WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 249
  1. #61
    Registered User Pokey2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-14-2006
    Location
    Gatlinburg, TN
    Age
    51
    Posts
    1,294
    Images
    41

    Default

    Hmmm, Mr. Bumpy might be on to something -- challenging the legality of such a fee. Because to charge me a fee to camp in the park is essentially charging me to use the park, at least as far as I'm concerned, and that's something they are not legally supposed to be able to do. Interesting.

  2. #62
    Registered User wisenber's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-11-2008
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Age
    56
    Posts
    86
    Images
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pokey2006 View Post
    Hmmm, Mr. Bumpy might be on to something -- challenging the legality of such a fee. Because to charge me a fee to camp in the park is essentially charging me to use the park, at least as far as I'm concerned, and that's something they are not legally supposed to be able to do. Interesting.
    Ah but they can charge to use the park, as front country sites currently charge. The grey areas is a charge for merely accessing the park is not permitted under the covenant (nor is prohibiting horses), but they can charge for services. A front country campground actually provides services (i.e. trash, water, toilets, lighting) whereas it is arguable that a backcountry site does not.

    Still, the underlying question should be whether any further service is being extended as a result of the fees, or do the fees just cover the enforcement of the fees. The next question should be whether there is an actual problem needing a solution or is this just a solution looking for a problem. Two thirds of the sites are not currently reserved nor is there a need for reservations as they are sparely used. As such, there really is no need to include them in an expanded reservation system.

  3. #63
    Registered User Pokey2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-14-2006
    Location
    Gatlinburg, TN
    Age
    51
    Posts
    1,294
    Images
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wisenber View Post
    Two thirds of the sites are not currently reserved nor is there a need for reservations as they are sparely used. As such, there really is no need to include them in an expanded reservation system.
    I do agree my biggest issue with this is the charging of fees for some of the lesser-used sites. High use sites, I do sorta understand. That's why the Everglades or Grand Canyon can get away with charging fees, because of the extremely high demand. However, many sites in the Smokies are not as well used as, say, the AT shelters are.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    09-29-2008
    Location
    West Palm Beach, Florida
    Age
    69
    Posts
    3,605

    Default

    Actually Everglades is not that high of a demand for back country usage. The season is short, December to April (some of us are crazy enough to go in summer), The park itself can be crowded, but that is in the car accessible areas, few venture off into the canoe trails, and overnight hiking is limited to one possible route, 7 1/2 miles each way.

    The back-country campsites can't be reserved and permits can't be issued more than 24 hours ahead of time. And most of the sites have port-a-let type toilets that have to be serviced by boat. I don't even remember when they started charging it wasn't always that way. Probably after they had to add toilets because people can't crap off of a platform into the water.

    The permits are $10 and then campsites are $2 per night. But at least the car tourists have to pay $10 just to enter.
    The trouble I have with campfires are the folks that carry a bottle in one hand and a Bible in the other.
    You never know which one is talking.

  5. #65
    Super Moderator Marta's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-30-2005
    Location
    NW MT
    Posts
    5,468
    Images
    56

    Default

    As a frequent user of the park, who is not quite local but not from very far away, I have a couple of concerns. Would this fee apply to the reservations-required shelters and campsites, or to all sites? I can see the fee applying to sites which require reservations, since you already have to call about them. It would not be a stretch to just add giving your cc # to that transaction.

    If it applies to all sites, however, that drastically increases the onerousness of making a trip to the park. There are many entrance points to the park, few of which are manned. If the park develops a system like Glacier's, making a weekend trip from Charlotte would become almost impossible. I'd have to drive up from Charlotte to the one and only ranger station that issues the actual permits, then drive around to the trailhead. In other words, I wouldn't have any time for hiking.In other words, the money is only a tiny issue for me, but the amount of time required for picking up a paid-for permit would be huge.It also does seem crazy that the cost of a back county permit would rival or exceed the cost of their front country campsites, which have amenities like lights a running water and bathrooms.
    If not NOW, then WHEN?

