View Full Version : Shenandoah National Park rules?
Woodturner
12-15-2015, 08:23
It’s still only 50/50 that I will be able to take a month’s long hike in 2016. I have the time, I have the money (Social Security check every month that would more than cover expenses) and I am sure that, even with Indiana winters, I can be in condition by my hoped for May 15 start date.
I made an unsuccessful try at a thru-hike in 1975. I quit because I had started skipping sections. Looking back, I have always thought that the experience in SNP was the beginning of the end. The backcountry rules were insane. You had to have a permit to be at a shelter, but you could not use the shelter, be a certain distance from the shelter or, even be visible from the shelter. As near as I can tell, although the language is slightly different, the rules are about the same.
As luck would have it, the easiest place for me to start my nobo “fill in the gaps and rehike others” hike is at Rockfish Gap. I will be starting by rehiking the hundred some miles that I feel led to my losing interest in the hike in 1975. Am I correct in thinking that SNP is basically a training exercise in stealth camping where any bare spot of ground is fair game as long as you have a permit and are far enough away from the trail, water sources, or any other taboos? Since the whole idea is to camp away from the trail, are there paths, faint or otherwise, leading to previously used campsites, or are you expected/encouraged to trample undisturbed vegetation looking for one? How are the permits worded for where you are supposed to be each night? If I get to go, I am seriously considering using a bivy sack in SNP just so I can hide better. I will also use the “pay” campgrounds when it works out mileage wise. Reading what is available online, I feel like you need a law degree to understand what is okay and what isn’t.
Once past SNP I hope to start hiking a little more seriously.
For what it’s worth, the Rockfish Gap start is being determined by Amtrak. I can walk to the local Amtrak station, and train 50 stops at both Staunton, VA and Charlottesville, VA.
Gambit McCrae
12-15-2015, 08:40
I have 2 comments:
1- I have never heard of these rules for SNP - I did the section almost 2 years ago and stayed in shelters every night I was in the park.
2- Why wouldn't you take SNP as serious as the rest of your hike? Don't under estimate any part of the trail, it doesn't take much to end a hiking trip short.
I have never found the rules in SNP the least bit intimidating compared to many other national parks. Yes you need a permit but you can self register right on the AT itself when you enter at Rockfish Gap. Anyone out for three or more nights can stay in the shelters (called huts in SNP). Designated tenting sites are available near shelters as well and perfectly legal. Water is usually available near the huts. Since the AT sticks pretty close to the ridge you're not always crossing streams but between the springs and developed sites (all open in May) water won't be an issue. Camping away from the huts takes some planning but can be done legally. SNP has better backcountry camping on the many fine side trails (some quite close to the AT) but in places near the AT as well. Study the trip plans at this link for campsite ideas.
http://www.nps.gov/shen/planyourvisit/campbc_at_trips.htm
Odd Man Out
12-15-2015, 10:35
SNP camping regulations are quite generous compared to many NPS properties. You need a permit but they are free and you self register when you arrive. You can stay at a shelter or camp by a shelter (first come first served just live everywhere on the AT). You can camp along the trail as long as you follow the rules. There are a few other high use summits that are restricted.
32969
Anyone who is open to deviating from the AT proper while still maintaining a continuous set of footprints would be well served to look at some of the excellent camping opportunities on side trails like the Rose River, easily accessible from Big Meadows and way more scenic than the AT section that is missed. There are a few other good detours.
Slo-go'en
12-15-2015, 11:50
I don't know what the OP is talking about. There were a couple of "day use" huts which were off limits (only one now) but that's it. I'm not sure how many people even bother with the registration tag any more. I didn't see many during my hike through the park last May. I hung a blank one on my pack just for show.
Good luck finding places to camp which aren't at a hut or campground. First there's the issue of water, or lack there of. Then there is the issue of being 1/4 mile from the road. Is the AT ever 1/4 mile from the road? I suppose it is in some places, but those places tend to be pretty rough.
