Battle brewing over JFK 50 race use of Appalachian Trail - The Herald-Mail

[WhiteBlaze]

The Herald-Mail

Battle brewing over JFK 50 race use of Appalachian Trail The Herald-Mail A dispute over whether the JFK 50 Mile ultramarathon will be allowed to continue using the Appalachian Trail and double the number of runners from 1000 to 2000 is escalating. After years of quiet battle, ...

More...

[Cosmo]

Superintendent Underhill should remain steadfast in her opposition to allowing a doubling of the number of participants on the AT.

Cosmo

[bamboo bob]

We have hikers allegedly backpacking for records. Those are races too. I don't like making backpacking into a competitive sport but I don't see how this race is any different.

[Ezra]

Possibly a share of the race proceeds could go to ATC. They are a large group but are they really any different than the annual mass of thru hikers? Heck, the runners aren't using damaging trekking poles.

[Sarcasm the elf]

Not being familiar with the race, I have to ask:

1) Does the trail get appreciably damaged because of the marathon?
2) Is there a valid reason to believe that allowing an extra 1000 participants will be considerably worse for the trail?
3) Is this worth fighting a battle that may put A.T. Conservationists at odds with members of congress?

I know the questions sound biased, but I feel like they all need to be carefully thought over.

[Jim Lemire]

I completely agree with Underhill. A line in the sand needs to be drawn.

Jim Lemire

[Monkeywrench]

I love trail running, but I don't think having 2000 runners blasting by is the kind of experience people rightly expect when they invest the time and effort to hike a section of the AT.

[Jupiter]

The AT portion of the JFK50 is only 13 miles long, so this disagreement is over an extra 500-1,000 runners on a short section of trail for a couple hours on one particular day of the year.

What exactly are people upset about?

[Sarcasm the elf]

As I said before I'm not familiar with this section of trail or this event and I'm kind of playing devil's advocate by posting this.

That said, I'm of the philosophy that if someone wants to use public land for a purpose that benefits a lot of people, causes minimal interruption to the regulars (such as an annual event) and doesn't cause any real damage, then they should be given permission. I currently live on a lake that is closed to boat traffic several times a year for Crew team meets/regattas. I personally don't care for the sport, but to me it's part of being a good neighbor and is just the price I pay for living next to public land. Every regatta has some negatives, they bring extra people, traffic and garbage to the area and each time the organizers do a good job of dealing with these issues.

This marathon seems to be a very similar situation. I wouldn't want to see this sort of event becoming common practice, but if there's only one race that's allowed on the entire trail because it's grandfathered in, then why make enemies by trying to force them to change their established route or limiting the number of people unless there's a good justification for doing so?

As much as I hate to say this, it sounds like there are politics involved and personally I feel like ultra marathoners would make good allies.

Again I'm just speculating, if someone has a good argument about why we should be against the race, I'm all ears.

[jacob_springsteen]

What's the BFD? Just have the 2000 runners occupy the trail for the 13 mile run.

[Captain Blue]

This would be a big deal if you happened to be hiking in this 13 mile section on the day of the race.

[endubyu]

Are the runners maintaining the trail?

[JAK]

Trail running is a gateway drug to driving ATVs.

[weary]

Are the runners maintaining the trail?

What percentage of hikers are maintaining the trail? Very few in my experience.

I spend a lot of time attempting to protect the AT from harm. But a once a year marathon -- even with an extra thousand runners over a 13 miles section -- strikes me as pretty harmless. About the same as a single hiker jogging 2,175 miles while attempting to set a new speed record.

[Hoofit]

How many is too many?

[Sly]

We have hikers allegedly backpacking for records. Those are races too. I don't like making backpacking into a competitive sport but I don't see how this race is any different.

You don't see the difference Really? One person attempts to hike the trail every several years against a clock, opposed to 2,000 runners on the trail at once trying to beat one another. Big difference. If I were Pam Underhill I won't let any more than 25 at a time never mind 1500-2000.

[Sly]

How many is too many?

The general LNT guideline is no groups over 25.

[Grampie]

I hope Underhill does not give in on this issue. Let's face it. The AT is a hiking trail. Not a race coarse. The orginizers just want to advertise that the race takes place on the AT. I'm sure their are plenty of places on other trails to move it to. I can just imagine what it would be like to be thru-hiking and have to give the trail up for 1,500 runners for over a period of 5 to 6 hours.
Like to see ALDHA get in back of this bad use of the trail.

[Lone Wolf]

i ran this race 20 years ago. it doesn't hurt the trail

[weary]

i ran this race 20 years ago. it doesn't hurt the trail

LOne Wolf is generally right when he's being serious. He's right about this.