    ME>GA 2006
    http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=3277

    Instagram hiking photos: five.leafed.clover

  6. #66
    Peakbagger Extraordinaire The Solemates's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-30-2003
    Location
    Appalachian Ohio
    Posts
    4,406

    Default

    currently there are 4 types of sites in the Smokies: 1) established campgrounds, which require a fee and reservation in season, 2) shelters, which require a reservation but no fee, 3) backcountry primitive campsites that require a fee and reservation, and 4) backcountry primitive campsites that require neither fee nor reservation.

    i ask - to what of these 4 options is this new fee going to apply?

    is the fee for backcountry sites going to include the sites that currently do not require a reservation? those are the ones I tend to camp at more anyways - i dont mind paying my dues, but also dont like the hassle of the reservation system. i also hike a lot in the winter - in which I have never run into any enforcement of any of the rules. I'm lucky to see another soul many of the times I go. On one particular trip this past winter with the wind chill it was below 0 almost every night of my trip. only the crazy are out in that
    The only thing better than mountains, is mountains where you haven't been.

    amongnature.blogspot.com

  7. #67
    Peakbagger Extraordinaire The Solemates's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-30-2003
    Location
    Appalachian Ohio
    Posts
    4,406

    Default

    sorry typo - some backcountry sites do not require a fee - just reservation
    The only thing better than mountains, is mountains where you haven't been.

    amongnature.blogspot.com

  8. #68
    El Sordo
    Join Date
    02-20-2005
    Location
    Hiawassee, GA
    Age
    78
    Posts
    1,612
    Images
    28

    Default

    throughs could always hike the BMT and avoid shelters altogether.
    Dyslexics Untie!

  9. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by generoll View Post
    throughs could always hike the BMT and avoid shelters altogether.
    That sounds appealing, but wouldn't you still be subjected to the new rules (understand this is all just talk now, but I don't like the talk in this link) http://gosmokies.knoxnews.com/profil...ll-reservation

  10. #70
    First Sergeant SGT Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-03-2002
    Location
    Maryville, TN
    Age
    57
    Posts
    14,861
    Images
    248

    Default

    Here is what I got today for comment:

    Backcountry Office & Permit System Restructuring ProposalJuly 25, 2011


    Introduction
    Park management is considering a proposal to improve visitor services by restructuring the park’s backcountry reservations and permitting processes as well as assisted backcountry trip planning services. The purpose of this document is to brief park partners, cooperators and stakeholder representatives and to solicit feedback on this proposal.

    Background and Scope of Problem
    • The park consistently receives complaints about the amount of time and effort it takes for visitors to get a backcountry reservation and/or acquire backcountry planning information. This is a reflection of insufficient staffing for the volume of customers, both call-in and walk-in, requiring reservations and/or trip planning information.
    • The park also frequently receives feedback from the public that they desire to see more Rangers in the backcountry to address problems such as dogs on trails, and permit and camping violations. This includes overcrowding of backcountry campsites by non-permitted campers. A greater National Park Service presence is also desired in the Backcountry Information Office to provide trip planning services.
    • Non-reserved sites currently comprise over half the park’s backcountry campsite inventory. Because they are non-reserved, capacities are frequently exceeded, which results in food storage violations, increased wildlife encounters and the need to close campsites to protect visitors and wildlife. When the park needs to close one of these sites, staff must rely on closure signs at permit stations and at the sites themselves to notify campers, but this is not a reliable method of notification. A reliable system of notification is vitally important when closures are due to bears or other safety reasons.
    Proposed Solution and Outcomes
    1. Contract with Recreation.gov, an online and call-in reservation service, to which customers will have 24/7 access and can print their backcountry permit prior to arriving in the park. Recreation.gov is the official centralized reservation service used by all U.S. Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service recreational areas offering camping reservation services. These options will reduce the number of reservation calls to the Backcountry Information Office and allow staff to spend more time assisting customers with high-quality trip planning services, both walk-in and by phone. Although park research suggests that 80% of reservations will likely be made online and almost 20% by phone, there will also be an opportunity for customers to obtain reservations or permits on a walk-in basis at the Backcountry Information Office and potentially at one or two other select visitor contact stations in the park.
    The reservation system will dramatically increase reservation/permit customer service and ensure customers have greatly improved access to high-quality trip planning information, both through personal contacts and improved on-line planning tools. Customers will be able to make reservations and obtain permits at their convenience.
    1. Create a cost recovery fee structure for reservations that will generate revenue to cover both the contractor cost of the reservation system and support an increased National Park Service presence in the Backcountry Information Office and in the park’s backcountry.
    Although Great Smoky Mountains National Park has been offering free backcountry permits for years, the park is in the minority when compared to other parks with comparable backcountry operations. Most other parks with similar backcountry operations charge between $10 and $30 per reservation, and many have additional per person or per person, per night fees. Parks use these fees in support of their backcountry operations programs and, in turn, offer improved services to the public. Similarly, beyond providing access to a more convenient reservation/permitting service, Great Smoky Mountains National Park proposes using these fees to increase ranger presence in the backcountry and improve customer access to trip planning services through the Backcountry Information Office.

