View Full Version : Hammocks in the Smokies AT?
How strict are they about making everyone sleep in the shelters on the AT in the Smokies? I dont believe I could get a min of shut eye anywheres but in my hammock!
bigcranky
08-22-2006, 23:27
You'd have to stealth camp far from any shelter or the trail. The backcountry rangers do enforce the rules as much as they are able.
SGT Rock
08-22-2006, 23:27
Your only salvation is if you are on a thru-hiker pass and the shelter is full. It is my experience that you can only get away with it during peak season. Otherwise risk a fine.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
08-23-2006, 07:21
In recent years, I've noted groups camped away from shelters and pretty far off the trail. If they hadn't been making so much noise, I would have never known they were there. While it isn't legal, it is being done.
As SgtRock & BigCranky note, rangers do try to keep people at shelters, but rangers rarely venture off the trail unless something - like a lot of noise, a campfire, being within sight of the trail - attracts them. If you plan to hammock away from shelters, I suggest going off trail over a hill and hanging partway down on the other side - it will keep you out of sight and dampen any noise you make.
it's really only the shelters nearest roads -- mt collins and icewater -- that rangers check with any regularlity at all. you're pretty safe at the rest of them to do what you please,
Footslogger
08-23-2006, 09:44
Your only salvation is if you are on a thru-hiker pass and the shelter is full. It is my experience that you can only get away with it during peak season. Otherwise risk a fine.
===========================
Same applies for tents. In 2003 by the time I got to the shelters they were generally bulging at the seams. I set up a tent in plain view of the shelter and was never challenged.
'Slogger
SGT Rock
08-23-2006, 15:43
In recent years, I've noted groups camped away from shelters and pretty far off the trail. If they hadn't been making so much noise, I would have never known they were there. While it isn't legal, it is being done.
As SgtRock & BigCranky note, rangers do try to keep people at shelters, but rangers rarely venture off the trail unless something - like a lot of noise, a campfire, being within sight of the trail - attracts them. If you plan to hammock away from shelters, I suggest going off trail over a hill and hanging partway down on the other side - it will keep you out of sight and dampen any noise you make.
Well I know you could stealth camp, but I wouldn't want to advise people to break the rules established by the park. They did it to try and reduce human impact and centralize it in the the few hovels along the AT. Honestly I don't care much for the Smokies shelter system so I avoid the AT in the Smokies.
One good trend is the removal of the Birches shelter and converting the area to a designated campsite a few years back. Maybe they will remove a few more shelters in the Smokies and create some more designated campsites.
If I remember, the BMT that parallels the AT in the Smokies has only a couple of shelters, and plenty of tent sites. Plus it's not as busy as the AT. I think it is still OK to use the BMT as part of a thru hike. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Just Jeff
08-29-2006, 21:46
Who defines "OK" for someone else's thru? If it makes my journey more suitable for me, I say it's ok. And since I'm the one carrying my pack, my opinion is the only one that matters.
But I don't think the ATC recognizes that as part of a thru yet. That's what Rock is always sniveling about. :D
I still have several years before I get to thru, but I'm really considering taking the BMT instead of the Smokies b/c I don't like places with lots of regulations if there's an alternative. And I'll still call myself a thruhiker.
next time i hike the AT in the smokies i will drop down the side of the trail out of site and stealth camp:cool: neo
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/showimage.php?i=12096&catid=member&imageuser=3462
Who defines "OK" for someone else's thru? If it makes my journey more suitable for me, I say it's ok. And since I'm the one carrying my pack, my opinion is the only one that matters.
But I don't think the ATC recognizes that as part of a thru yet. That's what Rock is always sniveling about. :D
I still have several years before I get to thru, but I'm really considering taking the BMT instead of the Smokies b/c I don't like places with lots of regulations if there's an alternative. And I'll still call myself a thruhiker.
:D thats the spirit,its your hike dude:cool: neo
Ramble~On
08-30-2006, 00:02
I do not "claim" to be a "thru hiker" nor do most people that I know.
Who cares..... is it a contest ? If you miss a blaze becuase you'd rather check out a side trail that is your decision and more than liklely you'll be bettered by the experience. The AT is one vein in a huge circulatory system.....if the heart and blood do their jobs all is well. If your goal is to "thru hike" than be a purist and cover every foot of the trail and pass every blaze...if you take a side trail....backtrack to the AT and pick up where you left off. I seriously doubt that there are many people who can claim to have passed every blaze.
Did Benton dream of "a" trail or a network of trails ?
Hike your own hike and enjoy it.:sun
I do not "claim" to be a "thru hiker" nor do most people that I know.
Who cares..... is it a contest ? If you miss a blaze becuase you'd rather check out a side trail that is your decision and more than liklely you'll be bettered by the experience. The AT is one vein in a huge circulatory system.....if the heart and blood do their jobs all is well. If your goal is to "thru hike" than be a purist and cover every foot of the trail and pass every blaze...if you take a side trail....backtrack to the AT and pick up where you left off. I seriously doubt that there are many people who can claim to have passed every blaze.