The trail isn't all that busy in the middle of May so you shouldn't have any trouble staying at huts, I didn't (have trouble staying) and was there in that same time period (middle of May).
chknfngrs
12-15-2015, 12:50
OP must be thinking of a different park.
There are a lot of places where the AT is more than 1/4 mile from Skyline drive that could be suitable for camping but the hard part might be the requisite distance from the trail. I've seen many illegal sites right off the trail that I'm sure thru hikers use.
saltysack
12-15-2015, 13:26
Sure he's not talking about GSNP?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bigcranky
12-15-2015, 13:52
No, I remember when the "shelters" were day use only (I think a few might still be) and the "huts" were for overnight. But now there are actual regular AT 3-sided shelters as well. I think they are also called "huts" in the park.
Rest easy, woodturner, hiking in SNP is easy now. You can stay in the shelters, or camp in the nearby tentsites. If you want to camp elsewhere, there are specific rules oyu need to follow, but there is no need to do so. A permit is easy and free. No worries.
Yes, the standard three sided shelters are called huts in SNP. Along the route of the AT, there is only one day use only shelter (Byrds Nest #3) and there is no real reason to use it since Pass Mountain Shelter is a couple of miles to the south and Gravel Springs is maybe 10 miles north.
There are also PATC cabins in the park that are available for reservation in advance. These are not three sided shelters but enclosed cabins of various sizes. There isn't any reason to use them in my opinion.
To the OP: you are negatively exaggerating SNP Rules for the AT. As others have said, they are rather lenient for AT section and LD hikers going through SNP as compared to perhaps some other NPs. With your negative perspective of SNP it will decrease from the overall positive experiences you want. Readjust your mindset. SNP Rules are not the "insanity" you ascribe to them.
Further, it sure sounds like you are defining "stealth camping" as bypassing rules as if they shouldn't apply to you. This is exactly the type of mindset that may be increasing on the AT, and perhaps other trails in general, that causes SO MANY ISSUES for potentially not only yourself but for others. That mindset usually leads to a greater degree of rules.
Be a responsible self governing AT hiker that is knowledgeable of and abides by rules. Be considerate even IF you do not REALLY know why SNP rules are in effect. It's for everyone's benefit.
The OP is talking about his experience back in 1975. He is correct. You were not allowed to sleep in the shelters, you needed a permit, and there were restrictions on where one could camp.
squeezebox
12-15-2015, 20:10
Well said Dogwood.
All the huts were closed in the park for several years in the 1970s due to vandalism and abuse. The PATC agreed to take over stewardship of the huts. For awhile all the huts had a caretaker that collected a one dollar fee. That proved unworkable and the fees were eventually done away with. The Park also had some very strict rules about where one could camp. Had to be out of sight of the trail and a stated distance from any water source. Tickets for violations were handed out on a regular basis. I lived in Raleigh at the time and we avoided the Shenandoah Park due to these issues. I live near the park now and can say that the regulations now are fair and easy to follow.
The OP is talking about his experience back in 1975. He is correct. You were not allowed to sleep in the shelters, you needed a permit, and there were restrictions on where one could camp.
But he's under the mistaken impression that the rules are about the same.
I recall reading somewhere about SNP shelters being misused during the 70s. Here's an article that seems to confirm this:
http://www.southshenandoah.net/history-albums/before-the-park/83-hut-or-shelter.html
In the late 1970s, the Park closed all trail huts due to abuse by vandals. After some time and sometimes painful negotiations, the Park re-opened some huts, but removed a few permanently. As a result of the negotiations between the Park, the Appalachian Trail Conference (now Conservancy), the NPS Appalachian Trail Project (now Park) Office, and PATC, one hut in each of the three administrative districts of the Park was set aside for the exclusive use by PATC trail overseers (maintainers) when working on their trail sections. The three Maintenance Huts are:
Indian Run (North District)
South River (Central District)
Ivy Creek (South District)
Woodturner
12-15-2015, 21:28
Thank you Big Cranky. You answered my questions.
To some of the others, most particularly Dogwood.
