PDA

View Full Version : Time to deny out of country visitors who want to thru-hike?



BaxterBear
12-18-2014, 14:56
I am wondering what the overall idea of denying temp visa's to people who are not United States citizens who come to the USA with the intention of thru-hiking the AT. Would this help lower and slow the amount of hikers who start at Springer each year? Laurie P said that 50 people starting a day is unsustainable so this would lower than number who leave each day.

I know it might seem odd to suggest this, but as the ATC and Baxter State Park have both expressed something needs to be done. This seems like a quick way to directly lower the number of hikers. Any reduction is good to lower the environmental impact.

Share what you think!

imscotty
12-18-2014, 15:01
What do I think? I think that would be wrong.

I also do not think that 50 hikers a day is necessarily 'unsustainable.' They way things are implemented now may be unsustainable, but I think measures can be taken to deal with these volumes without excluding people. Many excellent suggestions have been made on this site.

Starchild
12-18-2014, 15:09
To me wrong on many levels.

MuddyWaters
12-18-2014, 15:30
Unfortunately, US citizens cannot get permits to hike the JMT or Grand Canyon corridor , while others from other countries do.

Sure seems to be something wrong with that to me. I hate to exclude anyone, but US citizens SHOULD come first. Period.

Connie
12-18-2014, 15:33
The european hikers, in my experience, in Glacier National Park are better equipped and more experienced hikers.

U.S. Citizens are excluded from permits, to hike in JMT or Grand Canyon corridors?

MuddyWaters
12-18-2014, 15:45
The european hikers, in my experience, in Glacier National Park are better equipped and more experienced hikers.

U.S. Citizens are excluded from permits, to hike in JMT or Grand Canyon corridors?

Everyone goes in a lottery on the day you apply for, 4 or 6 months in advance, and the in-advance permits are difficult to get. The # of applicants is many times the number of permits available.. People from other countries get lucky and get them when US citizens dont.

Fixed capcity model, and the problem getting worse with time.

Slo-go'en
12-18-2014, 15:45
Non-US citizens probably amount to 0.5% of the number of hikers. If you look at the list of completed thru hikes posted by the ATC for this year, you'll see that the vast majority of thru hikers (at least the ones who actually finished) are from the east coast, which stands to reason.

From this we can conclude that either East Coast hikers are better prepared to hike the AT or not too many from outside the area come here.

fluffkitten
12-18-2014, 16:00
Do you have figures for how many of us foreign types are hiking the AT? I have a feeling we're a drop in the bucket considering the expense plus visa hoops we need to jump through just to get into country for long enough.

Would be interesting seeing how you'd intend enforcing it. You'd probably need the immigration people to deny visas.

Hot Flash
12-18-2014, 16:07
I think it would be a terrible idea to deny foreigners the ability to hike our trail.

Coffee
12-18-2014, 16:10
Terrible idea and it won't solve the problem unless trails are currently overrun with foreigners which I don't believe to be the case.

Odd Man Out
12-18-2014, 16:13
This is about the worst idea I have heard.

Some of the best experiences I have had in national parks is sharing the park with international visitors. I especially enjoyed chatting with the motorcycle gang from Finland at the Grand Canyon. But I do have another idea. During rush hour, the police are going to close the highways and only let local people drive on them. This will solve all of our traffic problems.

ALLEGHENY
12-18-2014, 16:15
Why come here to spend money? Everything is made in China. :confused:

StealthHikerBoy
12-18-2014, 16:16
This issue could be fixed simply: just get rid of the first dozen or so shelters on the trail.

TNhiker
12-18-2014, 16:17
wellllllllllll..............

unless someone is 100 percent native america indian----we are all foreigners...........

Lyle
12-18-2014, 16:33
Absolutely terrible idea to place any special roadblocks to international visitors. Same rules should apply to all.

One thing that may slow folks down, is to eliminate dropping hikers off from FS42. Make that a "pick-up only" access point for if folks change their mind in the first 10 miles or if friends/family want to hike the first few miles with a thru-hiker. If no method to enforce this is available/feasible, then just close that access point to all non-emergency or non-official operations. You want to hike the AT, hike to the beginning, like you are required to do in Maine. Not saying that would solve the problem, but it won't hurt and it may reduce the initial "party atmosphere".

