaffe did not disclose in SR48, but that was contained in LBN? Folks who know more about the makeup and attitudes of the ATC Board back in that era could address that better than I can, but what appears certain is that the standards in 1948 were more stringent than the "report on the honor system" standards of today. In his latest post (#142), rickb notes that the ATC seemed o-kay with Shaffer skipping part of the AT in the White Mountains and instead walking alternative trails. Since writing my Report, I've seen information suggesting that the standards of that era where not perhaps as demanding as one might have expected.

So perhaps Shaffer's 1948 hike would have been accepted even if he had disclosed the full extent of his off-AT travel. The way in which Shaffer wrote SR48, and his post-hike actions in which he apparently "backfilled" the record of that hike, all suggest that he was concerned that his hike would not be accepted if he fully disclosed what was in LBN and the actual state of his photographic record in 1948. As I discuss in Chapter 15 of the Report, what exactly was Shaffer doing on that automobile trip in 1950 along the AT? Was that when he finally reached the summit of Mt. Oglethorpe? That is my finding, and it is yet to be factually challenged.

What we do know to a high degree of certainty is that Shaffer took photographs in 1950 that he included in the "record" of his 1948 hike. In fact, what is very surprising is the number of photographs even now represented to be 1948 Shaffer hike photos that appear to be (from the dating of film mounts, film numbers, foliage development in the views, and Shaffer's 1950 report to Avery) either 1950 Shaffer photographs or even photographs from other sources. I didn't get into the photography in any detail (except for the Oglethorpe photographs), but I think a person with knowledge of photography would find the Shaffer photography collection at the NMAH a fascinating subject for study.

I'd like to bring up again the issue of whether Shaffer allowed anyone to read LBN during his lifetime. Was LBN held as a "secret" document by Shaffer, even as he cited it repeatedly in WWS as his source document? Or did close associates, hiking companions, friends, family, etc., have access to it? I say again that if LBN was put on-line, or otherwise published (as the records of his other two AT hikes have apparently been), interested folks in the AT community could read it for themselves. Many of thos posting cite Walking With Spring as their source for Shaffer information, but that was a book writtern and rewritten , edited and reedited, over many decades. It is really more a literary work than hike documentation. LBN is the trail journal -- if you are really interested in what Shaffer actually went through on his hike, and where he actually traveled, LBN is the best place to start. So I'm frankly surprised there is not more intellectual curiosity about LBN, and more expressed interest in reading it, within the AT community. It is a fascinating document, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in AT history. I think it would be a great service to the AT community for it to be put on-line.

[Jack Tarlin]

Mr. McNeely, in his extended post above, expresses surprise that people aren't as fascinated with this as he seems to be, and I have to say, after following this debate for some time, that Mr. McNeely's pathological interest in the tiniest detail here (i.e details from 1950 photos, etc.) doesn't merely display "intellectual curiousity." If Mr. McNeely is genuinely intersted in pursuing this for scholarly and historical reasons, that is fine and good. That being said, his earnestness in pursuing this matter is starting to look more like some sort of obsessive quest to destroy the memory and good name of the late Earl Shaffer. It would be unfortunate if Mr. McNeely's research and scholarship gets lost or disrespected because people start misunderstanding his motives here. It would be even more unfortunate if they are not misunderstanding his motives at all, but instead, understand entirely what he seems intent on doing.

[k2basecamp]

You should get a new hobby and let Earl be since he is no longer here to defend his record.

[thepathsproject]

Though this new research is extensive for the section of Trail it covers, it does beg the question on how Earl Shaffer's journey may have deviated from the marked AT farther to the north-- if in fact it deviated at all.

I recall reading in what you call SR 48 (as published in an ALDHA directory some years back) Shaffer made a particular point about informing the ATC that he had not walked all the official Trail in the Whites because his maps had not arrived on time-- but that he walked substitute trails of equal or greater length. That impressed me.

So the ATC was clearly OK with the notion that one need not walk the entire footpath as such iconic AT walkers like Warren Doyle and Jack Tarlin might define it today.

But were there any other indications in either Earl Shaffer's contemporaneous journal or his later writings that he walked or rode around any other stretches of the marked trail in New England? Or even indications that he did so based on the distances traveled?

Do you think that it would have even been possible to walk the blaze-defined trail in 122 days (I think) in 1948 with the state of Trail as it existed at the time?

