View Full Version : More on Thrus and Shelters ..Neo's attitude
DawnTreader
05-03-2006, 17:40
When the AT was first proposed, Benton Mckaye instilled a communal aspect to the trail that has existed to this day. It was his vision that shelters be constructed for people travelling on the trail. During this time, a thru-hike was considered impossible, therefore, shelters were designed, for anyone and everyone. In my mind, a thru hiker has no more right to a shelter than a section or weekender. And despite others opinions, mine will not change when I am able to thru. I have had a bad experience in an almost full shelter, when thru's kept pouring in, past dark, in good weather. Nobody questioned others claim to spots in the shelter, and I, having arrived earlier in the evening, around 5 oclock, to an empty shelter, was asked if I "minded" pitching my tent.. Of course I didn't.. I just didn't feel like it. I would argue that a hiker on a week long trip, who hasn't been trail hardened that season, probabbly needs the convinience of a shelter more than a NOBO whose been truckin' for 4 months. I set up my tent and went back to the shelter to debate the issue, and all thru's played the infamous "I"M a thru, I have first dibs" card, which IMO is BS. Come to find out, 2 thru's didn't carry shelter, and others, whom had just returned from a hostel in town (warm beds, full tummies, gennerally content), were just as strong in their stance against non thrus using shelters when thrus were forced to tent.. I will not avoid shelters in the future, I have met some excellent people at shelters. Mrs. Gorp, Billygoat, and countless others have unknowingly contributed to my interest in trail life, and are great models for idea. From what I've seen, If thrus insist on relying on shelters alone for accomidation, they should get there at a decent hour to avoid these hassles. I hate sleeping in tents too. SO I BOUGHT A HAMMOCK!!!!!! Shelters are for all, not some.. This prevalent thru hiker thought process really sucks. Thank you to all thru's who sleep in their tent/hammock at a shelter site without polling shelter guests to the nature of their hike, to decide if he/she deserves/has the right to be there.
RockyTrail
05-03-2006, 17:51
DT, don't let anybody push you around.
It's no different than claiming a picnic table at city park; first come, first serve, it doesn't matter if you like to eat there every Tuesday or whatever.
People know this, they just like to see what they can get with BS.
We all pay our taxes (well, most of us anyway:D )
I hate sleeping in tents too.
What do you have, a mouse in your pocket?
I love sleeping in my tent. Better still out, under the stars.
TJ aka Teej
05-03-2006, 18:29
Benton Mckaye...
...and the A.T.C. ever intended the Appalachian Trail to be used for thru-hiking.
I also don't believe that Benton MacKaye or ATC ever intended the AT to be built for thru-hiking, but realistically speaking, it wasn't in their grasp. Still, in the 10 years from completion to when Earl did thru-hike, only a few had section hike it thus far and all bets were off.
Lots of people get caught up in the thru-hiker mania, from thru-hikers themselves to hostel owners and trail angels, who'll 1st serve thru-hikers. I can see their point in a way, but when on the trail everyone is equal.
... and all thru's played the infamous "I"M a thru, I have first dibs" card, which IMO is BS. Come to find out, 2 thru's didn't carry shelter, and others, whom had just returned from a hostel in town (warm beds, full tummies, gennerally content), were just as strong in their stance against non thrus using shelters when thrus were forced to tent..
I have aspirations of attempting an end to end hike of the AT one day. I can't imagine feeling like this towards my fellow backpackers. Carrying no shelter is selfish and irresponsible. The last thing I'm gonna do when I'm out in the woods is kiss someones ass. The thru hiker has tons of time, and is lucky to have that luxury. Elitist attitudes are a real put off. I still love and prefer my tent, though.:sun
A problem with shelters is when an entire church group, scout troop, etc, etc.. come in and take over the entire shelter along with tenting spots. A hiker, especially a thru hiker, that depends entirely on shelters should be prepared for some really BIG disappointments and possible trouble while on the trail. The old rule that says "the shelter isn't full until everyone is in" might be a tough one to enforce sometimes.
The old rule that says "the shelter isn't full until everyone is in" might be a tough one to enforce sometimes.
Short story...
About 6 other thru-hikers claimed the Low Gap shelter before a few of us got there during a rain. They had their **** spreadd everywhere drying and never attempted to make any room saying there was none. Fine, I set up my tent.
