Unsustainable number of starts at Sprimger oww

[Coffee]

Just to clarify, I don't think that a quota for starts at the southern terminus could apply only to thru hikers. Just as permits to start the John Muir Trail at Happy Isles apply to JMT thru hikers and weekenders heading for Half Dome, so would the permits at the southern terminus of the AT apply to all. I think that there should be both reserveable and walk-in quotas available to ensure that people still have the opportunity to plan spur of the moment trips. I don't pretend to know what the quota should be set at but it is very possible that there could still be a very generous supply while spreading out the bubble. For example, instead of 100+ hikers starting on a Saturday in April, maybe the quota is set to 40 or 50 per day and some of those who would prefer to start on Saturday would have to instead start mid-week. If the permit also specified first night camping locations, that could further spread out the impact.

I have not hiked the AT in Georgia so take what I'm suggesting with a grain of salt. But even not having hiked that part of the trail, in principle such a system has worked elsewhere and could work anywhere if well designed for local conditions. Most AT thru hikes are planned months ahead of time and I don't think that registering for a permit would be an enormous hassle in light of all the other required preparations.

I would be totally opposed to an oppressive system where camping locations have to be specified for every single night of a trip. Obviously totally unworkable for thru hikers. Instead I would hope for a Sierra Nevada style of permit where, yes, you need one, but after the initial inconvenience you can roam about without restriction for as long as you want.

[Sarcasm the elf]

Just to clarify, I don't think that a quota for starts at the southern terminus could apply only to thru hikers. Just as permits to start the John Muir Trail at Happy Isles apply to JMT thru hikers and weekenders heading for Half Dome, so would the permits at the southern terminus of the AT apply to all. I think that there should be both reserveable and walk-in quotas available to ensure that people still have the opportunity to plan spur of the moment trips. I don't pretend to know what the quota should be set at but it is very possible that there could still be a very generous supply while spreading out the bubble. For example, instead of 100+ hikers starting on a Saturday in April, maybe the quota is set to 40 or 50 per day and some of those who would prefer to start on Saturday would have to instead start mid-week. If the permit also specified first night camping locations, that could further spread out the impact.

I have not hiked the AT in Georgia so take what I'm suggesting with a grain of salt. But even not having hiked that part of the trail, in principle such a system has worked elsewhere and could work anywhere if well designed for local conditions. Most AT thru hikes are planned months ahead of time and I don't think that registering for a permit would be an enormous hassle in light of all the other required preparations.

I would be totally opposed to an oppressive system where camping locations have to be specified for every single night of a trip. Obviously totally unworkable for thru hikers. Instead I would hope for a Sierra Nevada style of permit where, yes, you need one, but after the initial inconvenience you can roam about without restriction for as long as you want.

I haven't hiked the JMT, but my understanding is that it a unique and much more fragile environment that is easy to damage and slow heal, and this is why it a permit system was implemented to protect it from overuse. The A.T. in Georgia is a very different landscape made up primarly of temperate hardwood forest that can safely handle far more use than arid/alpine regions on the west coast. Springer gets overused for a month or two each year, but the treadway is well made and well maintained and if you hike there in the fall, it doesn't look much worse for the wear.

There certainly are places where the west coast system of permits and quotas is appropriate, but the Southern A.T. isn't one of them. The A.T. isn't being destroyed by the number of hikers, it's just getting crowded in a way that can be managed by less intrusive methods. The A.T. Is also a very porus trail with entry points every couple of miles and dispersed camping allowed on much if it's corridor. The 98% of trail users who aren't thru hiking aren't going to stop by Amacolola to get a permit or watch a LNT video, they're going to park their car on the side of the road and go hiking like they have been for generations.

I also doubt that there would be much public support in Georgia for a permit system Amacola is a state park after all, so the state would have a large say in the matter.