Jeff
12-18-2014, 16:36
At Green Mountain House 8% of our hiker guests are from outside the USA. Some may be hiking the Long Trail, but the majority are AT thruhikers. The international hikers bring a unique perspective and getting to know them is a real treat.

The suggestion of this thread is NOT a good one. How would we Americans like to be restricted from hiking the Camino in Spain or the Te Araroa in New Zealand ??

gpburdelljr
12-18-2014, 16:36
wellllllllllll..............

unless someone is 100 percent native america indian----we are all foreigners...........

American Indians are no more native than I am, their ancestors just arrived from other continents before my ancestors did.

BCPete
12-18-2014, 16:41
I am wondering what the overall idea of denying temp visa's to people who are not United States citizens who come to the USA with the intention of thru-hiking the AT. Would this help lower and slow the amount of hikers who start at Springer each year? Laurie P said that 50 people starting a day is unsustainable so this would lower than number who leave each day.

I know it might seem odd to suggest this, but as the ATC and Baxter State Park have both expressed something needs to be done. This seems like a quick way to directly lower the number of hikers. Any reduction is good to lower the environmental impact.

Share what you think!

Wow ... :datz:datz. This kind of thinking is like blaming a Prius driver for bad air quality, while you drive a Hummer to the convenience store 100 yards down the block.

Coffee
12-18-2014, 16:43
The suggestion of this thread is NOT a good one. How would we Americans like to be restricted from hiking the Camino in Spain or the Te Araroa in New Zealand ??

Precisely. I have a number of international destinations on my bucket list including the Camino, Swiss Alps, and Te Araroa. I'll probably avoid the destinations that fleece foreigners (Kilimanjaro, Nepal, etc). Tourism is good for the US, even from hikers who may not be dropping the big money.

Fairway
12-18-2014, 16:47
The suggestion of this thread is NOT a good one. How would we Americans like to be restricted from hiking the Camino in Spain or the Te Araroa in New Zealand ??


And that is exactly what would happen to American hikers. Tourist visas issued to Americans already have an inflated cost in other countries simply because our government likes to charge it's visitors more than everyone else. Its a two way street.

Tipi Walter
12-18-2014, 16:56
wellllllllllll..............

unless someone is 100 percent native america indian----we are all foreigners...........

Once gold fever hit us Americans the native americans lost everything and most of their land. We wanted it and we took it. And look what we did to it.

HogFan
12-18-2014, 17:02
wellllllllllll..............

unless someone is 100 percent native america indian----we are all foreigners...........

Exactly.
Like the picture I've seen posted of the native American indian chief. Right below his picture it says, "Actually, you're ALL illegals."

Sarcasm the elf
12-18-2014, 17:15
Why would we limit access for anyone and why would we target one group of people? All of these threads are frankly getting silly.

The whole point of the study that started these recent discussions is to find ways to improve the trail, the person in charge of the study has experience designing better trails and campsites to properly disperse users while protecting the surroundinng area.

50 people a day walking down a section of trail and camping beside it is just fine. This really comes down to a need to educate the inexperienced people using the trail, add create infrastructure that can handle the number of users such as adding a few more privies and more and better designed campsites in the southern section (which is likely what the study will conclude)

Doc
12-18-2014, 17:30
Boy, what a can of worms that opened up. I think that exposure to international hikers is one of the premier experiences of the trail. They have almost without exception been wonderful hiking companions, sharing a very different perspective on the trail experience. I have also found them better stewards of the trail than some of us locals. I am reminded of this contrast whenever I cross the Maine border into New Brunswick. I suddenly leave Maine with its farms in poor repair and rusting equipment and cross over into Canada where most farms seem well cared for, barns painted, machinery under cover, etc. I don't think the slobs on the trail are from other countries.

rickb
12-18-2014, 17:31
What do I think? I think that would be wrong.

I also do not think that 50 hikers a day is necessarily 'unsustainable.' They way things are implemented now may be unsustainable, but I think measures can be taken to deal with these volumes without excluding people. Many excellent suggestions have been made on this site.


Thank you you for that post.

If Baxter Bear really lives in Boston, he has no doubt has been up Mount Monadnock (not on AT) and would also know that is purported to be the second most climbed mountain in the world-- with about 125,000 people summiting each year.

And that it is a wonderful place, and environmental degradation is minimal.

