If there were no shelters?

[drastic_quench]

How big of an outcry would there be if shelters were either actively demolished or phased out by neglecting them until they rotted? For argument's sake, let's leave out the Smokies.

If all responsible hikers carry some form of shelter - tent, hammock, or bivy - would they really be missed that much?

I can see how shelters fit with McKaye's idealized vision, but with modern, light, and affordable tents why bother maintaining three-walled wooden sleeping platforms. Couldn't that extra manpower be put to more practical use on trail maintenance and/or maintaining the shelter areas as campsites and privies?

I don't claim to have any answer. I'm just interested in the question and opinions.

[sheepdog]

Question ;If there were no shelters?
Answer; The AT would be a better place.
disclaimer: I do like the picnic tables.

[kanga]

Question ;If there were no shelters?
Answer; The AT would be a better place.
disclaimer: I do like the picnic tables.

except for that last part.

[ShoelessWanderer]

I have to agree I like the picnic tables, and privies. I'd have no problems if most of the shelters weren't there. However, would cut down on my options for winter backpacking. I hate pitching my tent in the snow...so can we leave a few shelters up??

[A-Train]

I respond to this as someone who had hiked the AT (tons of shelters) and the PCT (virtually no shelters to speak of).

While i don't advocate for adding AT shelters or continuing to build or renovate shelters that are of the Hilton variety (15-20 hiker capacity), shelters have a very functional purpose.

They are a welcome site in a thunderstorm storm or snow storm or during consecutive nights of cold rain, and most people can admit this, even those who love their tents.

If you abolished shelters you'd still have people convening in campsite areas, but the shelter structure itself (and the adjoining register, picnic table and fire pit) bring people together and provide the setting for a thriving AT community that's been bringing people together for years

[kanga]

I respond to this as someone who had hiked the AT (tons of shelters) and the PCT (virtually no shelters to speak of).

While i don't advocate for adding AT shelters or continuing to build or renovate shelters that are of the Hilton variety (15-20 hiker capacity), shelters have a very functional purpose.

They are a welcome site in a thunderstorm storm or snow storm or during consecutive nights of cold rain, and most people can admit this, even those who love their tents.

If you abolished shelters you'd still have people convening in campsite areas, but the shelter structure itself (and the adjoining register, picnic table and fire pit) bring people together and provide the setting for a thriving AT community that's been bringing people together for years

wait a minute. i just read in another thread that there wasn't any at community? i am so confused.

[A-Train]

wait a minute. i just read in another thread that there wasn't any at community? i am so confused.

There's nothing to be confused about. Decidedly, there is no AT community. Sorry to confuse you. Next time you are on the trail, jam q tips into your ears and put your head down when those rotten scoundrels try to coax you into a conversation and/or friendship

[kanga]

There's nothing to be confused about. Decidedly, there is no AT community. Sorry to confuse you. Next time you are on the trail, jam q tips into your ears and put your head down when those rotten scoundrels try to coax you into a conversation and/or friendship

ahhh, so that's how it's done... and here i thought i was going to have to bend over and try to hike while kissing my own butt. thanks!

[Snowleopard]

In some fragile environments shelters serve an important purpose by concentrating use in a small area and providing more infrastructure there (privy, water, the shelter itself). In the White Mountains (NH) above tree line, the alternative to the expensive AMC huts would be no ability to spend the night above tree line; you'd have to descend. Since many thru-hikers would not descend but would cowboy camp, there would be more damage to the alpine environment.

[emerald]

The A.T. isn't the PCT and wishing it were so won't make it so. The environmental impacts such a change would cause would be more than unfortunate.

What is the most biologically diverse unit managed by the National Park Service? It's the Appalachian National Scenic Trail. If you don't believe me, ask them or ATC.

I'd advocate for more shelters or more acceptable alternatives that concentrate impact before I'd accept none.

[kanga]

In some fragile environments shelters serve an important purpose by concentrating use in a small area and providing more infrastructure there (privy, water, the shelter itself). In the White Mountains (NH) above tree line, the alternative to the expensive AMC huts would be no ability to spend the night above tree line; you'd have to descend. Since many thru-hikers would not descend but would cowboy camp, there would be more damage to the alpine environment.

very good point

[kanga]

The A.T. isn't the PCT and wishing it were so won't make it so. The environmental impacts such a change would cause would be more than unfortunate.

What is the most biologically diverse unit managed by the National Park Service? It's the Appalachian National Scenic Trail. If you don't believe me, ask them or ATC.

I'd advocate for more shelters or more acceptable alternatives that concentrate impact before I'd accept none.

it's just a hypothetical discussion, shades. nothing to nut up about.

[sheepdog]

If there were no shelters?
A gazillion mice would be homeless??

[The Weasel]

If there were no shelters?
A gazillion mice would be homeless??

And people would have to pack out their own tuna cans.

TW

[sheepdog]

And people would have to pack out their own tuna cans.

TW

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.

[emerald]

The A.T. isn't a free for all, but rather a 2000-mile compromise, one which varies locally throughout its length.

[emerald]

it's just a hypothetical discussion, shades. nothing to nut up about.

You wouldn't be overreacting, dear, now would you? I told you he doesn't post here anymore. He got the ****s of it long ago.

Just providing tobacco for the peace pipe. I don't smoke, but some others seem to think they benefit from the activity.

[kanga]

yes, i'm running around pulling my hair out as we speak.
seriously though, as far as you comment about rather having more shelters instead of none, don't you think that more of the wuss pusses that come in for the weekend to party at the shelters wouldn't be there to trash things if there wasn't some sort of shelter there to protect them from the boogie man? i have found in life that the people that are the most self-sufficient are usually the more respectful and less wasteful ones. isn't there some quote regarding laziness begetting.. something?

[sheepdog]

yes, i'm running around pulling my hair out as we speak.
seriously though, as far as you comment about rather having more shelters instead of none, don't you think that more of the wuss pusses that come in for the weekend to party at the shelters wouldn't be there to trash things if there wasn't some sort of shelter there to protect them from the boogie man? i have found in life that the people that are the most self-sufficient are usually the more respectful and less wasteful ones. isn't there some quote regarding laziness begetting.. something?

well said
or
yepperdoodle

[BlackCloud]

Then there would be no mice...