My research did not extend beyond the Rockfish Gap area in Virginia, so I can't address the extent to which Shaffer followed, or failed to follow, the AT north of there. However, I suspect he more carefully followed the AT as he headed north because he was no longer anonymous as he was south of Rockfish Gap. By the time he got to PA, more folks knew about his hike, so he would likely have been more aware of the need to follow the AT. Also, I don't think there was any parallel highway like the Blue Ridge Parkway/Skyline Drive through the middle and northern states to offer what to him was apparently a more certain and attractive route to walk than the AT through Virginia. But that is all speculation on my part.

As far as mileage is concerned, the rapid pace of Shaffer's hike certainly suggests he wasn't "hacking his way through" with his hachet as some commenters have suggested. I know there is a persistent myth of Shaffer strugging through the tangled forest on a non-existent AT in 1948. As romantic a literary image as that may be, that is not what he reported in LBN or SR48 in 1948. I made a point in my Report to recount the only instance of extended "bushwhacking" reported by Shaffer in the south, which was the Snowbird Mt. section (Chapter 9). It should be noted that I did not count that section as non-AT travel even though my finding was that he likely just missed the AT by making a wrong turn at the river, failing to backtrack when the blazes disappeared (Shaffer just didn't seem to believe in backtracking when he lost the AT), then wandered around parallel to the AT until he stumbled onto Max Patch Road later that day. But even then he did not report "hacking his way through," just navigation by compass, probably on what was likely a web of woods roads or trails through that area in that era.

Anyway, a study of Shaffer's narratives and looking at his mileages suggests that trail conditions did not appear to be a serious impediment to his travel in the south. However, I can't speak of conditions in New England. What I've read is that a 1930's hurricane had, in fact, pretty much wiped out the AT in some areas -- I'd defer to more knowledgeable folks on that. So the stories of Shaffer hacking his way through may be true in parts of New England. My study was of the south, and I found no evidence of any such substantial "obiteration" of the AT in the south. In fact, the southern Virginia section (where Shaffer skipped a lot of AT mileage in walking Va. 97 and the Parkway) had reportedly been reblazed in 1947, and there is evidence of those bright white blazes in Shaffer's own photographs during the rather brief periods he was on the AT in that area. In fact, Shaffer probably had better conditions in southern Virginia than the 1950's hikers who followed, since it is likely the 1947 reblazing and maintenance was the last general maintenance on that section before abandonment in the mid-1950's (although one can assume that John Barnard probably continued to loyally maintain the Pinnacles of Dan section to, and perhaps beyond, abandonment).

It is doubtful that Shaffer would have made the time he did if he was struggling along a non-existent AT. At least in the south, the answer appears to be that he, or the legend of his hike as it developed over time, greatly overstated the degree to which he was slowed by either an unmarked or overgrown AT. Like hikers of today who travel semi-maintained or unmaintained trails, hikers of that era were much more accustomed to navigating over and around downed logs and through undergrowth. Shaffer, like other hikers of the era, was no "tee-shirt and shorts" modern hiker expecting a "groomed" AT. Gene Espy has a photograph in his book of the type of AT he hiked -- it is a footway with vegetation encroaching from either side -- and lots of blow-downs, I'm sure. But like those of us who hike unmaintained trails today, hikers of that era were dressed, equipped and expecting to just "plow through" such undergrowth without really slowing their pace. Those folks were a tough bunch of hikers, so plowing through underbrush was probably the norm for them in many areas of the AT -- thats why AT blazes wer put high on trees, so as to be visible above the undergrowth. I recall back in the early 60's as a teenager on an AT hike standing on stumps along the AT north of the James River in order to see AT blazes above the head-high nettles obstructing the AT, so even in my lifetime I guess I go back far enough to have been experienced the "old AT." It wasn't groomed, but you could still make good time plowing your way along.

Also, I'm not sure modern AT hkers appreciate just how fast early AT hikers were on the many road sections of the AT in that era. Having just hiking extended sections of those same roads on the old AT route in southern Virginia, I understand just how fast a conditioned hiker could travel those roads. I am out-of-shape and slow, but even I covered 3.6 miles in less than an hour in one case (had a store with a Mt. Dew ahead). The best hike to see that in is probably Gene Espy's 1951 hike, as he was more consistent (and having actually followed the AT, now more easily traced). He put in 20 - 30 mile days through that area as he pushed ahead to reach Mt. Katahdin before the snows set in. Espy had been delayed in beginning his hike by waiting for a companion, who quit almost immediately.