My descriptions of SNP back country rules are based on the ONE time I hiked the entire AT in the park in 1975. In other words, almost forty years ago. What I stated is not an exaggeration of what the back country rules were at that time.
The same amount of time has elapsed since I have overnighted in the backcountry of GSMNP, and I think the rules may be different there after four decades as well. But, to defend myself, and compare the differences in the backcountry experience between the two parks when I hiked them in 1975 allow me to compare the rules AS THEY WERE AT THAT TIME.
The Smokies were about as straightforward as you can get. To hike the AT in the Smokies a Ranger would meet you at Fontana Dam and issue one of two kinds of permits. The first was a Thru Hiker permit. It did not reserve a space in any particular shelter, but it did not tie you down to being at any particular shelter either. You were required to camp near a shelter or other backcountry campsite. The only other stipulation was that you had to be out of the Park in seven days. The other permit did reserve shelter space and required you to be at a particular shelter each night. Since I planned on going into Gatlinburg (It was a favorite family vacation destination when I was a kid) I was not able to get a thru-hiker permit. After two days in town I walked out to Sugarlands to get my permit for the rest of the hike. The Ranger had a hard time helping me work out an itinerary because the space at each shelter had to be reserved. We managed it, but the point is, that it was possible to limit the number of people at each shelter each night.
Then there was SNP. Anyone who doesn’t want to believe it doesn’t have to. It’s the way it was.
Permits required you to be near a specific lean-to or at an established campground each night. But not too near a specific lean-to. Memory and a quick look at my journal indicates 250 yards. Certainly not in the lean-to. All lean-tos (PATC cabins didn’t even enter into the picture) were day use only. But distance itself was not enough. You had to be out of sight of the shelter as well. If a Ranger showed up at a lean-to and could see your tent, it was a fifty dollar ticket. The logic was that the areas around the shelters were suffering from overuse, primarily from large groups. So, instead of limiting the number of people who could use the shelter by way of a rigid permit system to combat the problem, the rules required everyone using the backcountry to tramp around areas they would never have tramped around in otherwise trying to find a spot to erect a tent. We all have our own opinions. My opinion, is that backcountry rules that require, even demand, further damage instead of confining it to a relatively small area is insane. Yes Dogwood the entire backcountry experience in SNP was an exercise in stealth camping. And, because my mindset is the exact opposite of what you seem to imply it is, I hated my time in SNP.
I’m glad to hear that the rules are no longer insane.
Wood turner,
It only takes a very few minutes to find the current backcountry policy for ANY National Park. They are all listed online.
Have a great hike. Count the bears in SNP.
Wayne
Sent from somewhere around here.
Woodturner
12-15-2015, 22:30
Wood turner,
It only takes a very few minutes to find the current backcountry policy for ANY National Park. They are all listed online.
Have a great hike. Count the bears in SNP.
Wayne
Sent from somewhere around here.
,
I had looked up and read the information online before I started this thread, but I wasn't sure that much, if anything, had changed. All the language seemed pointed toward random, previously used campsites, as opposed to shelters or areas around or near them. The first time through the park, playing hide and seek with the Rangers, was such a negative experience that it probably colored the way I read the current regulations.
Fair enough. You did your homework and ask for clarification. Glad you got the info that you need.
Have fun. GSMNP is more restrictive.
Wayne
Sent from somewhere around here.
I've never even seen a backcountry ranger in SNP much less have my permit checked. Sounds like much has changed since the 1970s
Alligator
12-16-2015, 00:49
I've never even seen a backcountry ranger in SNP much less have my permit checked. Sounds like much has changed since the 1970sI saw rangers 2 out of the 3 times I was sectioning through the park. One time, I saw a ticket given at the shelter I was staying. The other time, the rangers were checking up on hikers as the road was closed due to snow/ice. It is easy for the rangers to drop in as the road is nearby. It was easy to get a permit and to camp except one section of the park had a spacing issue and we hiked a long day. I think it also had something to do with how my endpoints were located too, I had divided the park into 3 hiking trips.
.
