In article <fast-CE9B6B.13414030082008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Bruce in alaska <fast@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>I always figured that if you were out, farther than two days of steady
>Hiking, from the nearest Road, in any direction, that connected to
>somewheres else, that you would be in the "BackCountry", or Bush.
>With that definition you would not find a lot of "BackCountry in
>the EU, but some in the Scandinavian Countries, and mostly in their
>Northern Parts. Same in Canada, and with Argentina, and Chile, except
>theirs would be in the Southern regions. Here in Alaska, Two days
>hike to the Road, puts you ON the Road System.
I think that there are a lot of romantic Europeans who would like to
think they retain some degree of backcountry. Your problem then becomes
enumerating the qualities (and the quantities) and it starts to become a
matter of nit picking. I think the land problem comes from areas like
bogs and tundra which are part time submerged, deltas, swamps, glades.
Clearly you can get frostbite and hypothermia in Boston. Happens in
those areas every winter. Avalanches happen in high latitude, urban
steep relief areas. Does that make them backcountry? Floyd argues Barrow
is
backcountry. You don't have hospitals in backcountry. So enumerate away.
My favorite is having something which might eat you. But you need an
operational and legal definition (the why's and how's of what you want
to do).
I watched the Haul Road on Monday on Worst Jobs. Quite amusing.
They had it pretty cushy.
Next week appears to be gold panning/mining. And there appears to be a
mountain rescue segment! At least 4 AK episodes. Oh Cyli would love
this.
--
|