It was, incidently, that delay that made Espy the first person to travel a connected, continuous AT from Georgia to Maine. The AT was not a continuous trail in 1948, with two gaps not yet constructed after the AT's continuity had been severed by Parkway construction in the late 1930's -- Cloverdale to Black Horse Gap and "The Priest-Three Ridges" section. So regardless of whatever else he did, Shaffer could not have hiked the AT from Georgia To Maine in 1948 because the AT was not then a continuos trail (the same can be said for the boy scoputs, since there was a much smaller uncompleted gap in the AT in 1936). By 1951, the Cloverdale-Black Horse Gap section was complete, and the last section over Three Ridges was apparently completed just a week or so before Espy hiked through in July 1951.

So Espy, as a factual matter, was the first to hike a continuous AT. Its a shame more attention hasn't been paid to Espy's hike in all the frenzy over Shaffer. Espy was a state-of-the-art hiker for the time and hiked the AT in a very matter-of-fact manner. And he was, as a matter of fact, the first thru-hiker to hike the AT from one end to the other. Regardless of any other issues, both the boy scouts and Shaffer hikes ought to have an "*" noting they hiked a non-continuous trail.

Shaffer was a very fast hiker, but much more inconsistent than Espy. His mileages tended to "bounce" a lot, with short days followed by long days. In an early draft of my Report, there was a running calculation of Shaffer's success at maintaining a 4 month schedule. I edited it out because it was too tedious and space-consuming in an already overlong document. But I can say that with several very low-mileage days in the south due to his rather stubborn refusal to backtrack when he lost the AT (the Doublehead Gap, GA, and the Hampton, TN, situations being prominent), Shaffer was way behind a four-month hike schedule as he left Hampton, TN. He made up a lot of time by Galax, and made up enough time to be on schedule by Rockfish Gap. So I suspect that a lot of his short-cuts and Parkway walking through Virginia, and acceptance of motor vehicle rides to move him ahead on the AT, was likely motivated by his need to make up time.

In the case of the Fries - Galax situation, I think Shaffer just didn't want to wait until the next morning to find his way across the New River -- he wanted to get to Galax that evening. He was well set up in Fries to spend the night (with an early case of "trail magic" having found him a warm meal and dry porch), so he had no reason to push on that evening except for impatience to get to Galax. So I think that a fairly straightforward case of being in too big a hurry to continue hiking.

In the case of his decison to not return to the AT after visiting the Peaks of Otter by motor vehicle on May 14, but to instead continue north on the Parkway to Apple Orchard Mt. (thereby skipping about 18 miles of well established AT), I suspect he was pushed by both the need to make up time and his running low on food (he was hoping, I think, for a hand-out of excess food at the Apple Orchard Mt. tower as he had received at the Peaks of Otter tower, but was disappointed to find the Apple Orchard Mt. tower unmanned).

It is interesting to note that Shaffer and Espy seemingly set the standard for two respective schools of AT hikers. Shaffer was the "free-form" hiker with a rather casual atitude about actually following the AT, or even walking the entire distance. Espy was the "white-blazer," actually following the AT. While Shaffer wandered around on and off the AT, Espy just ticked off AT miles like you would expect of a well-organized, matter-of-fact, young engineer.

I do think that comparing Shaffer's mileage to his reported trail conditions would be an interesting study. I can say that one of the first things that clued me to "problems" with Shaffer's hike in southern Virginia was his reporting in WWS that he hiked from Galax to the "Puckett Cabin" (an exhibit on the Blue Ridge Parkway) in one day. First of all, the 1948 AT didn't pass that cabin (although the '34 AT had). More importantly, that was an AT distance of more than 40 miles. That clued me to look more closely, and I found Shaffer had taken a short-cut on Va. 97 out of Galax that cut off something like 20 miles of AT (and the Fisher Peak trail section) -- again, he was in a hurry at that point and not focused on the AT. So it is true that a mileage chart can offer early clues to possible cases of short-cuts or other non-AT travel.

It would not be difficult to set up the data base for a study of his hike through New England. The closer a person lived to D.C., and the National Museum of Americam History, the easier it would be to study the Shaffer material in that collection.

Hope this is helpful.

[Sly]

So what concrete evidence do we have that Gene Espy was methodical purist that never missed a white blaze?

[thepathsproject]

So what concrete evidence do we have that Gene Espy was methodical purist that never missed a white blaze?

Espy missed a number of blazes, according to his accounts of his hike. He took a wrong turn near Fontana Dam, I believe, and ended up on the old AT. I believe he had to detour any number of obstacles requiring that he leave the AT. So I think he made a number of detours along the way. But his listing of his nightly camps was highly regarded by the ATC in '51, and continues to be today, as far as I know. With his trail data sheets tucked in his hat, I believe, Gene Espy followed the AT from Mt. Oglethorpe to Mt. Katahdin, including those disclosed detours and missteps. So as far as I know as an outsider to the AT community, his 1951 hike has always been regarded as a highly authenic thru-hike by the ATC and the AT community. But I admit I'm an outsider -- if you have information challenging that impression, I'm sure it would be of interest to a lot of folks.