Mainly I am just mentioning that the rangers do venture backcountry. It was relatively easy to get the permits and to find suitable camping.
bigcranky
12-16-2015, 08:06
We saw rangers twice in SNP during a five day hike, both times at shelters. No tickets issued, but they were checking up on things.
I saw rangers 2 out of the 3 times I was sectioning through the park. One time, I saw a ticket given at the shelter I was staying. The other time, the rangers were checking up on hikers as the road was closed due to snow/ice. It is easy for the rangers to drop in as the road is nearby. It was easy to get a permit and to camp except one section of the park had a spacing issue and we hiked a long day. I think it also had something to do with how my endpoints were located too, I had divided the park into 3 hiking trips.
.
Mainly I am just mentioning that the rangers do venture backcountry. It was relatively easy to get the permits and to find suitable camping.
We saw rangers twice in SNP during a five day hike, both times at shelters. No tickets issued, but they were checking up on things.
This. Over the last 11 yrs or so I've seen SNP Rangers on foot on the AT the three times I've hiked it in it's entirety through the park. I've had my self registering permits checked on all occasions. On several other SNP hikes when not thruing the AT I saw SNP rangers in vehicles at THs and/or on foot every time.
The current SNP Rules for the AT are not difficult to follow IF you're a sensible agreeable individual that makes themselves aware of the rules and abides by them.
Have a great hike.
Interesting to see that I'm in the minority in terms of not having my permit checked. In any case SNP is so easy to deal with that it is a non issue. Permits are self issued and no quotas apply and the regulations are not that onerous.
squeezebox
12-16-2015, 20:16
What about dogs in SNP?
What about dogs in SNP?
http://www.nps.gov/shen/planyourvisit/pets.htm
Thanks for the interesting piece of history. There seem to be a lot of compplaints about some of the restrictive rules in place today on the trail, and the way people breaking those rules hurt everyone by bringing on more rules. It's interesting to hear about old restrictions that really do sound onerous. It seems we are relatively privledged in the way we are able to access the trail today.
I am interested in how you are planning to get from the Amtrack stations to the trail, as I am planning a hike starting at the beginning of the SNP or thereabouts and haven't worked out transportation yet.
johnnybgood
12-16-2015, 20:50
Add me to the list also of having my backcountry permit checked. Just happened once, but don't be lackadaisical about filling one out. Oh yeah, also worth noting-- he was polite and I was obliging
Hikerhead
12-16-2015, 21:44
I had mine checked once also. It happened in a parking lot as I was getting ready to do an overnighter. He looked it over, said everything was in order and wished me a good hike. Nice guy, very polite and you could tell he liked what he was doing.
Woodturner
12-16-2015, 23:16
I am interested in how you are planning to get from the Amtrack stations to the trail, as I am planning a hike starting at the beginning of the SNP or thereabouts and haven't worked out transportation yet.
There are shuttles that operate out of Staunton (maybe not based there) and taxis can get you to Rockfish Gap from Charlottesville. Since I don't know for sure that I will be able to go I haven't really ironed out all the details yet myself.
In 1986 I bicycled the Blue Ridge Parkway from Rockfish Gap to Cherokee, NC. The Taxi from the airport at Charlottesville to Rockfish Gap cost sixty bucks back then. Long before I leave home I will have checked with Charlottesville taxi companies and any possible contacts on the shuttle list to have the best price.
I'm figuring a night in a motel before I start hiking. At best, it is around 13 hours by Amtrak from where I live to Charlottesville. Actual time is often one to three hours more.
There is a local bus that will get you from the Staunton Amtrak to Waynesboro which is around five miles from the trail so it should be possible to get there at little or no cost.
Slo-go'en
12-17-2015, 12:52
There is a local bus that will get you from the Staunton Amtrak to Waynesboro which is around five miles from the trail so it should be possible to get there at little or no cost.
Once you get to Waynesboro there are a bunch of trail angles who will drive you up to the trail. Any of the motels in town will have the list of numbers to call.