[TheYoungOne]

I hate to say it but economics and the "Market" has a way of fixing things. I think with the internet and the recent slew of books ad movies are making the AT way too popular. I am in my mid 40's an live less that 100 miles from the AT and most people I know didn't eve know what a thru hikers was until a few year ago. Popularity and ore hikers leads to more of a demand, which will lead to an increase in prices for the hostels, hotels, transport, resupply, stores. Also it will lead to more legislation, quota, permits, fees, town ordinances against hitchhikers, Hostels, camping outside of town, etc.

It either going to go one of two ways, or a combo of both.

1) The AT, and the thru-hike experience will be a shell of what it once was. A over crowded hike, on a trashy overused trail, with more built up areas that will kill vistas and any sense of wilderness,isolation and privacy. Remember 2/3 of the total US population lives east of the Mississippi and close to the AT. If thru hiking becomes "mainstream" the number hikers could go up exponentially. The Springer could start looking like the entrance to Disneyworld


2) Hiking the AT and Thru hiking will become EXPENSIVE and over regulated. Dead will be the days of the hippie hiker, hitching rides, stealth camping, cheap hostels, etc. In PA there I already talk about a hiking "User Fee" to hike thru State Game Land. With Quotas people with money and connections will bump others out. The total cost of a thru hike will go up exponentially, making it too expensive for an average person to complete.

[Another Kevin]

I can agree that shelter may provide a crutch for unprepared hikers. On the other hand building more privies and durable tent sites are effective ways to address the sanitary and environmental concerns in heavily used areas while still requiring hikers to use their own gear for shelter. I don't see that type of improvement as doing much to encourage unprepared hikers.

Let me share something from what I've personally seen. I think I've mentioned this once before, in a thread about a grant for Jeff Marion's research group to study hiker impact.

The Devil's Path in the Catskills (about 25 miles of arduous hiking, with 9000 feet of very scrambly elevation gain) is a very popular trail. Lots of people want to say they've done it. It passes through a state campground near the midpoint, and to support the load of hikers it gets, it has four lean-tos (from east to west: Devil's Kitchen, Mink Hollow, Devil's Acre and Diamond Notch). They used to be real you-know-what-holes, and a couple still are. Mink Hollow, however, has got a new lease on life using the sort of techniques Elf is talking about. And it was perhaps the worst impacted of the sites, since it's accessible by mountain bike as well as on foot.

A lot of what they did was pretty simple. They repaired the lean-to structure itself. It had been showing its age. The repairs were funded by the family of a trail steward who died young in a bicycle accident, and there's a plaque at the lean-to honoring him. Even the presence of the memorial seems to discourage the people who would deface the surfaces. In any case, it's tarred wood that's both more durable than bare logs and harder to write on.


The Mink Hollow lean-to by ke9tv, on Flickr


Bronze plaque by ke9tv, on Flickr

Both sides of the lean-to are posted NO TENTS, TARPS OR CAMPING AROUND SHELTER. At least on summer weekends, this rule is enforced, and the word is out that there's a $250 fine for doing so. In addition, you can see in the picture that the clearing in front of the lean-to has been reinforced with rock. That makes an uncomfortable surface for tenting, and at the same time, it hardens the ground. The area around the lean-to used to be a mud pit, and now it's dry to walk on for most of the hiking season. (There's nothing to be done for it in the spring snowmelt.)

Late arrivals to the lean-to who are properly prepared needn't be dismayed by the camping restrictions, because just across the MTB trail from the lean-to, there's a short spur trail, blazed with markers like these.


Campsite disc by ke9tv, on Flickr

That trail has a surprising number of tent sites strung out along it, spaced just far apart to give a feeling of privacy when the leaves are on the trees. (When the leaves aren't out, it's cold enough that you have privacy anyway.) Each site has a similar yellow disk with the same tepee and the legend, CAMP HERE. A few spots that are not hardened but look as if they might be decent places to pitch have disks with a red NO circle through the tepee and NO CAMPING.