The current conditions in the southern Appalachians may be unsustainable, but to focus on just raw numbers is limits the range of solutions.

Conditions are different, of course-- Mount Monadnock is primarily a d estimation for day hikers.

But one could then look to the Whites and see how crowds are managed there-- and I am not talking about just the huts.

The point is, there is no reason to look at one probable cause of problems encountered on the Trail and focus just on it, with this sort of rubbish.

The trail is a diverse place. Issues and solutions that would be appropriate for one place, are not in another. Even Baxter expressly stated he did not want to separate people from his park, and I fact went further as said he wanted them to full partake in what it had to offer-- just not at the expense of bird and beast.

Whipping up a frenzy to include blaming tha ATC for increased usage of the trail, and suggesting that people from other countries should not be welcomed with open arms is wrong. It also misses a fundamental understanding of what the trail is.

Not going back to edit this.

Traveler
12-18-2014, 17:43
I am wondering what the overall idea of denying temp visa's to people who are not United States citizens who come to the USA with the intention of thru-hiking the AT. Would this help lower and slow the amount of hikers who start at Springer each year? Laurie P said that 50 people starting a day is unsustainable so this would lower than number who leave each day.

I know it might seem odd to suggest this, but as the ATC and Baxter State Park have both expressed something needs to be done. This seems like a quick way to directly lower the number of hikers. Any reduction is good to lower the environmental impact.

Share what you think!

I think the issue (in view of the BSP memo) is more behavioral than its one of sheer numbers. Most anytime I have run across internationals on trails they have always been very well mannered. I have no idea what percentage of hikers attempt/complete thru hikes of the AT versus the total, but I don't believe they are in significant numbers to be statistically relevant.

Damn Yankee
12-18-2014, 17:49
I hate the term foreigner. Non US citizens is a much better term. As for stopping them, I think it's a bad idea. They don't have the type of hiking we have here in the US. They also don't have the wild, untamed, wilderness with all our NP and SP. I say, let them come and enjoy.

WingedMonkey
12-18-2014, 18:02
I think we should ban folks from Boston. Not just from thru-hiking but from the whole trail.

Just think how less beaten the Whites would be without anyone from Boston (AMC stronghold) going from hut to hut.

:banana

Connie
12-18-2014, 18:03
I don't know if it is "sweet lime" or "slaked lime" used in "privys" before "anerobic micro-organisms". Thay are rather easily killed off: phosphates, detergent, laundry soap, etc. in the privy. I do not have that. I have seen well-ventilated design "privys" in Montana, and, in Northern California that had no odor.

No "deodorants" were used either.

I keep hearing you have a "privy" problem.

I suggest the design team:

1. find the successful designs used, and

2. consider "lime" because "anerobic micro-organisms" are so fragile.

It is a thought.

I know, from experience, of our parks and our highway "Rest Stops" if paper supplies are kept up people do not "litter" or "trash" the facillities.

DavidNH
12-18-2014, 18:05
Baxerbear.. I am willing to bet that the would be thru hikers of the AT are 99% American. Your suggestion would do absolutely nothing to solve the problems existing now on the AT but it would cause a lot of ill will among other countries.

illabelle
12-18-2014, 18:07
Why would we limit access for anyone and why would we target one group of people? All of these threads are frankly getting silly.

Agreed. And honestly, since BaxterBear has shown himself in multiple posts to be a person of wisdom and understanding, maybe, just maybe, he started this thread so we could reach this conclusion.
Why single out foreigners? Why single out young people? Why single out thru-hikers? Idiocy lives in every group, as does maturity and responsibility. Let's target lawbreakers, plain and simple.
Let's listen to legitimate complaints and make the changes that are needed (whether it's tearing the shelters down or building more).
Then let's educate, at multiple points on the trail, and through multiple media.
Then let's enforce, in a reasonable and consistent way.

TNhiker
12-18-2014, 18:08
American Indians are no more native than I am, their ancestors just arrived from other continents before my ancestors did.



ahhhhhhhhh...........

but the white man came and stole their land away from them claiming it as their own...........

Connie
12-18-2014, 18:11
Hmm, didn't the earliest human skull in North America discovered looked like CPT Picard. No?

It wasn't Data, that was fiction.

Alligator
12-18-2014, 18:20
Sorry to close this but we have to fumigate.

29195