If I were voting on standards to be applied to a thru-hike (which I won't, not being an ATC member), I'd vote for a "substantial compliance" standard for acceptance of a thru-hike in which the hiker does not voluntarily fail to follow the AT. I wouldn't much care about counting blazes, although I might get concerned when the number of blazes missed exceeded 10,000 as Shaffer's record reflected (as I calculated in Chapter 19, according to ATC data as to the number of blazes on the AT). Instead, I would just want to see the hiker focused on and following the AT in good faith, exercising what what one might call "due diligence" in staying on the AT (i.e., backtracking and looking for it when one strays rather than just forging ahead with no regard for AT location other than relocating it somewhere ahead), not ever accepting motor vehicle rides that advance them on the AT (that would be a "big deal" for me), generally experiencing the AT environment, not some other environment (like the Blue Ridge Parkway, as nice as it is to travel), and -- very importantly -- the hiker being entirely candid and honest about the route followed, with no post-hike "back-filling" of his or her record. But without a vote, my opinion doesn't frankly mean much.

Anyway, if you just accept at face value both Shaffer and Espy as ATC "certified" thru-hikers -- which both are --Espy is nevertheless the first thru-hiker to travel a continuous AT from one end to the other by virtue of the AT not being a complete, continuous trail in 1948, but complete and continuous in 1951 when Espy hiked it. That seems pretty simple to me -- you can't "thru-hike" hike the AT from Georgia to Maine if its not a continuous trail. If I were voting, I'd put an "*" beside Shaffer and the boy scouts on that basis alone, recognize the factual reality that Gene Espy was the first actual thru-hiker of a continuous AT, and give everyone due credit for their respective accomplishments as reflected in the available record.

But thats not up to me. Its just my impressions, based on my research. You could read my Report if you wanted to know more.

Thanks for the question.

[max patch]

I haven't read your report, but I can tell you that if you spent 5 minutes researching the "boy scouts thru-hike" you'd stop referring to it. Affects your credibility.

[thepathsproject]

I haven't read your report, but I can tell you that if you spent 5 minutes researching the "boy scouts thru-hike" you'd stop referring to it. Affects your credibility.

As far as I know, the 1936 boy scout hike it is accepted by a thru-hike by the ATC under modern "report it on the honor system" standards of the ATC. In Chapter 19 of my Report, I note that, according to December 2000 ATC correspondence found in the NMAH Shaffer collection, Shaffer personally requested that the ATC remove the name of Max Gordon from the ATC "2,000-miler registry." As I understand it, Gordon was one of six boy scouts who reportedly hiked the AT in 1936 and who are listed (with some names unknown) on the "2,000 miler registry" by the ATC. When the ATC Board of Managers refused to do so, he renewed his request a second time. The Board refused that second request as well. So as far as I know, they remain listed on the registry as "2,000 milers."
That hike was generally described in a 1994 ATN article.

So I don't see how noting the existence the first "thru-hikers" listed on the ATC registry hurts my credibility, particularly in light of Shaffer's unsuccessful attempts to have them removed from the registry. As has been noted by other commenters, Shaffer also questioned the completeness of the hikes of other thru-hikers, including perhaps the best known and best-loved AT hiker in history -- Grandma Gatewood. As I note in Chapter 18 of my Report, Shaffer, in a December 27, 1955, letter to a Richard Lockey, stated his personal opinion that Martin Papendick (of Michigan) supposedly did it [thru-hike the AT] "but not too meticulously (taking some shortcuts, etc.)." He noted that "Gatewood supposedly did it this past summer but I suspect her trip was similar to Martin’s." So by those precedents, Shaffer’s 1948 hike could appropriately be subject to the same reexamination that he requested of the 1936 Gordon hike or by his critical comments about Grandma Gatewood and Papendick. I think that lends weight to a new look, in turn, at Shaffer's 1948 hike, but that is a decision for the AT community.

If the ATC Board of Managers has removed Max Gordon and the boy scouts from the registry, then I'll stand corrected as to the record. Otherwise, the boy scouts remain recognized as thru-hikers, as far as I know, under the "no questions asked" modern standards of the ATC. Shaffer is, I think, the first thru-hiker with a record -- or the first one "certified" by the ATC under the old, more strict, standards (as are Papendick and Gatewood, as far as I know).