Thanks for the info. I knew I'd figure out something, but it's better than I hoped - as someone who doesn't drive and thus always takes public transit, I expected it to be messier.
full conditions
12-18-2015, 14:55
To the OP: you are negatively exaggerating SNP Rules for the AT. As others have said, they are rather lenient for AT section and LD hikers going through SNP as compared to perhaps some other NPs. With your negative perspective of SNP it will decrease from the overall positive experiences you want. Readjust your mindset. SNP Rules are not the "insanity" you ascribe to them.
Further, it sure sounds like you are defining "stealth camping" as bypassing rules as if they shouldn't apply to you. This is exactly the type of mindset that may be increasing on the AT, and perhaps other trails in general, that causes SO MANY ISSUES for potentially not only yourself but for others. That mindset usually leads to a greater degree of rules.
Be a responsible self governing AT hiker that is knowledgeable of and abides by rules. Be considerate even IF you do not REALLY know why SNP rules are in effect. It's for everyone's benefit.
To be fair Dogwood, he is describing the rules for SNP in 1975 perfectly. I thru hiked the trail in 1976 and the rules were the same and he is in no way exaggerating. All shelters were for day use only and you were not allowed to camp within sight of one - or within sight of or fifty meters of: any road, trail, structure, campground, water source or other campers. It was extraordinarily difficult to comply with the rules - I managed but it was tough. They were trying to encourage dispersed camping at a time when back-country use was exploding and it made through hiking/ a tremendously difficult task. The current rules are far more reasonable and fairly easy to comply with - but back then....
Odd Man Out
12-18-2015, 15:09
Once you get to Waynesboro there are a bunch of trail angles who will drive you up to the trail. Any of the motels in town will have the list of numbers to call.
What about transportation options at Front Royal? I'm contemplating a hike through SNP. I could drive to FR in a day (650 miles). But getting to Rockfish gap so I could hike back to my car seems to be problematic without a very expensive shuttle.
Woodturner
12-19-2015, 07:58
What about transportation options at Front Royal? I'm contemplating a hike through SNP. I could drive to FR in a day (650 miles). But getting to Rockfish gap so I could hike back to my car seems to be problematic without a very expensive shuttle.
Since bus service isn't what it used to be (Unlike Amtrak, I couldn't find a listing of cities that Greyhound serves. It makes planning a trip kind of difficult.) your best bet might be to rent a car in Waynesboro and drive back to Front Royal yourself. Depending on the car, it looks like it would be in the fifty dollar range.
Once you get to Waynesboro there are a bunch of trail angles who will drive you up to the trail. Any of the motels in town will have the list of numbers to call.
Acute, Right or Obtuse? ;)
To be fair Dogwood, he is describing the rules for SNP in 1975 perfectly. I thru hiked the trail in 1976 and the rules were the same and he is in no way exaggerating. All shelters were for day use only and you were not allowed to camp within sight of one - or within sight of or fifty meters of: any road, trail, structure, campground, water source or other campers. It was extraordinarily difficult to comply with the rules - I managed but it was tough. They were trying to encourage dispersed camping at a time when back-country use was exploding and it made through hiking/ a tremendously difficult task. The current rules are far more reasonable and fairly easy to comply with - but back then....
I get the rules for 35-40 yrs ago.
However, is it fair to insinuate tanking up with H2O and then finding a legal flat space to disperse tent, tarp, cowboy camp, or hang 50 m away from the AT, day use only shelters, other campers, and roads is difficult...especially for a thru-hiker? REALLY? Wow!
TexasBob
12-19-2015, 23:12
However, is it fair to insinuate tanking up with H2O and then finding a legal flat space to disperse tent, tarp, cowboy camp, or hang 50 m away from the AT, day use only shelters, other campers, and roads is difficult...especially for a thru-hiker? REALLY? Wow!
Actually, in the northern section of the park (from 211 north to Front Royal) it is difficult to satisfy all those conditions and there are limited areas where you can legally camp that are flat. The rangers will gladly tell you where the legal flat areas are and even mark them on the map for you there just aren't many places that meet all the criteria.