Did Benton dream of "a" trail or a network of trails ?
Hike your own hike and enjoy it.:sun
I like your analogy. The BMT was conceived as an alternate route if landowners along the AT at some point chose to refuse access to their lands. I think that was resolved around forty years ago. Anyway, I like a less crowded option. If the stars line up, and my daughter's pending tuition obligations end in '08, I'll be up there. Hammocking My Own Hike.:D
sliderule
08-30-2006, 01:06
rangers rarely venture off the trail .
For that matter, they rarely venture on to the trail. The ones with law enforcement authority rarely venture away from their cars!!!
sliderule
08-30-2006, 01:15
One good trend is the removal of the Birches shelter and converting the area to a designated campsite a few years back.
One shelter demolition hardly qualifies as a "trend." (The was also a shelter at False Gap that was removed many years ago, but not converted to a campsite.) The "trend" is shelter renovation, which started in 1998.
SGT Rock
08-30-2006, 08:16
Trends have to start somewhere. One can hope ;)
shades of blue
08-30-2006, 08:44
I do not "claim" to be a "thru hiker" nor do most people that I know.
Who cares..... is it a contest ? If you miss a blaze becuase you'd rather check out a side trail that is your decision and more than liklely you'll be bettered by the experience. The AT is one vein in a huge circulatory system.....if the heart and blood do their jobs all is well. If your goal is to "thru hike" than be a purist and cover every foot of the trail and pass every blaze...if you take a side trail....backtrack to the AT and pick up where you left off. I seriously doubt that there are many people who can claim to have passed every blaze.
Did Benton dream of "a" trail or a network of trails ?
Hike your own hike and enjoy it.:sun
Spirit Wind, I agree with almost everything you said. It personally doesn't matter to me what other people do, and while I am sectioning now I'll take the blue blaze routes into shelters and the occasional blue blaze that was the old AT. I disagree with what I've bolded in your quote. When I hiked the trail to "complete" it, I passed every blaze. That doesn't mean that I judge anyone else, it was my hike, and it was important to me. It would appear that Baltimore Jack feels pretty strongly about that too (just don't compare us with politics! ;) ) So....I think there may be more who passed every blaze than you think, but I'm sure many don't. Does it really matter if someone passes every blaze...that's up to them and why they are hiking. Does it matter what others do? Not to me, as long as they don't hurt the trail, or the reputation of hikers with their behavior in towns. Any way...my .02
Gray Blazer
08-30-2006, 08:48
"Peer" pressure kept me from setting up my tent in the Smokies at the shelters.
SGT Rock
08-30-2006, 08:48
Who defines "OK" for someone else's thru? If it makes my journey more suitable for me, I say it's ok. And since I'm the one carrying my pack, my opinion is the only one that matters.
But I don't think the ATC recognizes that as part of a thru yet. That's what Rock is always sniveling about. :D
I still have several years before I get to thru, but I'm really considering taking the BMT instead of the Smokies b/c I don't like places with lots of regulations if there's an alternative. And I'll still call myself a thruhiker.
I know, I snivel about it. But honestly I am starting to wonder if making the BMT an alternate route is a good idea. Too many thru-hikers sniveling about the AT and not enough shelter space and such. Give them another route and soon they will want to turn the wilder, more primitive BMT into another AT clone to the west. That would be the real shame.
I know, I snivel about it. But honestly I am starting to wonder if making the BMT an alternate route is a good idea. Too many thru-hikers sniveling about the AT and not enough shelter space and such. Give them another route and soon they will want to turn the wilder, more primitive BMT into another AT clone to the west. That would be the real shame.
If/when I thru, I'm going to do the BMT instead of the AT for that section. My first response to the No Shelters "rule" on the BMT was indeed "AAAARRRRGGGG, NO SHELTERS?!?!?" But then I thought "hey, I don't stay in shelters anyway" so whitdrew my protest before I actually said the words outloud.
So on my trek thru the Smokies, I will have to hang my hammock cause I won't have shelters to stay in.
When I did that section of the AT I saw ample indications of stelth sites that would support tents or hammocks. Granted some of the hammock sites were not realized untill I started hanging this year, but in my mind I see many at regular intervals. I didn't really go to the "sites" I saw, but with a few years hiking experience, I was able to see areas that were a bit off trail but accessable that LOOKED like good sites. And if you stayed quiet, didn't show any light, etc, you would stay hidden quite well.
As stated elsewhere, I don't advocate breaking the rules of the GSMNP, but if the shelter is full OR if you "bit off more (distance) than you could chew" it's good to know you can camp elsewhere.
Doctari.
Remember, too, that another reason for restricted campsites is the bear issue. Even the campsites where trhere are no shelters have cables for hanging yor food, so if you are stealth camping be very careful about where and how you stow your food. Bears are known to shake the cables trying to get food down.
sliderule
09-03-2006, 00:37
Bears are known to shake the cables trying to get food down.
Don't trust the hooks on the cables. Tie or clip you food bag or pack so it cannot come loose.