High Sierra Topix

.

longri wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:02 am There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

No, not at all. It certainly has its place for those that are interested, as long as it doesn't broadly alter the face of the activity to the point where the "new normal" is an unspoken undercurrent of intimidation over not being able to meet a set standard or maintain a sense of belonging for those that still want what they want...whatever that might be.

Back to the PCT: think of all the people that have quit or come away bitter in some way because they couldn't keep up with or gain the acceptance of their peers, whether real or only perceived. Keeping up with the Jones', envy, and finding a personal reference point wherein you can find a way, any way, to identify with the successes of those that have higher abilities and standing are, unfortunately, an American obsession.

rightstar76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:21 am I do observe a bit of resentment on your part that someone was able to do this. Perhaps a bit of envy, no?

I'm not clear on whether that was for me or not, but if so, God No! I think it's awesome, but it's not my thing at all. I gotta get what I gotta get in order to stay interested at all, and all I want is the room to do it. If we're talking about an already crowded place that so many threads have been dedicated to decrying, then add what are potentially, essentially a new and growing number of super-ultra-marathoners to an already impacted mix, we end up with a whole other set of cultural expectations and experiences on the trail. There's room for everyone, but once again, look at what a PCT thru-hike has become or now means for so many. We can take the ball and run with it, but we also have to be careful what we wish for.

.

LOL! I'm pretty relaxed in this. No worries. No food fights on my end. I don't really even think we're that far off philosophically in what it all means, but we might just be facing a new phenomenon that needs to be considered in a bigger context for what might be. Everyone can do what they want, but it all has to work.

Maybe I'm not finding the right simile, but much of it is about measurement of one's self by comparison. Norms get established, and people clamor to hop on board with the latest and greatest, while others avoid it like the Plague either out of direct experience or in concept...their interpretation of its "meaning" overall. In so many places wherein hikers share the trail with cyclists, there's contention...same trails, differing agendas and needs in what they want from it. I always try to coexist in a state of symbiosis and acceptance of the needs of others, and I can only hope that the same courtesy is extended towards me. Most of the time, it is, but there are always some that don't, won't, or even see the need to.

I do have to disagree slightly on what the PCT is for many these days: While there's always the element of scheduling and beating/avoiding weather, maybe even call it purity?, I think it's largely becoming a social movement fueled by social media, a need to feel "unique" but still inextricably "connected" through a shared experience in some way. And somewhat like what Burning Man once was intended to be, but has now morphed into, it's arguably a case trite hipsterism run amok. In this case, what was once a few thousand attendees will next year become a temporary city with one of the highest populations in Nevada, and require countless dumpsters and bulldozers to put right, and all because it became the newest thing.

But I digress...badly. Really, really badly!

If anything, I feel the peer pressure is to go slower. I see a lot more commentary on how you can't possibly be enjoying your hike if you are going "x" miles per day, where x is more miles than the person making the judgement is doing. I found myself falling into this trap when I saw the new record then reminded myself that I had no more right to think those thoughts than someone else has to criticise my pace or the places I like to go hiking.

No food tossing. I've given mrphil a hard time elsewhere but on this subject I think we've both been civil.

People say "hike your own hike" but very often you hear disparaging comments about how certain other people actually do hike. I don't believe it's about their motivations. I think it's because there are certain backpacker behaviors that get under peoples' skins and those behaviors are often associated with certain types of backpackers.

It's not that we really care if someone is so shallow as to walk a particular route just to say "I did it". That's way too common a thing to care about. It's unpleasant interactions with other backpackers that causes the strife. And then we go looking for something to blame it on. It ends up being prejudicial, lumping everyone in a particular group together.

longri wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:41 pm No food tossing. I've given mrphil a hard time elsewhere but on this subject I think we've both been civil.

People say "hike your own hike" but very often you hear disparaging comments about how certain other people actually do hike. I don't believe it's about their motivations. I think it's because there are certain backpacker behaviors that get under peoples' skins and those behaviors are often associated with certain types of backpackers.

It's not that we really care if someone is so shallow as to walk a particular route just to say "I did it". That's way too common a thing to care about. It's unpleasant interactions with other backpackers that causes the strife. And then we go looking for something to blame it on. It ends up being prejudicial, lumping everyone in a particular group together.

I have to completely agree with that sentiment. Nobody's immune to bringing their own prejudices and opinions with them wherever and in whatever.

"....Everything will be just fine if you practice what I preach. A red backpack? Really? " It all sounds very French....oops, there I go again.

One thing I was wondering: did he bring a bear canister? Would a ranger let them do this record attempt without a can, knowing they likely never stop, or take of their packs for more than a few minutes? Or do all self-supported record attempters lie about their bear canister use when they obtain their wilderness permits?

I would challenge any self-supported record if there is no proof of bear canister use, just to drive home the point that this high altitude gym still has rules that need to be followed, even if you feel you are in a different class of user. This segment of wilderness users seems quite picky about the exact route hikers need to take to produce a valid time (I read the FKT rules and details about the JMT, with exact route details at locations where one may do a shortcut without knowing it), so why not be picky about following wilderness regulations? It's not like I can choose not to bring my canister when I want to break my own 10 day JMT record, even though I did that long before canisters became mandatory.

fishmonger wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:53 pm One thing I was wondering: did he bring a bear canister?

Bear canisters are not needed over the entire JMT. Bear canisters are not required when day hiking. By putting those two rules together and ensuring that one never camps in a bear canister required area it is apparently possible to legally hike the JMT without a bear canister. At least that's what I took away from previous discussions on the subject. So, for example, if you can walk from Whitney Portal to Woods Creek without stopping you wouldn't need a bear canister. Good luck with that!

The people making these attempts are not trying to cheat the law. Are they bending it? I'm not really sure; the rules about bear canisters are somewhat arcane. As are the rules about what constitutes a day hike and what it means to carry overnight equipment.

Even if the letter of the law is a bit vague the spirit of the law is clear. And these guys are pretty much the last ones who are going to feed a bear.