6 Tufts Students Rescued From Dry River

[David Metsky]

Mohamed, you might want to contact Fish & Game, and at least notify them that you were partially responsible. Granted the ultimate responsibility rest with the hikers themselves, yet they did take the advice of a well-respected local who knows the trail system. Just a thought.

The advice he gave them was accurate, helpful, and not responsible for them taking the wrong trail. I'm not sure what F&G would do with that?

 

[MadRiver]

F&G might see the situation in a different light. Ultimately it was their responsibility to read the trail signs, it just might mitigate any fine they are thinking of imposing.

 

[spider solo]

Very interesting, I know that aspect never crossed my mind.

 

[sardog1]

F&G might see the situation in a different light. Ultimately it was their responsibility to read the trail signs, it just might mitigate any fine they are thinking of imposing.

Ooh, ooh, ooh! Justifiable reliance, summoning of VFTT posters as expert witnesses on the definition of reasonable care in the planning and execution of a winter hike, admissibility of such testimony under the NH Rules of Evidence, third-party complaint against Mo and his unnamed companion, etc., etc. Now, if we can just get the amount in question over the $75,000 threshold for federal diversity jurisdiction (a high hurdle maybe in this case, too bad there wasn't more helicopter time involved), we can get this ball rolling:

Bleak House

 

[MadRiver]

At least someone has a sense of humor!

 

[psmart]

The current policy for blazing in Wilderness is stated on page 3-15 of the 2005 Forest Plan:

Trail Management and Operation, S-2
Cairns, limited scree walls, blazing, and directional arrow signs must be used only when the summer trail tread is not easily discernible, for resource protection, or to mitigate an unusual or extraordinary public safety hazard. Cairns and limited scree walls should be used in preference to blazing.

The trail "level" is only a general maintenance guide, and can be superseded by specific provisions such as this. This is certainly the way it's currently being implemented by the USFS.

 

[MichaelJ]

Well, that's just silly putting those guidelines in a different part of the Forest Plan from all the other Wilderness guidelines in the appendix.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

Interestingly, you never hear about people dropping off of the Carter Moriah ridge into the Wild River drainage, I wonder why that is.

Actually, this summer I started to do that very thing. I was charging along coming down from Carter Dome and heading toward Mt. Hight my mind was miles away. Suddenly the trail started to really drop off. That brought me back to reality in a hurry. I said 'Hey, this trail's not supposed to do that.' I only had to back track a few feet to get back on the right trail.

 

[Tom_Murphy]

Trail Management and Operation, S-2
Cairns, limited scree walls, blazing, and directional arrow signs must be used only when the summer trail tread is not easily discernible, for resource protection, or to mitigate an unusual or extraordinary public safety hazard.

I am not a lawyer but that is an interesting choice and order of words.

Does that sentence have the same meaning as the following one?

In order to protect resources or to mitigate an unusual or extraordinary public safety hazard, cairns, limited scree walls, blazing, and directional arrow signs must be used when the summer trail tread is not easily discernible.

My sentence makes it an imperative that the USFS provide the navigational aids on trails like Lincon Brook and Dry River.

FWIW, I agree with Tim that we want a variety of trails and would be sad it LBT lost too much of its "wildness". So I recognize this is a very subjective issue.

 

[TCD]

I think what is important is that it's clear to visitors what they are getting into. If some trails are well and obviously marked and maintained, and others lack marking and maintenance to the extent where it is easy to lose the trail, then that should be made clear on a nice, simple, big sign at the trailhead. That information should not be buried in ridiculous legalese filed in an office somewhere, that is obviously hard even to interpret. Put it where the people that need to know will see it.

/Opinion/
Personally, I have no use for poorly marked and maintained trails. It's a trail. Stop trying to pretend that it's not. If you want it to look like wilderness, then go off trail. If we've chosen to create a trail, then let's mark it and maintain it so it can be followed, instead of pretending that it's something that it's not. But I know some people are enamored of the trail classification systems, and don't agree with me on that. So AT LEAST let's make it clear to users at the trailhead what they should expect. And I'm not talking about pablum like "You should know the area you are hiking in" and "Always carry a map and compass." I'm talking about a nice clear sign that shows a trail map and says "The trails highlighted in red and not well marked and maintained. Be careful at intersections! DO NOT attempt to follow those trails unless you are prepared to bushwhack." Or words to that effect.
/Opinion off/

 

[Will]

F&G might see the situation in a different light. Ultimately it was their responsibility to read the trail signs, it just might mitigate any fine they are thinking of imposing.

