Fluorescent Orange Dots...too much for one person

[Ken]

Does anyone have any experience using motsenbockers lift off #4

this threads freaking me out a little..

anybody want to help next saturday, im getting a gallon of a waterbased biodegradable remover to get rid of the dots.., theres other graffitti too.

ive gone up a couple times since the new dots, and general consensus with traffic (mostly new people displaced by the shutdown), is they like them. well that doesnt make them less ugly.

lets get rid of them so we dont have heated debates about ethics at least.

trail clean up anyone? zip?

by the way i think Ken did it.





Ken, please know that im kidding

Noted!

Thanks for effort to clean up the mess. I've no experience with #4, but often, just a wire brush works well, as the rock often doesn't bond well with the paint.

I'm tied up with the end of season activities of the wilderness ranger group that I managed this summer, or I'd join you.

[Ed]

Actually, your analogy would be that you'd be outraged at my having my car painted, destroying the character of steel the way that God meant it to be viewed.

Sorry, Ken, you are the one who is into twisting other's people's comments into a target even you can hit. I know this may sound confrontational, it is. But I am signing off on this discussion, it's become tiresome.

[bluerail]

brushes and thinners have failed in the past.

[OC hiker]

My friend and I hiked C2C yesterday for the first time. Being from the east coast myself and having most of my experience in the White Mts, etc. I am very accustomed to using the blazes when in the wilderness. The Appalachian Trail is heavily blazed especially in the most remote sections of NH. These blazes save lives, period, and that is why they are there. What if it was your friend that got lost on C2C and ended up in one of those canyons in 100 degree heat?

I think what people on this forum are forgetting is that this trail is used not only by locals but by people new to the trail as well. In our experience there was no clear map that we could purchase and hiking in the dark for the first 4 hours in an unknown area those stupid bright orange dots helped us in quite a few occasions. As many of the websites state this trail is sort of a free for all. There are so many false trails, cut switchbacks, etc. it would have been very easy for us to get off trail. So for that reason I think that having blazes (of a different color of course) in particularly difficult spots is a good idea for safety reasons.

Now as to this specific application obviously the color choice is utterly ridiculous. What I think happened was that someone had good intensions with the dots below about 6K feet but then some other person decided to use the same color to encourage cutting multiple switchbacks up over 6K feet which we ignored of course mostly because we were tired!

What I think would be the best idea would be to have a universal color (the AP trail is always yellow) and only place a small arrow or dot on those tricky areas. I am sure you will all disagree but I would rather err on the side of caution and people's safety then some idea that this is a "renegade" trail where if you get lost then good luck.

[towbradley]

4 pages and still going. this subject has exhausted itself. Too many are turning on each other here. Many went up on Saturday and I'm looking forward to reading a few trail notes and some photo's if anyone's game for sharing. Missed my opportunity to go up yesterday, but I probably should have gone anyway. Anyway, hope everyone can move on from this as its not doing any positive impacts in conversations. Just a thought.

[scotts]

[...]
I don't believe I've made any false arguments.

Actually, when you access Wilderness Rules in non-wilderness, you have.

Condemnation of this defacement of skyline does not rest in some application of Wilderness Rules. Nor does the idea of wilderness itself, nor the hope of its conservation, as far as that goes.

These things are negotiated, and taking part in the discussion in the immediate context of this defacement, again, does not make one a nazi, or a zealot, or hate/ignorance motivated at all.

edit: You're right towbradley. I just don't like being smeared cheaply, nor seeing others smeared, nor having my arguments dodged and misconstrued.

Ken, we'll have to disagree to disagree.

[Hikin_Jim]

we'll have to disagree to disagree.

No! No! No! We need more thoughts on the dots! Fight like a politician, dang it! I demand gridlock!

HJ

[towbradley]

your killin me smalls..lol

[Jeff66]

If they had made orange squares or triangles, or even a hexagon I'd understand, but orange dots...no way!

[Ken]

[...]
I don't believe I've made any false arguments.

Actually, when you access Wilderness Rules in non-wilderness, you have.

Condemnation of this defacement of skyline does not rest in some application of Wilderness Rules. Nor does the idea of wilderness itself, nor the hope of its conservation, as far as that goes.

These things are negotiated, and taking part in the discussion in the immediate context of this defacement, again, does not make one a nazi, or a zealot, or hate/ignorance motivated at all.

edit: You're right towbradley. I just don't like being smeared cheaply, nor seeing others smeared, nor having my arguments dodged and misconstrued.

Ken, we'll have to disagree to disagree.

Scotts, I have to say that I must have misunderstood your posts.

When you said:

Defacing rocks with spraypaint goes against the wilderness conservation ethic.

and

"Yes, I would want to apply 'those rules' to everyone, everywhere, at all times."

That you were speaking as though you were to be taken seriously, and that you actually meant:

Condemnation of this defacement of skyline does not rest in some application of Wilderness Rules.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.