|
Post by tipiwalter on Mar 7, 2016 14:32:11 GMT -8
"The real mind blower is that the GSMNP has the worse air pollution for any Park in the U.S. and yet the park cops don't require a $20 car entrance fee or close the Cades Cove road or institute a car quota system." The real mind blower is not being aware of the federal law negotiated with the states that established that the major highway that bisects the park serving surrounding towns and cities cannot have a toll imposed. Those roads as well as roads within that fantastical 50 mile radius are used by far more than people intending to use the trails. And the air pollution, of course, doesn't originate within the park. Much like the air pollution in Yosemite valley is from air that drifts in from the central valley.. I hear this argument all the time in TN and NC. "Federal law negotiated with the states that established" GSMNP roads, in particular Highway 441. Your plea is that there cannot be an entrance fee or a toll road because the law was written in stone by God with no chance of change? It's just a matter of the TN legislature changing the law to charge car's an entrance fee into the Park. It's human choice. And then there's the air pollution problem, always blamed on distant coal plants outside the park as if the 10 million car driving visitors coming into the Park yearly are invisible and not a problem. "Our cars don't pollute, that coal plant does." Weird logic. Especially weird logic coming from the land managers who oversee the most polluted Park in the country. There's such a battle here (on this thread?) to keep the car culture alive. The Pro-Rolling tourism argument seems to dominate. "Roads are good! Roadless areas suck! How else will fat Americans get to see the Yellowstone if they don't roll thru? What better place to see the Grand Canyon than driving up to the Skywalk? Katahdin is a National Treasure, now take the opportunity to drive within 4 miles of it on the Roaring Brook road." You get the idea. Ed Abbey says it best--- No more cars in national parks. Let the people walk. Or ride horses, bicycles, mules, wild pigs--anything--but keep the automobiles and the motorcycles and all their motorized relatives out. We have agreed not to drive our automobiles into cathedrals, concert halls, art museums, legislative assemblies, private bedrooms and the other sanctums of our culture; we should treat our national parks with the same deference, for they, too, are holy places. An increasingly pagan and hedonistic people (thank God!), we are learning finally that the forests and mountains and desert canyons are holier than our churches. Therefore let us behave accordingly.” ― Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire Another one--- “A man on foot, on horseback or on a bicycle will see more, feel more, enjoy more in one mile than the motorized tourists can in a hundred miles.” --Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire He seems to reflect a backpacker's perspective, except maybe not backpackers here on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Mar 7, 2016 14:47:20 GMT -8
So you agree "the park cops" cannot impose any such $20 fee? and it is not their "choice" but rather the Tennessee legislature?
I agree.
So just walk on over to Nashville and start a petition.
|
|
reuben
Trail Wise!
Gonna need more Camels at the next refugio...
Posts: 11,214
|
Post by reuben on Mar 7, 2016 15:09:41 GMT -8
Your plea is that there cannot be an entrance fee or a toll road because the law was written in stone by God with no chance of change? Purely awesome. Putting both words and religion in HSF's mouth. Wow. Oh, well, if Ed said it, then that trumps God for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Jester 2000 on Mar 7, 2016 23:08:51 GMT -8
I place absolutely no value on make-believe "crowns" and the need to claim them. Sort of the way of the world, isn't it? I don't pretend to know why Scott Jurek would want to do what he does, but I also don't pretend that what I think about what he does is particularly relevant or meaningful or worth voicing. And you can probably imagine that there are a lot of people in the country who place absolutely no value on the things you like to do or the things I like to do. So it's sort of nice that despite my fellow countrymen's general lack of any interest whatsoever in going into the backcountry, much of the backcountry still exists as public land. Pretty cool.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2016 1:37:00 GMT -8
Jester2000 wrote:Then why do you voice it? (Just a rhetorical question.)
Jester2000 wrote:So you finally figured out that I really don't read your blog. Okay, fine.
Jester2000 wrote:I never suspected you were a leader of the Sagebrush Rebellion. But thanks for the reassurance. I guess.