A member of my party who insisted on going out ahead of the pace as a multi-day was winding down, was instructed to "Stay on the trail. Straight ahead. No turns. Straight shot to the road." He met a very-well-versed hiker (whom ironically I knew) who told him "Only decision: there will be a place you have a choice left or right, stay right."

Of course my guy did NOT go straight but TURNED right and a minor search ensued the next morning finding him finally straightened out and heading for the road. He had combined my correct (but incomplete) guidance with the correct (but not complete) information from the second expert and made the wrong choice. My fault, yes, His fault, yes. Second advisor's fault, yes, a little.

Had a fine been imposed on him, I think the fact he was responding to expert but not complete guidance as best he could MIGHT have mitigated the fine.

 

[psmart]

So AT LEAST let's make it clear to users at the trailhead what they should expect. And I'm not talking about pablum like "You should know the area you are hiking in" and "Always carry a map and compass." I'm talking about a nice clear sign that shows a trail map and says "The trails highlighted in red and not well marked and maintained. Be careful at intersections! DO NOT attempt to follow those trails unless you are prepared to bushwhack." Or words to that effect.

We definitely need better signage at Wilderness trail heads. Of course, the very presence of a Wilderness entry sign should convey that message, but many folks don't know that.

 

[cushetunk]

Personally, I have no use for poorly marked and maintained trails. It's a trail. Stop trying to pretend that it's not.

No pretending necessary. It is what it is. Some people enjoy the experience of wilder trails.

 

[TCD]

Thanks, psmart. I agree, especially today, I think a very small proportion of our visitors (in NH or in my Adirondacks) have read any regs or policy, or have any idea what to expect. And obviously from the legal debates on this thread, even reading the policy may not really inform the reader. This is really exacerbated when SOME trails are well marked, or are easy to follow naturally because they are a corridor thrrough thick woods. This lures in the unsuspecting, and then when they get into an unmaintained area (or above treeline in winter), they are especially surprised that the trail is no longer visible.

 

[GBKDalton]

Seems like a mistake a lot of people make in that area. I have a friend who went off Eisenhower in the summer down into the Dry River area. She gets very one-track and not looking around. Luckily she's also one of these crazy fit runner types who simply turned around and went back the way she came. Made for a twenty + mile day. She went down a long way before she realized where she was.

 

[TomD]

I am not a lawyer but that is an interesting choice and order of words.

Does that sentence have the same meaning as the following one?



My sentence makes it an imperative that the USFS provide the navigational aids on trails like Lincon Brook and Dry River.

FWIW, I agree with Tim that we want a variety of trails and would be sad it LBT lost too much of its "wildness". So I recognize this is a very subjective issue.

I don't see any real difference in how these two would be interpreted and yes, I am a lawyer.

 

[Tim Seaver]

/Opinion/
Personally, I have no use for poorly marked and maintained trails. It's a trail. Stop trying to pretend that it's not. If you want it to look like wilderness, then go off trail. If we've chosen to create a trail, then let's mark it and maintain it so it can be followed, instead of pretending that it's something that it's not. But I know some people are enamored of the trail classification systems, and don't agree with me on that. So AT LEAST let's make it clear to users at the trailhead what they should expect. And I'm not talking about pablum like "You should know the area you are hiking in" and "Always carry a map and compass." I'm talking about a nice clear sign that shows a trail map and says "The trails highlighted in red and not well marked and maintained. Be careful at intersections! DO NOT attempt to follow those trails unless you are prepared to bushwhack." Or words to that effect.
/Opinion off/

Agree with every word - especially the mushy language used on the signs. The whole concept of "Wilderness Trails" is ridiculous in it's current form in NH. There will be more people lost as a result of the crappy signage and blazing, you can count on it.

 

[kevinmac]

Here is the response from Tufts and the student trip leaders:

http://www.tuftsdaily.com/student-hikers-rescued-in-new-hampshire-mountains-1.2804186#.UPgbC_JZMg8

 

[Snowflea]

I have hiked in each of the 50 states and have found signage in NH's & ME's White Mtns, in both designated Wilderness and not, to be excellent and far above average. Jus' sayin'.

(Admit to uttering a few choice expletives at both the lack of signage AND the non-correlation between what the paper Green Map displayed vs actual reality, in a very popular Nevada hiking area the past couple of days...)

 

[Tim Seaver]

I have hiked in each of the 50 states and have found signage in NH's & ME's White Mtns, in both designated Wilderness and not, to be excellent and far above average. Jus' sayin'.

I think people with a lot of experience following trails have a much easier time with poorly marked trails - the "getting lost" problem will be with more with beginner and intermediate hikers who aren't so savvy at staying on course or keeping their head when things get dicey.