Actually, in the northern section of the park (from 211 north to Front Royal) it is difficult to satisfy all those conditions and there are limited areas where you can legally camp that are flat. The rangers will gladly tell you where the legal flat areas are and even mark them on the map for you there just aren't many places that meet all the criteria.
Wow. Really? Not to sound elitist or snobbish but I would think most hikers especially supposedly vaunted AT Thru-hikers especially by the time they arrived in the S NP area could read a map and have some idea of where to legally pitch a tent on flattish ground or hang between Hwy 211 and Front Royal not excessively far off the AT. I'm quite familiar with that AT section in S NP. Off the top of my head I've easily managed to find 4 or 5 different legal sites in about 4 hikes of that section. Combine those sites with another different area, that as you say friendly S NP Rangers pointed out to me, it's not all that difficult to legally camp. Also, factor into it that AT thru-hikers typically find the AT in S NP a place to ramp up the daily miles on less strenuous trail. It is rather flat elevation wise so with a minimal degree of logistical considerations it shouldn't be that difficult getting through S NP legally or specifically that AT section between Hwy 211 and Front Royal.
Actually, in the northern section of the park (from 211 north to Front Royal) it is difficult to satisfy all those conditions and there are limited areas where you can legally camp that are flat. The rangers will gladly tell you where the legal flat areas are and even mark them on the map for you there just aren't many places that meet all the criteria.
There are at least five decent stealth sites between Thornton Gap and the northern SNP boundary, plus the two huts with designated tentsites. When I was involved with a shuttle service in the area we supplied "clients" with that info on request, but the Park Service frowns on publishing that sort of data because it would cause such sites to become overused and possibly abused.
All of these are close enough to the AT to be useful, and all but one are close (enough) to a water source. Just be observant and you can see four of these from the AT. That, and natural curiosity, is how I found them originally--and finding good campsites on your own is one of the joys of backpacking.
Dogwood is correct. If you go to the backcountry permit desk at the Byrd Visitor Center at Big Meadows knowledgeable specialists will point out potential camping areas on a map hikers can take with them. They may not provide a paint-by-numbers path to a specific campsite but will guide backpackers to a place where they can figure it out themselves. And then they can experience the joy, too. :)
Since bus service isn't what it used to be (Unlike Amtrak, I couldn't find a listing of cities that Greyhound serves. It makes planning a trip kind of difficult.) your best bet might be to rent a car in Waynesboro and drive back to Front Royal yourself. Depending on the car, it looks like it would be in the fifty dollar range.
enterprise has locations on both Waynesboro and Front Royal. I'll bet it would be cheaper and more flexible than such a long shuttle and could add extra benefit of a leisurely drive on skyline drive maybe hitting some side trails and overlooks if so inclined.
Actually SNP does public an extensive list of possible trip ideas along with campsite selections! I've posted this link a number of times. Difficulties in the mid 70s notwithstanding today I find it easy to hike and camp in the park meeting all regulatory conditions. The section closest to me, and therefore the one I hike most often, is 211 to Front Royal. Check out the trip plan sorted by location for many great ideas. Not all are on the AT but many are quite near the AT and easy to get to.
http://www.nps.gov/shen/planyourvisit/campbc_trips_all.htm
TexasBob
12-20-2015, 10:46
........Not to sound elitist or snobbish but I would think most hikers especially supposedly vaunted AT Thru-hikers especially by the time they arrived in the S NP area could read a map and have some idea of where to legally pitch a tent on flattish ground between..................
I lived in Virginia for 25 years until this summer and hiked that section of the park frequently. In the last 3-4 years the number of illegal campsites along the AT has increased. It is possible that someone other than thru hikers are doing this but having the skill to find a legal campsite and doing so are two different things.