Each tent site also has the ground hardened. For the tent sites, the hardening was done simply by gathering soil from elsewhere and building up a tent pad no more than a few inches high. You can barely see it, but it's enough to keep the site dry in wet weather. Each tent site has its own little fire pit. The one at mine looked disused - I think that the tenters build fewer fires than the lean-to campers, pr perhaps they just enjoy the fire up at the lean-to! Note that I took this picture on a sunny morning after a rainy night - you can tell by how much the silnylon in my TarpTent has stretched. I do ordinarily pitch tauter than that! You can see that the site drained well.


Campsite by ke9tv, on Flickr

The outhouse is raised up off the ground on very loosely constructed stone walls. They ventilate the vault quite well; even with the heavy use the site gets, there's comparatively little stench. It's wrapped in chickenwire so the porcupines won't eat it. It's starting to be nicely screened by birch and beech saplings. When cleanout is needed, there's a stone slab at the back that two guys can lever aside in moments. There's also a handwritten note inside the door reading something like, "Hi, I'm Xxxxx. I shovel your poop. I don't even get paid to do it. I really don't mind all that much. It's work that needs to be done if we're going to have trails. But I do mind needing to separate your garbage from the poop, and if there's garbage in there, I have to do the job a lot more often. So please don't put anything put poop or TP down the hole. Thank you. - Xxxxx."


The privy is wrapped in chickenwire by ke9tv, on Flickr

The site now accommodates twice the number of hikers that it did before. I think that when I was there for these pictures - which was on a weekend - there were 6-8 people in the lean-to, and maybe six or seven occupied tent sites, mostly with parties of four to six. I think I was the only solo. Probably about forty or fifty hikers - on this single site - but except when everyone was getting water or packing up in the morning, it gave the illusion that each party had the place to themselves.

About the only improvement that I could think of would be to have some sort of bear-resistant storage on site. A bear box probably wouldn't work - they turn into dumpsters, alas. But a cable or pole might be an adequate solution. Lots of people were bemoaning the lack of suitable trees. I managed a halfway decent hang, but it took a fair amount of searching - crashing through brush in mud season - to find a place to do it.

This site is an example of what Elf and I are talking about. It's using engineering to channel human behaviour - make it easier to do it right than do it wrong, and minimize the impact. It is a lot more work to get the system set up, but maintaining it may be less work in the long run, since the site doesn't get nearly as damaged. And it doesn't require any permit system or really any more bureaucracy than the occasional ranger writing a ticket.

But so far, there hasn't really been a lot of work done - Jeff and his grad students mostly - on studying what works and what doesn't in terms of site architecture. This design greatly helped a heavily impacted site, and worked for that particular place. But a slew of people doing 3-4 day backpacks in the Catskills isn't the thru-hiker bubble in the Nantahalas. Lots of things are no doubt different - soil, vegetation, slope, climate, usage patterns - and so the engineering solutions will be different too.

A lot of what I've seen on the A-T in the Northeast (I can only speak about short sections between New Jersey and New Hampshire because that's all I've done) looks like Mink Hollow before this project was started.

(Political rant follows. Stop reading here if you have a distaste for such.)

Unfortunately, what I'm talking about here faces a very rough road in our political times, particularly in the Red States. (This was definitely a Blue State project!) At the moment, it seems to be an article of faith that money spent by the government is money wasted. With a permit-and-fine system, the politicians can say it will pay for itself in the fees collected and the fines assessed. With an engineered system, the money to engineer it has to come from somewhere. I think it would be money well spent, but I seem to be in the minority even on this site - and it's an even harder sell to the general public. Well-engineered trail facilities will work much better than rules and chaotic enforcement, but I'm convinced that the latter is what we're going to get because it's the best solution that we can sell politically. It's a shame, really.

[Mags]

Thanks for sharing Kevin. Amazing how a high-use, heavily damaged site seems to have been rehabbed.

I think Jeff Marion did something a decade ago off the AT in Maryland IIRC?

[Just Bill]

Something at some point will happen, it may not happen AT wide, but the recent changes by GSMNP should be a pretty clear warning.
Baxter now stands ready to join this list, people already chafe at AMC and other caretaker run sites. The writing is on the wall IMO.

What would you prefer?
A hodgepodge park by park system implemented by each agency as it reaches it's individual limit and "solution". Adding 50 pages to AWOL's guide to sort out as you go?
Or the ATC implementing a program and continuing to negotiate and provide exceptions for Thru and section hikers trail wide?

I for one would be more than happy to buy an AT pass, have one set of guidelines to follow. Even if that annual pass was relatively expensive and "bought" you access to what would normally be a paid site or avoided park by park rules. Your pass can be your get out of jail free card to a certain extent in regards to various park by park rules. It would also empower individual parks to enforce their rules for those without a pass, or in violation of it's rules without facing any "fallout or pushback" for messing with AT hikers. Then instead of writing threatening letters, these park officials could simply enforce rules, fine violators, use existing staff and resources and increase their revenue streams.

Individual parks could also be provided with some authority to "cut a corner" from a pass. In Scouts, you demonstrated your responsibility with Fire and Sharp things by earning a card. Violations resulted in a corner being cut off your card, loose four corners and the card is revoked. It's a very simple, but very powerful system of compliance that teaches youngsters that responsibility is a two way street.

Word travels fast: $250 fines make or break many hikes and sober up even the most free smoking "it's cool man" hikers wandering the woods.

I find the notion of the ATC stepping up, before the opportunity passes, to be the much more appealing one.

I also agree that at the moment, it's less of a numbers issue, than a people problem. There can easily be as many benefits to a pass, certainly many more than the modest cost or perhaps a different than planned start day. You're going on a six month hike, does it REALLY matter if you start day changes a week? Especially when that start day is more often arbitrarily chosen?

[Another Kevin]

Word travels fast: $250 fines make or break many hikes and sober up even the most free smoking "it's cool man" hikers wandering the woods.

I find the notion of the ATC stepping up, before the opportunity passes, to be the much more appealing one.

In the case of the fine for illegal camping at that particular site, an even worse prospect that the $250 is the hassle of jackassing over to Delhi (pronounced dell-high) for the obligatory second scolding by a judge. I may be misremembering which county it's in, it might be jackassing over to Catskill, instead.

I think that people here have unreasonable expectations of what the ATC can do. It's not an enforcement arm, and doesn't really even have all that much policy-making authority. It's a coordinating and advocacy body, and in some cases a channel of funding. The real clout for making the rules belongs to the landowners, who are legion. (Less than half the trail is Federal land.) What ATC can do is pretty much limited to recommending policy to NPS, USFS, and the many other landowners and controlling authorities. I don't think they'd have the authority to institute a permit system unless the landowners were to delegate it to them. Even the letter from the BSP authorities is mostly asking that ATC change its marketing approach of trying to recruit as many hikers as possible.

By the way, lack of power is also something that a lot of people don't understand about AMC. They are, at times, enforcing what seem to be some silly and arbitrary rules, but they're not the AMC's rules, they're the USFS's. AMC in the Whites is essentially a glorified concessionaire, tasked with maintaining the trails and huts, collecting fees, and reporting rulebreakers. And they, like ridgerunners, have an impossible job, charged with policing, but with no police powers.

[1234]

"Some suggestions:
- Use a semi-permanant tarp or GI GP tent type shelter to make a "shelter overflow" for the shelters between Springer and GSMNP for the bubble season. Could easily double the number of folks not having to pitch a tent. ATC or NPS could possibly get them as GOV Surplus.
- Increase the moldering privy's near, but not at the shelters. (Eg .5 mile before and .5 after)
- Make a detailed shelter map board with the close alternate tent sites. It always amazed me the spots that were just 500 yards down the trail that went unused after we all piled up at a shelter.
- Beef up garbage collection points at road crossings.
- Issue a thru-hiker trash bag at Springer
- Require a short "AT Indoc Class" at Amicola for NB certification. Make sure the info made the class worthwhile. "

