Warning

[Bob Kittredge]

So as I was finishing the Pumpelly, I thought to check the sign at the trailhead. I don't think I've ever seen one of these before, but, then, I may be getting senile. Are the posted in other places too?

 

[Quietman]

Last I knew, the Pumpelly is one of the few trails in S. NH maintained by the AMC. This is probably one of their signs, hence the more northernly references.

Just a guess.

 

[Waumbek]

The sign looks old--rusty staples and hardware cloth. It probably went in back when the NH legislature extended the "reckless conduct" concept to gross negligence in hiking, primarily night hikes with six packs (or pints or quarts), then cell phone calls for help 'cause the inebriated could not find their way off the mountain and panicked at the prospect of sitting tight (i.e., calm) until dawn. Certain mountains and trails were (are) more prone to that kind of abuse than others. Night searches are risky, even when the "victims" are drunk teens.

 

[skibones]

Maybe if there were more signs like this at other trailheads hikers would be more careful when hiking in the woods. I know I would hate to be on channel 9 news with a reporter saying I was unprepared or careless. I would hate to have SAR out there risking their own lives because of my carelessness. I'm sure most VFTT hikers feel the same

 

[Pete_Hickey]

I would hate to have SAR out there risking their own lives because of my carelessness. I'm sure most VFTT hikers feel the same

However, I'm sure that, AT TIMES, many of us have done something that others would consider reckless.

Remember: It's only reckless when someone else does it, and SAR is called. If YOU do it, and run into problems, but make it out alone, it's EXPERIENCE.

 

[lumberzac]

I don’t like the idea of using a subjective word in a law. What exactly is “reckless?” This could mean different things to different people. For example trail running or solo hiking could be considered reckless.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Bob -

I have a vague recollection of seeing a similar sign posted a few years ago, not long after the policy went into place. As I recall, it was on 8.5x11 white card stock (not very weatherproof), and it was stapled on a post. I recall seeing it in winter, but where? Have a dim recollection that it was Appalachia or Lafayette Place, but it might even have been Ferncroft. But, I do remember it wasn't there when I next visited the trailhead.

It wasn't the same sign though - it had the statement that you could be charged for your own rescue, but not in legalese. It also did not imply the endorsement of all the SAR's/outdoor organizations as the one in your photo.

Kevin

 

[RGF1]

I don’t like the idea of using a subjective word in a law. What exactly is “reckless?” This could mean different things to different people. For example trail running or solo hiking could be considered reckless.

I would guess it is vauge to make it easier to charge some one but a good lawyer would be ableto win as the state has to show intenr to be reckless . and what constitutes reckless behavior . It would be very difficult in most cases for t state to show a person was delberatly reckless . the example i give below of inoxicated hikers might be one of thevfew cases of recklessness.

If i recall there ar some boulders on that trail and a peole might like ot scamble up it ten slip is that reckless? Then ther are the nitiwits who walk a mile or so with a lot of alcohol or drugs of their choice and get ripped and do something that requires a SAR. now that is reckles but then hiking in of it se;lf is dangerous any one can slip and sustain a injury requiring SAR But you are more likely to be severely injured driving to and from the trailhead. or even in a aprking lot i hace seen and heped a person who fell in a parking lot .

OK What is recklessnes or does it depend on ah never mind

It is probably mostly a way of getting people to think twice about what they are doing .

I have seen differnt versions of this sign mostly they arewhite and much smaller .

But that just my thoughts .

 

[Waumbek]

Let's not get in a twist about this. I am certain that NH is not going to try to prosecute for going the "wrong" way on the Franconia loop, for wearing cotton and flip-flops, for forgetting your map and compass, or never having one, for running on the trail, for hiking solo, for jumping on boulders, and so forth. These things may get some of us in a twist, but they don't rise to the legal level of reckless. Think "gross negligence," usually involving massive quantities of alcohol before or during the hike. That's "massive." "Reckless conduct" was not invented to oppress the hiking community; however subjective, the charge and concept have been around for some time and were first applied to other activities. It spread to include hiking, if I recall this correctly, after a few egregious six pack-cell phone incidents, which often seem to occur in the spring when overnight temps on mountains can still drop off into winter-like cdx.