But I'm really not up on all that internal ATC stuff -- as far as I know, the scouts are on the 2,000 miler registry and that is why I reference them.

[Sly]

--Espy is nevertheless the first thru-hiker to travel a continuous AT from one end to the other by virtue of the AT not being a complete, continuous trail in 1948, but complete and continuous in 1951 when Espy hiked it. That seems pretty simple to me -- you can't "thru-hike" hike the AT from Georgia to Maine if its not a continuous trail. If I were voting, I'd put an "*" beside Shaffer and the boy scouts on that basis alone, recognize the factual reality that Gene Espy was the first actual thru-hiker of a continuous AT, and give everyone due credit for their respective accomplishments as reflected in the available record.

Of course, you're entitled to your opinions but this is the type of AT mentality that really annoys me.

People have been hiking the CDT for some 30 some odd years now even though it's not a "officially" completed trail. It's kind of you to give them their due credit for their respective accomplishment, but in all honesty it takes a lot more skill, stamina and determination to complete that trail than the whiteblazed AT. Everything about it is harder. I suppose it takes a certain type of rigidness to blindly follow the white blazes and return to the spot where one may lose the trail, rather than making a correction, but IMO, it also seems almost cultist with a lack of individuality.

You take the YO out of HYOH.

[kanga]

So what concrete evidence do we have that Gene Espy was methodical purist that never missed a white blaze?

i don't know, but i'm betting he's glad he's dead so he's missing these long-winded posts about nothing. the writer should be a politician. that's how they get most of their crap passed. they make it so blatheringly boring that no one can get through it all.

[Sly]

i don't know, but i'm betting he's glad he's dead so he's missing these long-winded posts about nothing. the writer should be a politician. that's how they get most of their crap passed. they make it so blatheringly boring that no one can get through it all.

Gene Espy isn't dead!

I'm not trying to belittle Gene, and hated to use him as an example, it's just that I don't think it's fair to examine Earl's hike without making a a similar examination of everyone's hike that followed.

[kanga]

Gene Espy isn't dead!

I'm not trying to belittle Gene, and hated to use him as an example, it's just that I don't think it's fair to examine Earl's hike without making a a similar examination of everyone's hike that followed.

sorry. didn't fully read what i quoted. i'm still on the whole shaffer "debacle". little spacenut trolls need to rotate back out of our galaxy.

[Sly]

sorry. didn't fully read what i quoted. i'm still on the whole shaffer "debacle". little spacenut trolls need to rotate back out of our galaxy.

Yeah, I'm not sure of Jim's intentions, maybe he doesn't himself. He seemed to turn from an interest in the "lost" sections of the early AT, to an expose of Earl's hike.

[rickb]

Of course, you're entitled to your opinions but this is the type of AT mentality that really annoys me.

People have been hiking the CDT for some 30 some odd years now even though it's not a "officially" completed trail. It's kind of you to give them their due credit for their respective accomplishment, but in all honesty it takes a lot more skill, stamina and determination to complete that trail than the whiteblazed AT. Everything about it is harder. I suppose it takes a certain type of rigidness to blindly follow the white blazes and return to the spot where one may lose the trail, rather than making a correction, but IMO, it also seems almost cultist with a lack of individuality.

You take the YO out of HYOH.

Sly,

One thing that sets the AT apart is the enormous amount of effort that its supporters expended to scout and mark and maintain and protect to insure that it was a continuous and marked footpath.

In one sense that's kind of dumb, I will agree. What difference would it make if the trail stopped at one edge of Hanover and then started up again at the other, right?

But for whatever reason, ensuring the continuity of the Trail has been central to what its all about. And I can't help but think that it a very cool aspect of the AT. How many people have first walked on the Trail and marveled in the knowledge that in one direction it heads to Maine, and in the other Georgia? Without a break.

After reading McNeely's report, I cant help wonder if the reason why Avery seems to have accepted Shaffers' report without and asterisk or qualifier was that made for better public relations and helped further the success of the AT project.

[kanga]

Gene Espy isn't dead!

I'm not trying to belittle Gene, and hated to use him as an example, it's just that I don't think it's fair to examine Earl's hike without making a a similar examination of everyone's hike that followed.

he's a sensationalist looking to stir up **** to get notice for himself.

[bobqzzi]

he's a sensationalist looking to stir up **** to get notice for himself.

I think that is completely off target- laughably so really. While his manner may be slightly off-putting, all I've seen are sincere, well researched replies from jwmcneely that politely answer questions and scurrilous attacks. He's discovered something that is upsetting to many people, but that doesn't make it untrue.