    Alternative fee structures that would allow the park to meet these objectives include:
    • $10 per reservation + $5 per person; or,
    • $10 per reservation + $2.25 per person per night; or,
    • $4 per person per night.
    1. Require reservations for all backcountry sites. The reservation system will have the capability of notifying reservations holders of site closures, safety issues, or emergency information via phone calls, text messages or emails.
    The park will be aware of, and have contact information for, users at each site. The park will be able to reliably contact each reservation holder with timely information about closures, safety issues and other important backcountry information.

    By placing all sites on the reservation system and having an increased ranger presence in the backcountry, negative impacts to both the natural environment and to the visitor experience from overcrowding and other conflicts will be reduced.

    Conclusion
    Implementation of this proposal will result in an improvement to customer service that will make obtaining backcountry reservations quick, easy and convenient for customers, as well as increase their access to Backcountry Information Office personnel for trip planning. Additional Rangers in the park’s backcountry will improve visitor experience by actively addressing commonly reported backcountry camper concerns.

    Additional Information & Comments
    • Written comments regarding this proposal may be addressed to the Park Superintendent by August 26th. Comments may be submitted via email to [email protected] or by mail to Great Smoky Mountains National Park, 107 Park Headquarters Road, Gatlinburg, Tennessee 37738.
    • The park will also hold two informational open houses regarding this proposal to which partners, cooperators, stakeholder representatives and the general public are invited.
      • Tuesday, August 16: Old Oconoluftee Visitor Center 5:30 – 7:30 pm.
      • Thursday, August 18: Headquarters Lobby 5:30 – 7:30 pm.
    Things that stand out to me:
    1. ALL back-country sites will require a reservation. Even the ones that I normally use, which are not reservation required will now require a reservation. That sucks as I often grab my pack and go. Unlike what this says, I have never found these sites to be overcrowded. In fact, I can only remember two times even having to share one of these camps with another person. Only one of these times was inside peak hiking season.

    2. The "quality" trip planning (when I do need a reservation) often includes hearing that my mileage is too high on some day of my trip and I can't go that far. Other than that I have only had one quality suggestion when one of the places I wanted to go was full. I don't need quality trip planning.

    3. There is still the option for doing a walk-in plan at the reservation office. BUT this doesn't allow me to do what I normally do and walk into the park somewhere other than the Sugerlands and drop off my permit as I am walking in at some other place using non-reservation campsites.

    4. I really don't want to pay for my permits, but I can sort of understand why. The Park uses paid maintainers on most of its trails, and that isn't cheap. However most of the damage is from horses in my experience. I would recommend a per-horse fee in addition to any fee for hikers. So a horse camper would need to pay $10 + $5 per person, + $20 per horse or something like that.

    5. This plan has no plan for thru-hikers. There are three long trails I can think of that go into the park (MST, AT, BMT) where thru-hikers will not be able to know ahead of time when they may arrive to the park nor have computer access, may not have phone access, and will not be able to swing past the Sugerlands before entering the park. They need to have an exception or some sort of process that works for these people.

    That is just based on my first reading of this. I hope to go to one of their Open House things and see what they have to say.
    SGT Rock
    http://hikinghq.net

    My 2008 Trail Journal of the BMT/AT

    BMT Thru-Hikers' Guide
    -----------------------------------------

    NO SNIVELING

  11. #71
    Registered User Carl in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-20-2011
    Location
    Port St. Lucie FL
    Age
    69
    Posts
    227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sly View Post

    How much of a local "supporter" are you if you're not willing pay?

    My whole point earlier is that we all DO pay, but that got seen as a political statement,
    so I can't really go into it any further. Anytime the government is involved, it's going to
    be political.

  12. #72
    Super Moderator Marta's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-30-2005
    Location
    NW MT
    Posts
    5,468
    Images
    56

    Default

    My experiences are about the same as yours, Sgt. Rock. Non reservation backcountry sites are rarely even occupied, let alone crowded. In addition, since I live to the east of the park, if I had to pick up permits at Sugarlands I would essentially never be able to take a weekend trip to the park again. The drive time would make that impossible.Thanks for posting that. I'll have to send them my comments.One way they might be able to deal with locals is to offer some sort of annual fee that would give blanket passes to the non reserved sites. And I agree that they should charge extra for horses.
    If not NOW, then WHEN?