 

[Cath]

Working Group

The NH Search & Rescue Working Group, is made up of a representative from each of the organizations listed at the bottom of the sign. They usually meet once a month in Pinkham. Discussion normally covers recent accidents & assistance provided by the groups, training & issues within the individual groups that pertain to search & rescue, etc.
This is somewhat of an outdated sign, as Upper Valley S & R, as well as Pemi Valley S & R and Tuck's Ski Patrol aren't acknowledged. But, I'm quite sure that the state's RSA hasn't been changed in the interim.
~ Cath, AVSAR member

 

[mavs00]

I don’t like the idea of using a subjective word in a law. What exactly is “reckless?” This could mean different things to different people. For example trail running or solo hiking could be considered reckless.

It's like porn... Really hard to define, but pretty obvious to recognize it when you see it.

 

[RoySwkr]

As mentioned, this is an old sign which is rendered obsolete by the HikeSafe signs

The original reckless hiker was on Moriah which is why AVSR is prominently featured

Laws cited in article
http://hikenh.netfirms.com/Reckless.htm

 

[Andrew]

I placed this sign this spring. The only reason was that I had it in the truck while performing other trail maintenance (removing blowdowns) and the former signs were stolen over the winter, including the routed wooden "Pumpelly Tr. 4 1/2 Miles to Summit". We have had this same sign posted at the Old Toll Rd for years and used to have it at all trailheads, as our local CO handed us a stack many years ago and it is a convenient size that fits easily on many existing signboards.
We have replaced the majority with the more informative and constructive HIKE SAFE posters. These signs are to get people to just stop and think before charging up a trail, with the main concern at Pumpelly being starting too late it the day to accomplish the posted milage.
No the AMC does not maintain this trail, although I'm sure a few Appies who hike through help out when they encounter blowdowns etc. SPNHF had a land steward lined up to do routine maintenance, but he seems to have faded away. The lower 1.5 miles were not the responsibility of the state park until the newest lease agreement that was signed this spring between SPNHF and NH Parks. We have 40 miles of trails to maintain on Monadnock and hope to provide improvements as resources are available.

 

[Mr. X]

I guess it only applies to men since the wording is "he". Girls, live it up!

 

[sierra]

I have no problem with signs like this but really the people that do the stupid things out there really could care less about that sign, heck they will proboly graffiti it up on the way by,

 

[Bob Kittredge]

I think there must be a real art to designing signs that people will actually read. I blithely blew by this one without really noticing it (or the No Pets sign posted above it). It was only on the way out that I got to thinking "this trail has such an obscure trailhead. I wonder if there's still a sign near the start that identifies it." So I looked for it, and still almost neglected to read any of the text once I'd seen the PUMPELLY TRAIL bit.

 

[Mike P.]

Mr. X. seems to have a decent point, when was the last rescue where a couple of girls went on hike, had a bunch of questionable decisions (like hiking to a closed up & not realizing there was still a bunch of snow or a fast light winter Presi-traverse in when horrific weather was forecasted) & required a SAR mission that people here said, "that was really dumb"?

I recall a woman who had a few bad decisions take place when getting an October Sunset picture on Jefferson with little gear, a faulty flashlight, a cell phone & a dog (a Golden I think) for warmth maybe a jacket but this was October who was rescued when she went up Washington & SAR drove up teh road. This might be the closest I recall that did not involve a male partner that might be considered reckless & there have been a lot worst than this IMO.

 

[Pete_Hickey]

While I was away last week, I took a picture of this sign:

http://newmud.comm.uottawa.ca/~pete/wisc.jpg

Another state's take on it.

 

[dropack]

Sign Sign, Every where a sign

I have one question, for us hikers satus post heart surgery, that have maintained good health through living well and lots and lots and I mean lots of exercise. Do we because of our past medical history come under the heading reckless adventures because we continue to pursue our goals some of which are hiking where we can hear our heart beat.

 

[David Metsky]

Do we because of our past medical history come under the heading reckless adventures because we continue to pursue our goals some of which are hiking where we can hear our heart beat.

No. You have to be doing something exceedingly irresponsible for the state to invoke this. Hiking with a medical condition doesn't seem to rise to that level.

-dave-