That reminds me. I was going to eat an apple. Be back later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2016 7:07:49 GMT -8
Jester 2000 , let's say I go to a place called "TrailsEnd Park" with the alternate plans of hiking routes A, B, or C to peaks 1, 2, or 3. But no one offers me a crown for any of them. You go to TrailsEnd Park with the singular purpose of hiking route A to peak 1. And someone promises you a prestigious "crown" for completing that route. But you have no alternatives. You've decided that you have to do route A to peak 1. We both arrive on the same day and find that a quota system will not allow either of us to do route A to peak 1. The quota system is in place to reduce impact to the route and to the peak. Too many people are already doing that route today, so we can not. I say that's okay and go to route B to peak 2. I find after doing route B that I actually appreciate the diversion. In effect, I feel like TrailsEnd Park has done me a favor by referring me to a less impacted route. You say that's not okay at all because it is costing you what you consider a very prestigious crown. And you file a complaint against TrailsEnd Park for discrimination. In your mind, they obviously treated me better than you. And you want your group to put pressure on the Park to quit giving me better treatment than you. But whose fault is it really? I think it is yours. No one treated me any better. I just made better plans than you. I had more realistic goals and didn't set myself up for a make-believe crown with no real merit. That, in a nutshell, is how I regard the thru-hiker complaints about Baxter State Park.
|
|
RumiDude
Trail Wise!
Marmota olympus
Posts: 2,361
|
Post by RumiDude on Mar 8, 2016 16:13:38 GMT -8
Oh, well, if Ed said it, then that trumps God for sure. Travis trumps them both. Rumi
|
|
|
Post by Jester 2000 on Mar 9, 2016 9:13:27 GMT -8
That, in a nutshell, is how I regard the thru-hiker complaints about Baxter State Park. Well, I guess that explains a lot. From my point of view, even if the trail officially ended at Abol Bridge, I'd still want to hike into the Park and climb Katahdin, as would most of the hikers I know. Not because it's where the trail ends, but because it's an amazing, challenging mountain. And it's also the highest mountain in Maine with spectacular views (but admittedly there are people who assign no value to climbing things just because they're high points). By the way, in the example you've given, someone who is thru-hiking could still hike "route B to peak 2" and be considered a 2000-Miler by ATC. The designation allows for re-routes that the hiker has no control over. It's not as inflexible as you seem to believe (nor is the definition that Baxter uses. Anyone who walks there from Monson, ME is counted by them as a "thru-hiker"). Frankly, I don't really care about thru-hikers having to register, up until that registration system is used to place a quota on thru-hikers and not on Gate visitors who want to hike the same route on the same day. Because that's when your analogy fails -- when it's not a matter of you and I both being told "that a quota system will not allow either of us to do route A to peak 1." But that's a slippery slope argument, and the better argument to make now (in my opinion) is that it doesn't solve the actual stated problems. What actually would: enforcing the rules. And before you say they don't have the money or manpower to do that, ask yourself who's supposed to enforce the added layer of bureaucracy of a registration system?
|
|
|
Post by Jester 2000 on Mar 9, 2016 9:15:33 GMT -8
So you finally figured out that I really don't read your blog. Okay, fine. I really laughed at this line. But I always figured that you weren't one of my seven readers (eight if you include my Mom).
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Mar 9, 2016 9:39:42 GMT -8
|
|
RumiDude
Trail Wise!
Marmota olympus
Posts: 2,361
|
Post by RumiDude on Mar 9, 2016 9:43:27 GMT -8
So you finally figured out that I really don't read your blog. Okay, fine. I really laughed at this line. But I always figured that you weren't one of my seven readers (eight if you include my Mom). There's a blog?
Rumi
|
|
|
Post by Jester 2000 on Mar 9, 2016 9:59:07 GMT -8
Allegedly. There's allegedly a blog. No one's actually seen it in person or provided evidence of its existence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2016 10:23:31 GMT -8
Jester, your blog's gonna be yuge. Yuge! I've seen it, and it's fantastic. I mean, c'mon, who doesn't like his blog, huh? We're gonna make it great again! Right? Darn right!
|
|
reuben
Trail Wise!
Gonna need more Camels at the next refugio...
Posts: 11,214
|
Post by reuben on Mar 9, 2016 11:53:22 GMT -8
|
|
RumiDude
Trail Wise!
Marmota olympus
Posts: 2,361
|
Post by RumiDude on Mar 9, 2016 14:42:31 GMT -8
He's merely a demigod, whereas Travis ... Rumi
|
|