Actually SNP does public an extensive list of possible trip ideas along with campsite selections! I've posted this link a number of times. Difficulties in the mid 70s notwithstanding today I find it easy to hike and camp in the park meeting all regulatory conditions. The section closest to me, and therefore the one I hike most often, is 211 to Front Royal. Check out the trip plan sorted by location for many great ideas. Not all are on the AT but many are quite near the AT and easy to get to.
http://www.nps.gov/shen/planyourvisit/campbc_trips_all.htm
This page is a great resource to NPS' Shenandoah site added this decade. I just checked out one of many hike itineraries: the (AT) NOBO entire SNP hike, 15mpd average, seven nights. A lot of good info there, though with one exception it uses the AT hut system for six of the seven nights. And some de ja vu: the one non-hut overnight occurs "east" of the South River Maintenance Hut--one I found in the '90s and included in our list to former shuttle clients. It's along the Saddleback Trail, and there are some good, legal, flat sites back there close to where the trail turns sharply right. The spring is close to the hut (which is for trail crew to store tools and stay in -- locked up and not usable by hikers), though I once found the nearby privy unlocked and usable. YMMV.
Some of the non-AT hikes don't use the huts, of course, and are more adventurous. Such as the Pocosin/Laurel Prong/Staunton/Slaughter hike. True to their admonition to others, they don't tell you where precise tentsites are but take you to a more general location where you usually have several to choose from. But you've got to scope them out yourself. Joy!
If the three maintenance huts (Ivy Creek, South River, Indian Run) were still open to AT hikers it would vastly improve options for them, but I understand the need for PATC to use them as they are currently. To the credit of both PATC and SNP, they did convert the former day-use Byrds Nest north of Skyland into an overnight hut, with bear poles, tentsites, picnic table, etc. a few years back. It has a great spring but it's 0.4-mi. down a steepish fire road. Oh well. That addition to the hut system cut down on a 15.3 mi. day between Rock Spring and Pass Mt. Huts. Nothing for most thru-hikers, but very difficult for some others.
I lived in Virginia for 25 years until this summer and hiked that section of the park frequently. In the last 3-4 years the number of illegal campsites along the AT has increased. It is possible that someone other than thru hikers are doing this but having the skill to find a legal campsite and doing so are two different things.
10,000's of conscientious AT hikers have no problem LEGALLY CAMPING and HIKING that 28 mile stretch between Hwy 211(Thornton Gap) and Hwy 522(Front Royal) with actually NO DIFFICULTY when availing themselves of the LEGAL places to camp AND demonstrating a reasonable degree of personal responsibility for their hiking behavior so to attempt to make it sound like it is so difficult which allows wiggle room to illegality doesn't fly.
This entails the side of HYOH that is often ignored ... being personally legally responsible for your hike.
Some these days will find difficulty in everything. So MANY seek to complain and CHOOSE TO BE offended instead of seeking solutions and making an effort to be personally responsible even when CLEAR SOLUTIONS are communicated. With that mindset it opens the door to the self serving notion "the rules don't apply to me."
Puddlefish
12-20-2015, 16:10
Some these days will find difficulty in everything. So MANY seek to complain and CHOOSE TO BE offended instead of seeking solutions and making an effort to be personally responsible even when CLEAR SOLUTIONS are communicated. With that mindset it opens the door to the self serving notion "the rules don't apply to me."
It's not even exclusively "these days."
It's too easy to just look at the new generation and think, what a bunch of entitled brats, demanding their own rights, while blindly stomping on the rights of others! Behave this way at a shelter, don't behave that way! Be tolerant of me when I break the rules that don't suit me, but don't violate the rules that make my life a little more convenient!
In truth, I see this kind of unintentional selfishness in my 83 year old father, in my children, and in my own peers. Looking back in history, it's been happening since the dawn of mankind. I even see it in myself, and at a minimum, I at least try to be aware of when, and why I'm doing it.
I stand rightly corrected Puddlefish. :) You are right making that distinction.
Y'all are making my head hurt.
Would somebody please go hiking.
Merry Christmas!
Wayne
Sent from somewhere around here.
WILLIAM HAYES
12-24-2015, 00:36
not a problem in the SNP you can stay at the lodges if you plan your mileage out otherwise not a problem staying in the huts or designated camping areas