I read through 14 pages of whining and lets over regulate and oh my this is unsustainable. BS--- finally got to a post with "REAL" ideas which is what it will take to correct an issue. Lets do some math! 2,000 starters at 50 a day, it takes 40 days BUT it will take 166 days at 12 per day to summit at the end of the pipe. But only 25% finish so 500 times .25 at 12 per day is 125 days- not doable, July,Aug, Sept, Oct and half of Nov. If 20 people start per day it will take 100 days to get 2,000 people on the trail, same ending. 300,000,000 Americans, and only 2000 starters is not overuse. What it is, is over current capacity. First solution is to increase capacity. That is not what happened, the opposite happened. example, Gooch Mt shelter, they built a new one I guess it sleeps about 12, but to limit use they only made 6 tent sites. So what happened on Saturday night 50-to 100 people show up they scratch and paw and set up tents every where. What should have happened was to make tents sites as use increased. (I heard they made 6 more tent sites when about 25 were needed). I think a big draw on shelters is the privy. Many folks just do not like going out exposed in the woods. So quick solution is to set up temporary shelters during peak times, build more privy's. Build more picnic shelter areas with tent sites, privy and no shelter By the way it is not just shelters that attract people it is also towns, they stay to long and leave in groups on non rainy days. Big groups leaving towns at the same time creates bubbles. So best solution is to increase capacity not to decrease. The population is increasing and demand will continue to grow so the trail should also grow.

[Alligator]

We’ve got several threads now about impacts to the AT from increased numbers and there have been many ideas suggested. Here’s two I’d like to put forward, I have incorporated some previously mentioned thoughts into number 1.



Idea 1: Help the trail first.

We have talked about thrus getting their soles prepped for thruhiking by taking a test hike of a week+. This is meant to work out gear choices and give the body a sample of the demands placed upon it. This is a good idea. But we also need to work on thruhiker souls and help them to understand their responsibility for the trail. We should encourage (not require) volunteer and monetary contributions to the trail before the hike. Hikers are about to spend 1000s of dollars on a trip of their lifetime. Send the ATC or a local AT trail club $50 before you put one foot on the AT. Membership should be the first item on your gear list. Every thruhiker can afford it. Along with that, prospective thrus should volunteer two days of trail maintenance with a trail crew before starting hiking. You wouldn’t spend 150 days in your house without sweeping the floors, cleaning the bathrooms, tidying up the yard, etc. You even clean up the rental unit before you go home from vacation (or pay to). When people give money and time to the trail they will feel ownership for it and treat it accordingly. People will think, “I helped to pay for that and I helped to build/fix that”. Thrus will respect it more. If every prospective thruhiker does this there will be $100,000 and 4,000 days of volunteer work pumped into the trail (based on 2000 starters). Support will be given up front-not promised for later but never delivered.

Every club should have trail maintenance trips scheduled to coincide with start dates for alternative thruhikes. The ATC should coordinate with clubs to make this happen. Most clubs have maintenance scheduled throughout the year already. WB has in the past contacted all the trail clubs to ask for volunteer dates and posted these. Produce a master schedule for all clubs and display it prominently on every hiking website. Thruhikers can incorporate these events into their travel itineraries as they travel to their start points. With a signup program, clubs will have more certainty for help on bigger projects and can divert some time to transportation for the volunteers. With a two day schedule, prospective thrus and maintainers could overnight camp together, break bread and have a short workshop on LNT or provide information on local trail regulations. The clubs become familiar to the new thrus and vice-versa.



Idea 2: Restore Goodwill at BSP

Leadership at Baxter State Park has expressed their frustrations with thruhiker behavior and their concerns for the future. We as the AT community should work to restore goodwill between this important trail partner. I can think of three actions that would foster more positive perceptions of thruhikers: writing, donating, and volunteering. First, if you are a hiker that has broken the rules at Baxter, whether intentionally or inadvertently, please send them a heartfelt apology. Hand write it on nice paper or in a card, and maybe even decorate the envelope nicely. Follow it up with some positive thoughts on the park, tell them what it meant for you to finish, maybe something nice happened to you in the park, maybe include some thanks. Hikers who were well behaved can leave out the apology. Second, donate some money to the park, right there in your letter or card is an easy place to do so. If you just can’t right now, write the letter anyway and send a donation on at a later time. Be sure to let them know you are an AT hiker when you send it. Finally, make a commitment to volunteer in the park on a project not related to the AT. Give BSP something back for the gift that was given to you and the resources expended on your behalf. An outpouring of letters and donations of time and money will go a long way to bridging the divide we are facing between the AT Community and the good folks at Baxter State Park.

The ATC and MATC should coordinate the BSP volunteer efforts.

Let’s clearly demonstrate responsible stewardship for all our local communities and trail partners to see. I know some clubs give out patches for volunteering. Those are patches thruhikers need on their packs to start with. Volunteering is something that deserves edification, using resources while walking from Point A to Point B, not so much so.

[rocketsocks]

That some good solid advice and ideas there Alligator.

[Lauriep]

Lots of really great ideas and feedback in this thread (and other threads that are going on).

Alligator, since you specifically wanted ATC to consider your suggestions and contacted me directly, I'll respond.

1) Help the Trail first. Great ideas. As far as on-the-ground volunteer work, in practice, the logistics and coordination would challenging. The 31 clubs are all quite different in their make-up. (Quite a few have only a few dozen active members (or fewer); many are located hours away from the trail). But maybe if just one club would try it and had success, it might catch on. It could go a long way to solve the problem of an aging volunteer base. There are a lot of trail maintainers on WhiteBlaze; maybe someone here will take this back to their clubs.

2) Restore Goodwill at BSP. Yes, it would be wonderful it there were an outpouring of gratitude and support from recent thru-hikers.

Jensen Bissell
Baxter State Park
64 Balsam Drive
Millinocket, ME 04462


The most important thing is to change future behavior, though. Baxter has got everyone's attention about the magnitude of the problems, from trail leaders to hikers, intentionally or not. I am confident constructive change will occur. ATC's executive director and regional staff and others on staff will be working with Baxter, National Park Service, and MATC closely in the coming year to address Baxter's concerns, many of which are also our concerns. That's our job.

By the way, I will point out that while there is among some thru-hikers a sense of entitlement, conversely, it seems to me that most thru-hikers can be exceptionally grateful for the smallest kindness. At ATC HQ, for example, many are profuse in their thanks for allowing them to simply hang out in our hiker lounge and charge their cell phones for a few hours. If I had to generalize, I would have to say, that as a group, they are more appreciative of what ATC does, overall, than other visitors. We also get many poignant, heartfelt thanks from hikers at the end of their hikes, thanking us for hosting them at ATC, or for making their journey possible by what we do in managing and preserving the A.T.

Some trail maintainers have long observed that thru-hikers are the people most likely to thank us for our work when we're out there on the trail; much more so than day-hikers, who might assume we are government workers, I suppose (because they don't know better).

As for expectations of services, civilization outside the the Trail has changed. The disparity between the services we have back home and what the Trail has to offer has changed dramatically.

I don't think today's thru-hikers or 20-somethings are really any different than they have been in the past. Many--most--are really wonderful people, considerate and appreciative. Another thing that is different is the size of the thru-hiker groups that congregate, and that can change the mentality. Social media also changes the dynamics. We face new challenges, and will have even more once thousands or millions have seen Wild and A Walk in the Woods in theaters. But, as 2014 thru-hiker "Sisu" who has been volunteering at ATC since his thru-hike, and our executive director Ron Tipton (GA-ME '78) keeps reminding me, these are also opportunities.

Laurie P.

[Alligator]

Thank you for your response Laurie. I too agree that changing the future response is critical. When I was thinking of the BSP approach, my thoughts were that even if #1 did not work, at least there would be this positive effort at Baxter to balance out some of the negative events. Best would be though to reduce the negatives and change hiker behavior.

Something I have been seeing on this thread and in other discussions is a significant amount of negative characterization for the 20-somethings crowd. I don't necessarily think they are any more prone to poor behavior either, no more so than any other generation. (I think some are forgetting their youthful indiscretions.) There is evidence collected though that generational differences exist in the US population. On the business side of things, employee relations can benefit from recognizing some of the differences. Social researchers have found for instance that Millennials, Generation X'ers, Sixties Generation, WWII Generations have different attitudes to work life balance, taking leave, and management-employee interaction. It's not my field, I can't detail the exact differences, and I probably do not have the generations designated precisely. The point I am getting to though is that it might help to consider generational attitudes when developing approaches to change future behavior. Social media is a definite factor to consider.

[rocketsocks]

If the infrastructure near the southern terminus is hardened to meet the increased demand and to make it more convenient for hikers (more privies, shelters, cleared campsites, etc), wouldn't that simply move the problem further up the trail by enabling more relatively unprepared hikers to continue their trips whereas under current conditions they might have to bail out?

Perhaps, and I don't know the numbers, but bailing out and going "off-trail" seems to happen closer to the beginning of the thru-hike. I don't think most bail outs are doing so because of over crowding, more the toughness of the mental game of hiking getting to them.

[Slo-go'en]

Perhaps, and I don't know the numbers, but bailing out and going "off-trail" seems to happen closer to the beginning of the thru-hike. I don't think most bail outs are doing so because of over crowding, more the toughness of the mental game of hiking getting to them.

I agree. Those who drop out early really didn't have a clue what they were getting into. There are those who are woefully ill prepared, out of shape, have medical issues or simply develop a really bad case of blisters. After this initial vetting, then it's simply a slow rate of attrition as the numbers slowly dwindle due to a whole host of reasons. Boredom, lack of money, stress injuries, too much heat, too much rain and so on.

[jmitchell]

The ATC should begin to recognize alternative thru-hikes that use the AT in combination with other trails, such as the BMT, GET, Allegheny Trail, Tuscarora Trail, SST, MST, FLT, Long Path, etc. This will help relieve pressure on the AT and promote hiking on trails that could use more traffic. This is consistent with MacKaye's vision of a network of trails.

Obviously, the ATC has a primary interest in the use, protection, and support of the AT alone. However, the AT can also benefit as the main trunk of a wider hiking corridor through the Appalachians.

[rickb]

The ATC should begin to recognize alternative thru-hikes that use the AT in combination with other trails, such as the BMT, GET, Allegheny Trail, Tuscarora Trail, SST, MST, FLT, Long Path, etc.

I know it may seem like splitting hairs, but the ATC does not recognize thru hikes.

They recognize hikers who have walked every mile of the AT.

Considering that a central mission of the ATC was establishing and then protecting a continuous trail where EVERY mile mattered (whether it had grandios views or was just a trudge), kind of makes sense, right?

If the goal is to get people off he AT, then they might better put a link on thier web site to the much more scenically magnificent PCT. I say that only half in jest.

[jmitchell]

I know it may seem like splitting hairs, but the ATC does not recognize thru hikes.

They recognize hikers who have walked every mile of the AT.

Considering that a central mission of the ATC was establishing and then protecting a continuous trail where EVERY mile mattered (whether it had grandios views or was just a trudge), kind of makes sense, right?

If the goal is to get people off he AT, then they might better put a link on thier web site to the much more scenically magnificent PCT. I say that only half in jest.

Well, if the central mission of the ATC is a trail that is suffering from overuse, then a new mission might be considered. A static mission can undermine the very thing ATC seeks to protect over the long term.

By looking at the AT in a broader context, as a common thread in a larger network of trails in Appalachia, heavy use can be sustainably spread out over more trails.

The premise of my post is based upon the AT facing overuse, as some feel with the pending release of Bryson's movie. If the AT is not facing long term overuse, never mind my suggestion.