    ME>GA 2006
    http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=3277

    Instagram hiking photos: five.leafed.clover

  13. #73
    First Sergeant SGT Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-03-2002
    Location
    Maryville, TN
    Age
    57
    Posts
    14,861
    Images
    248

    Default

    Good point on the blanket fee, I would probably do that as opposed to per trip. As I understand it there are also incentives in other place for volunteers to earn free time in parks, so a system that allows trail maintainers and other volunteers to earn a free park pass?
    SGT Rock
    http://hikinghq.net

    My 2008 Trail Journal of the BMT/AT

    BMT Thru-Hikers' Guide
    -----------------------------------------

    NO SNIVELING

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-01-2004
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Age
    74
    Posts
    587
    Images
    12

    Default

    Just a couple of thoughts on this:
    I really believe that most long distance backpackers don't trash the backcountry sites. It is more likely day hikers or weekenders. Of particular concern are the horse riders. These people are biggest offenders. I have personally witnessed riders tossing their drink cans into the woods. Plus they severely damage the trail surface, often requiring the trail to be re-routed or the ridge edges dug out. I could go on but won't

    Perhaps a minimal fee could be charged on Friday and Saturdays, but in general, I would be opposed to any fees for backcountry site use. It has been my experience that many backpackers attempt to not only pick up after themselves, but tend to take out a little extra. Also, there seems to be a pretty good network of volunteer Ridge Runners who do a lot of cleanup.

    I'm pretty frustrated with so many fees and taxes that we have to put up with. I just seems like there is no place left where you can just enjoy the outdoors without having to open your pocketbook.

    Another fear that I have here is that if this proposed fee system is successfully implemented here, it will eventually be implemented at every location on the National Scenic Trail System corridors. Can you imagine the costs to hike the AT when it is a minimum of $10 a night? Then you've got the hut fees in the Whites....

    Finally, I think the private contractor Recreation.Gov is a total ripoff. Here you've got a private contractor profiting off public lands that are suppose to belong to the public.

    I say leave things like they are and have everyone pitch in to keep sites clean. Isn't that the Tennessee way?

  15. #75
    First Sergeant SGT Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-03-2002
    Location
    Maryville, TN
    Age
    57
    Posts
    14,861
    Images
    248

    Default

    I agree with you. I'd rather not pay at all. Unfortunately I see the way the economy and budget are going and I am afraid that there will be a lot of pressure to start charging fees for things that were once free. I will personally push for no fees, but it may come to it anyway and I plan to have a thought out position on that as well.

    Pitching in to help should earn you free time anyway, so if one volunteers it should also be rewarded.
    SGT Rock
    http://hikinghq.net

    My 2008 Trail Journal of the BMT/AT

    BMT Thru-Hikers' Guide
    -----------------------------------------

    NO SNIVELING

  16. #76
    Registered User Carl in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-20-2011
    Location
    Port St. Lucie FL
    Age
    69
    Posts
    227

    Default

    I hadn't though that angle out completely.
    The AT is 100% Federal land.
    They (the Federal Government) can charge a usage (camping) fee.
    Of course, it would be for our own good. Our protection.
    Be careful what you bargain for when you vote.

  17. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pokey2006 View Post
    Hmmm, Mr. Bumpy might be on to something -- challenging the legality of such a fee. Because to charge me a fee to camp in the park is essentially charging me to use the park, at least as far as I'm concerned, and that's something they are not legally supposed to be able to do. Interesting.
    The original stipulation by the state of Tennessee was that there would be no charge on the Newfound Gap road. It had nothing to do about camping.

  18. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl in FL View Post
    My whole point earlier is that we all DO pay, but that got seen as a political statement,
    so I can't really go into it any further. Anytime the government is involved, it's going to
    be political.
    Considering todays near governmental closure, it's pretty apparent our taxes only pay part of the costs of doing business. You're lucky if $5 comes out of each persons pocket to fund the National Parks

  19. #79
    Registered User
    Join Date
    01-26-2007
    Location
    maine
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,964
    Images
    35

    Default

    When the local park started charging for entrance it galled me. Now I sticker 2 vehicles a year. I go thru the toll booth when it is open maybe once a year. But it covers me in parking lots and hiking on trails.

    It bothers me a whole lot less now.

  20. #80
    Registered User Plodderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-14-2008
    Location
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Age
    64
    Posts
    631

    Default

    No problem with the fee but hope the process is not to complicated to get the reservations.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •