Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > objective hazards in the backcountry
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostTue Mar 08, 2005 2:18 pm 
I think we might be better off taking the discussion of this away from the thread about the guy who fell to his death recently. What, if anything, should land managers do to protect us from being hurt in the backcountry? Discuss.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Mount Logan
Canada's Highest



Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 870 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle, WA
Mount Logan
Canada's Highest
PostTue Mar 08, 2005 2:34 pm 
I think that one of the compelling characteristics of the entire American experiment is the ideal of personal freedom. When government agencies over-regulate our activities, it flies in the face of some of the reasons for our nation's existence. Land managers should do just that, manage & protect the land--rather than babysit the public. On the other side of the coin, it is vital for a healthy society to have safeguards in place that protect people from the consequences of other people's malicious or stupid actions; I think that laws and regulations should legitimately exist for this reason. I guess what I'm saying is this: I should have the freedom to head out into the great outdoors and decide for myself how much risk I am willing to subject myself to, but I should be constrained from taking actions which unreasonably jeopardize the safety and well-being of others. Rules that protect people from each other are necessary (don't drink and drive); rules that protect people from themselves are intrusive and an insult to our intelligence (don't drive without a seatbelt).

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
#19
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 2197 | TRs | Pics
#19
Member
PostTue Mar 08, 2005 9:48 pm 
Logan Jenott wrote:
I think that one of the compelling characteristics of the entire American experiment is the ideal for individualism and personal freedom. When government agencies over-regulate our activities, it flies in the face of some of the reasons for our nation's existence. Land managers should do just that, manage & protect the land--rather than babysit the public.
I'll take a stab at a non-political response to your politically loaded statement. Removing a hand line from McClellands Butte is not baby sitting the public. Putting hand lines and nailing ladders up every peak would be babysitting the public. But that isn't happening, is it? wink.gif
Quote:
I guess what I'm saying is this: I should have the freedom to head out into the great outdoors and decide for myself how much risk I am willing to subject myself to
I know of nothing that keeps any of us from jeopradizing our own personal safety in the backcountry.
Quote:
Rules that protect people from each other are necessary (don't drink and drive); rules that protect people from themselves are intrusive and an insult to our intelligence (don't drive without a seatbelt)
Another politically charged statement. If you believe mandatory seatbelt laws have no value to society , then I believe I should have the right to drink and drive. As long as I don't hurt anyone it should be OK. It is all about personal responsibility, right?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostTue Mar 08, 2005 9:52 pm 
I wonder if anyone has ever been hurt falling off the haystack?

Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
loofus
carpet bagger



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 80 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tom Waits' Refrigerator
loofus
carpet bagger
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 11:07 am 
marylou wrote:
What, if anything, should land managers do to protect us from being hurt in the backcountry? Discuss.
I could go way too deep on this, but I'll keep my answer simple and say "nothing." It isn't their job. They should protect the land, not the people using it. There are exceptions, of course, but they are highly circumstantial. My only gripe is the ever-increasing lack of trail/bridge maintenance coupled with the fees we pay for this stupid NW Forest Pass. It's getting so bad down here in Oregon that it makes more sense to just hike x-country than to try to find all the overgrown trails that usually don't lead anywhere interesting. It sure seems like the only trails that are ever maintained are the ones leading to "high use" problem areas. Go figure...Pretty soon the Forest Circus will ban offtrail travel and force us to stick to maintained routes, all but eliminating any kind of wilderness experience.

I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
dicey
custom title



Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 2870 | TRs | Pics
Location: giving cornices a wider berth
dicey
custom title
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 11:17 am 
touron wrote:
I wonder if anyone has ever been hurt falling off the haystack?
Yes. People have been killed falling off the haystack.

I'm not always sure I like being older but being less stupid has advantages. http://www.flickr.com/photos/32121172@N00/sets/
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 11:32 am 
Nothing. It's to open ended a question. To say that they should do anything means that they should do everything in their power to prevent whatever is possible of happening. Nothing. TB

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 am 
If you think the question is too broad, I have no objections with you reframing it. Go for it.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Chief Paulina
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Jun 2004
Posts: 486 | TRs | Pics
Location: Ochoco country
Chief Paulina
Member
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 12:41 pm 
Hi. We are from the government and are here to help you. huh.gif

"Life's been good to me so far" - Joe Walsh
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16088 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 1:05 pm 
What is a bit of a problem is a well traveled and maintained trail leading to a somewhat hazardous scramble. Perhaps a warning/memorial plaque would be appropriate like the one you see on the coast. I agree that a cable would probably create more problems than it would solve such things can become electrified in storms.

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 1:13 pm 
Personally, I don't want to see interference with the natual hazards. Let them be. The exception to that might be footbridges, but as much to combat erosion as to get across the creek.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Stefan
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 5082 | TRs | Pics
Stefan
Member
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 1:26 pm 
Land managers should do nothing. If they did something, then it would cost money. If it costs money then your trail park pass annual expense will increase. People make mistakes. People die from mistakes. It sucks but that is reality.

Art is an adventure.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
kleet
meat tornado



Joined: 06 Feb 2002
Posts: 5303 | TRs | Pics
Location: O no they dih ent
kleet
meat tornado
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 1:32 pm 
marylou wrote:
Personally, I don't want to see interference with the natual hazards. Let them be.
Do you classify Mt. St. Helens as a natural hazard? They've got the whole dealy-o closed off "for your protection".

A fuxk, why do I not give one?
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12287 | TRs | Pics
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 1:37 pm 
That's kind of an extreme example, and no, I'm okay with that being closed. Same with burn areas.

www.allisonoutside.com follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Jamin Smitchger
Member
Member


Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 673 | TRs | Pics
Location: Pullman
Jamin Smitchger
Member
PostWed Mar 09, 2005 4:46 pm 
I believe that government should do little if anything (besides placing warning signs) to protect us in the backcountry. For one thing, there is limitless potential to die out there if you are not prepared. Secondly, the vast majority of trails are completely safe and are generally not hazardous to the average person. Thirdly, a person who goes offtrail should be completely able to take care of himself in any normal situation. Fourthly, there will always be dumb people who push themselves beyond their limits and end up recieving a Darwin Award. This will occur even when safeguards are in place. For instance, a person who climbs over the rail at Wallace Falls and ends up "falling". smile.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > objective hazards in the backcountry
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum