Changing Thru Plans to Save the AT

[ghostwalker]

I have already made the decision to start in the first week of May, 2016. The route will be Harpers Ferry, W.Va., north to Katahdin; Harpers Ferry, W.Va., south to Springer Mountain. I would rather start early April at Springer because I love company and the Harpers Ferry, W.Va., north to Katahdin route will certainly put fewer folks on the trail.

Your post makes absolutely no sense. Please clarify.

[Coffee]

One thing I've noticed from reading start dates online both for the PCT and AT is that people seem to fixate on either the 1st or 15th of the month to start a thru hike. I'm not sure why that is. I suspect that those wanting at least marginally fewer people should pick a day other than the 1st or 15th.

[kayak karl]

The way i separated from groups (for different reasons) was to not camp at shelters or near it. i move on about 3-4 miles, camp and leave early. when at a town stop i would leave very early following day. you meet more people this way also.

[Tprunty8]

Love to see this discussion taking place. For all of the reasons mentioned, I am looking to flip flop HF-Katahdin, HF-Springer beginning early May. I'd also point out that this will have you begin with the relatively flatter middle of the AT, and get into trail shape before hitting the northern sections. Finally, the weather "should" be better throughout for this itinerary. The only unfortunate thing for me is that I can't retire for 4 years, so I'll just continue dreaming, planning, and hiking the occasional section.

[JohnnySnook]

The good thing about starting your hike in the bubble is that you can always say the shelter was full and camp in the woods.
I'm not sure on my start date. I was thinking maybe mid march. May b-day is the 23rd so I'd like to be on the trail before the 23rd.
Danger - Hopefully we cross paths and I can treat to to a fresh rainbow trout dinner. What I fear is the fishing licenses fees cutting into my budget.

If anyone can tell me what states would be worth fishing and those that I should skip and hike on to save time. I do know I want to fish in the northern states! Maybe skip some of the middle states?

Not much info on this forum about fishing except to not fish at all. Kind of sad. I mean many take many days off to go see cities or like NY and Washington DC.

Luckily I found a fishing guide in NC that is a LDH and I Hope he can provide some insight.

[Lauriep]

Awesome to see people thoughtfully considering new approaches, and thinking outside of the box, considering how their hike affects the big picture and what they can do differently to help the situation.

One thing that's useful to know: selecting a campsite for the minimum environmental impact is not always intuitive. Research shows that in most of the Eastern forests, it's best to avoid places where camping impacts are just beginning, which can recover fairly quickly if left alone, but will be compacted if there are something like just 10-20 overnight visits a year. The best thing on the heavily used A.T. is to use an established campsite.

Here is more guidance from Leave No Trace, Inc. although some of it doesn't quite resonate on the A.T., as many designated and established campsites are already close to trails and water--built and established before the science was understood.

The crux of it is this: "confine impact to places which already show use and avoid enlarging the area of disturbance."

lnt.org/learn/principle-2

Choosing a Campsite in High-Use Areas

Avoid camping close to water and trails and select a site which is not visible to others. Even in popular areas the sense of solitude can be enhanced by screening campsites and choosing an out-of-the-way site. Camping away from the water's edge also allows access routes for wild life. Be sure to obey regulations related to campsite selection. Allow enough time and energy at the end of the day to select an appropriate site. Fatigue, bad weather, and late departure times are not acceptable excuses for choosing poor or fragile camp sites.

Generally, it is best to camp on sites that are so highly impacted that further careful use will cause no noticeable impact. In popular areas, these sites are obvious because they have already lost their vegetation cover. Also, it is often possible to find a site which naturally lacks vegetation, such as exposed bedrock or sandy areas.

On high-impact sites, tents, traffic routes, and kitchen areas should be concentrated on already impacted areas. The objective is to confine impact to places which already show use and avoid enlarging the area of disturbance. When leaving camp, make sure that it is clean, attractive, and appealing to other campers who follow.

The very best thing for the Trail is to choose a campsite or shelter site that's already officially designated, and make sure that you're not expanding the overall camping area in that designated site. Choosing to hike in a time and place that is not already known to be crowded is part of this.

ATC is working on developing a voluntary registration system for northbound thru-hikers that will help people see what dates have the most people signed up to start and enable them to self-disperse across the calendar.

[Coffee]

On the AT corridor I wouldn't use a non established site if I think that others are likely to come across it. This means being quite a distance off trail in a non obvious location. And I try to leave it as I found it in terms of not being obvious that my tent was there. We definitely shouldn't create new sites within sight of the trail.

[Tipi Walter]

The very best thing for the Trail is to choose a campsite or shelter site that's already officially designated, and make sure that you're not expanding the overall camping area in that designated site. Choosing to hike in a time and place that is not already known to be crowded is part of this.

ATC is working on developing a voluntary registration system for northbound thru-hikers that will help people see what dates have the most people signed up to start and enable them to self-disperse across the calendar.

I find your post a sort of tacit approval and support for the AT rat-box shelter system. How so? By this:

"The very best thing for the Trail is to choose a campsite that's already officially designated..."

This is just wrong and if instituted would ruin the AT experience. We'll be back to the Smokies model: Camp Only Here! "Officially Designated" sounds scientific and researched and all else but so far Thank you Jesus there are no officially designated campsites on the AT yet except in areas where there's a heavy Tent Police presence i.e. GSMNP and Baxter.

The only damage new camping spots do over time is to produce a small area of compacted ground. This is nothing. Every Autumn these spots are covered by another round of fresh dead leaves and the world goes on.

There could be a million little compacted tent sites along the AT and it would not change or harm anything. I encourage backpackers to find new camps and use them and get away from the shelter madness. Camp where you want, folks. Camp by the trail. Camp a mile off the trail. Bushwack to new spots. Camp on the hill, camp in the valley. Camp everywhere.

[rickb]

Thank you Jesus there are no officially designated campsites on the AT yet except in areas where there's a heavy Tent Police presence i.e. GSMNP and Baxter.

Tipi, some words of advise. Keep talking beautiful photos of the mushrooms you find on your many long and amazing backpacking trips.

But please, don't eat them anymore, OK?

[Alligator]

You misquoted LaurieP Walter. It says "...campsite or shelter site...."

...

The very best thing for the Trail is to choose a campsite or shelter site that's already officially designated, and make sure that you're not expanding the overall camping area in that designated site. Choosing to hike in a time and place that is not already known to be crowded is part of this.

...

Now as far as impact, those small compacted sites can and do expand. There are sites up and down the AT that have had to be rehabilitated because they were overused. You are not providing good advice Tipi Walter. Admittedly, you tend to camp in places of low visitor use and your perspective on degradation from usage appears biased.

[Sheriff Cougar]

I find your post a sort of tacit approval and support for the AT rat-box shelter system. How so? By this:

"The very best thing for the Trail is to choose a campsite that's already officially designated..."

This is just wrong and if instituted would ruin the AT experience. We'll be back to the Smokies model: Camp Only Here! "Officially Designated" sounds scientific and researched and all else but so far Thank you Jesus there are no officially designated campsites on the AT yet except in areas where there's a heavy Tent Police presence i.e. GSMNP and Baxter.

The only damage new camping spots do over time is to produce a small area of compacted ground. This is nothing. Every Autumn these spots are covered by another round of fresh dead leaves and the world goes on.

There could be a million little compacted tent sites along the AT and it would not change or harm anything. I encourage backpackers to find new camps and use them and get away from the shelter madness. Camp where you want, folks. Camp by the trail. Camp a mile off the trail. Bushwack to new spots. Camp on the hill, camp in the valley. Camp everywhere.

My thoughts exactly, Tipi. Stealth camping or camping in areas no one else uses should lessen the impact on the trail.

[Tipi Walter]

You misquoted LaurieP Walter. It says "...campsite or shelter site...."

Now as far as impact, those small compacted sites can and do expand. There are sites up and down the AT that have had to be rehabilitated because they were overused. You are not providing good advice Tipi Walter. Admittedly, you tend to camp in places of low visitor use and your perspective on degradation from usage appears biased.

If I added "shelter site" it would be even worse and would validate the madness to use these shelters. All my pics of the AT prove there are thousands of such sites off the AT south of Fontana which have never been used or rarely so. And how many trees are there along the trail? Millions? So how many hammock spots? Millions.

Most of the worse compacted mud pits are located next to the rat-box shelters, although a few gaps here and there have impacted spots like Cody Gap or the spot by a spring south of Fontana but they don't bother me. I gather a stuff sack worth of dead leaves and place them under my tent. And I have camped a hundred nights in heavy used spots thruout the Southeast and other than the big firepits I have no problem using them and none in my opinion need to be rehabilitated. A compacted spot is nothing, and I never said to build a fire ring or use a fire. The big rock ash dump which people call Fire Pits are unsightly, granted. But a compacted spot? Never.

[Tipi Walter]

My thoughts exactly, Tipi. Stealth camping or camping in areas no one else uses should lessen the impact on the trail.

Thank ye for the input. And there are millions of such spots.

[Alligator]

If I added "shelter site" it would be even worse and would validate the madness to use these shelters. All my pics of the AT prove there are thousands of such sites off the AT south of Fontana which have never been used or rarely so. And how many trees are there along the trail? Millions? So how many hammock spots? Millions.

Most of the worse compacted mud pits are located next to the rat-box shelters, although a few gaps here and there have impacted spots like Cody Gap or the spot by a spring south of Fontana but they don't bother me. I gather a stuff sack worth of dead leaves and place them under my tent. And I have camped a hundred nights in heavy used spots thruout the Southeast and other than the big firepits I have no problem using them and none in my opinion need to be rehabilitated. A compacted spot is nothing, and I never said to build a fire ring or use a fire. The big rock ash dump which people call Fire Pits are unsightly, granted. But a compacted spot? Never.

Walter advocating that it's ok to create "a million little compacted tent sites" is certainly not following Leave No Trace, where there is the goal of minimizing impact. We will have to disagree on this issue, I would rather see the natural vegetation growing in those non-designated spots. Granted, with care, some hikers can pick spots that will not be impacted, but even hammock hikers end up walking around their chosen sites. Hikers tend to pick the best site for their shelter as well, so they don't necessarily disperse. For it to happen, hikers need to get well away from the trail and water sources. There are certainly places that are compacted and denuded, most any stream with a flat spot nearby has them. It doesn't have to happen and really, it's not ok when it does. It creates erosion problems and it takes away from the wild nature of trails.

[rickb]

Thank ye for the input. And there are millions of such spots.

But hikers invariably will pick the ones right next to trail.

Assuming your concern isn't Haunta Virus or the Bubonic Plague, then I have to guess it is in providing hikers a good aesthetic experience.

Well built and sited tenting areas may not be the ideal in that regard, but they most certainly make for a more beuatiful trail ahead-- especially for those who start hiking relatively early in the day.

[MuddyWaters]

Nothing wrong with concentrated impact camping model....for most.

Established campsites in view of trail should be rehabilitated

Concentrated impact sites and shelters should be at least 1/4 mile off the trail, and out of eye and earshot of the trail

People engaging in dispersed camping should meet a requirement to tent 200 ft off the trail, and 100 ft from water.

Fires should be banned.

[soilman]

....

The only damage new camping spots do over time is to produce a small area of compacted ground. This is nothing. Every Autumn these spots are covered by another round of fresh dead leaves and the world goes on.

There could be a million little compacted tent sites along the AT and it would not change or harm anything. I encourage backpackers to find new camps and use them and get away from the shelter madness. Camp where you want, folks. Camp by the trail. Camp a mile off the trail. Bushwack to new spots. Camp on the hill, camp in the valley. Camp everywhere.

Compaction is not some inert phenomenon. Depending on the degree it can have real consequences to hydrology, flora, and fauna. And depending on the degree, may take time to rehabilitate.

[rocketsocks]

There is also a freeze thaw that heaves the couple feet of top soil that takes place that helps to aerate a compacted soils. I have no idea the numbers, perhaps that will be part of the study that is taking place.

[Cosmo]

If I added "shelter site" it would be even worse and would validate the madness to use these shelters. All my pics of the AT prove there are thousands of such sites off the AT south of Fontana which have never been used or rarely so. And how many trees are there along the trail? Millions? So how many hammock spots? Millions.

Most of the worse compacted mud pits are located next to the rat-box shelters, although a few gaps here and there have impacted spots like Cody Gap or the spot by a spring south of Fontana but they don't bother me. I gather a stuff sack worth of dead leaves and place them under my tent. And I have camped a hundred nights in heavy used spots thruout the Southeast and other than the big firepits I have no problem using them and none in my opinion need to be rehabilitated. A compacted spot is nothing, and I never said to build a fire ring or use a fire. The big rock ash dump which people call Fire Pits are unsightly, granted. But a compacted spot? Never.

Alas, Tipi, very few of the overnight visitors to the AT have your high level of woodscraft and ability. From the photos you have linked to, it looks like you choose well, and undoubtedly there ARE thousands (millions is a big number) of suitable tent/hammock sites along our 2000 miles. However, in my experience, most hikers given the opportunity will camp in a group, close to the trail, next to water, and do a poor job of disposing of their waste. Once that happens a few times, you've got another muddy, trashed-out location. Then folks move along to the next one and the same cycle continues. People, especially in a highly fatigued and transitory situation, just don't seem to be interested in caring for a place they know they are likely to never visit again. The more cynical among us might say that this mimics our nation's past (and perhaps) current relationship to the environment in general--but I digress.

Yes, definitely an opportunity for education. But especially in areas with a high concentration of inexperienced hikers (and there are many--not just between Springer and Fontana), we really need sites that can first off sustain the physical impact of feet, tents and fires in all weathers (and there are definitely existing designated sites that can't), then are sited so as not to create a tent city on the Trail, damage water supplies, or be prone to physical expansion by those looking for yet another "perfect" spot.

I wish there were more hikers of your experience, Tipi--demonstrating ways to be compatible with the woods, rather than altering the environment to suit their needs. They may be out there, but they appear to be a pretty small percentage of AT hikers.

Cosmo

[tsommers]

Tipi Walter nailed it in few posts on page 2, there are so many amazing campsites that i stayed at only 2 shelters, which i had alone, from Springer to VT where i pulled out due to Lymes............ I don't care what anyone says, i started in march 1st last year on springer and never once had an issue with such "bubble". Did i know lots of people within 2 days, in front of and behind? Yes, i did, but never once camped with them and really on stopped to say hi as i passed them or they passed me during the day. More so about the topic of "the bubble", in my case it was gone by Hampton,TN it seemed. So i might be rambling here but this is my take. The trail is social,lots of people around. With a little effort you can make it so you camp alone every night you choose.