I went to make a fire in the fire ring in front of the shelter to warm up and dry some of my stuff. One of the shelter people, snug in their sleeping bag, ask that since the smoke was coming in, could I not. Everything was wet and I was having trouble getting a fire going anyway, so I took a brief break and asked to see the register. After reading the latest, I tore out a few pages and got my fire going.
brancher
05-03-2006, 19:54
Franklyt, the notion that a thru gets "first dibs" on a shelter is bull cr*p. I've been in secions and the shelters are there on a first come, first-served basis, and don't let amyone else tell you they are not.
Heck, I showed up at one shelter once with a free space, only to be told by that day's 'mayor' that they were holding a spot for a slower member of their group. I simply said, "Sorry, guys, it doesn't work that way," and proceeded to lay out my stuff.
But the point is, there are always folks who want to interpret (or make) rules to serve themselves, even if it's wrong. Beware of that.
Oh, yeah, one more point: I have NO sympathy for the dumb bunny who takes off thru-hiking or sectioning the trail with no shelter, thinking that he can alway 'squeeze into' a shelter or rely on the pity of someone else. It is bad planning, and not bringing a tent or tarp (or hammock) doesn't give anyone priority on shelters.
Franklyt, the notion that a thru gets "first dibs" on a shelter is bull cr*p. I've been in secions and the shelters are there on a first come, first-served basis, and don't let amyone else tell you they are not.
Heck, I showed up at one shelter once with a free space, only to be told by that day's 'mayor' that they were holding a spot for a slower member of their group. I simply said, "Sorry, guys, it doesn't work that way," and proceeded to lay out my stuff.
But the point is, there are always folks who want to interpret (or make) rules to serve themselves, even if it's wrong. Beware of that.
Oh, yeah, one more point: I have NO sympathy for the dumb bunny who takes off thru-hiking or sectioning the trail with no shelter, thinking that he can alway 'squeeze into' a shelter or rely on the pity of someone else. It is bad planning, and not bringing a tent or tarp (or hammock) doesn't give anyone priority on shelters.
i agree 100%:cool: neo
RITBlake
05-03-2006, 20:00
If I was in a full shelter and a thru hiker, weekend hiker, section hiker, whatever, rolled up and told me that they had 'dibs' or had the right to my spot, or that their friend was holding their spot, I would laugh at them and suggest they keep walking, or set up there tent. If you are stupid enough to not even carry a tarp or a light tent w/ youm, well then you deserve to be the one stupid enough hiking in the dark, in the rain. This shouldn't even be an issue.
"Can't we just get along." Rodney King.
Sure there are jerks on the trail. Some are thru hikers, some are section hikers, and some come in large groups. But, don't get caught up with the negative people. Look at all the great people out there. Those thru hikers that do move over after you have arrived wet and in the dark. The section hiker that decides to put up their tent so they do not disturb sleeping hikers at shelter midnight. The church group that sets up camp 100 yards from the shelter, in the rain so that they do not bother others. Or the day hiker that stops and shares some trail magic. The Trail will be what you make it. A kind, caring place with great people or whatever you decide it to be. We have alot of power, life is a little sweeter when we see the good in others or can find some good in the situation. The Trail will be as good as you want it to be or as bad as you want it to be. For me I'll take the high road.
rusty075
05-03-2006, 20:20
This prevalent thru hiker thought process really sucks.
"prevalent" is a huge exageration. In my experience the vast majority of thru's feel exactly the same way about shelter space that you do. Of course there will be a few, who through either ignorance or ego, think that they are special because they decided to take 6 months off to go hiking instead of just a weekend, that's to be expected. It also happens in reverse, where a weekend'er built their itnererary around staying in specific shelters and are recalitrant when told that they've arrived too late and there is no room left in the inn. Either way, it's a load of crap, and the best thing you can do is to re-educate them, and to not back down. Some of them probably really think that there is a rule somewhere that people on a thru-hike are supposed to get special treatment...there's no point in letting them go on thinking that.
My personal philosophy: Until you've finished your thru-hike you are just a section hiker, so you shouldn't expect treatment that is any different than that given to someone out for just a few days. That should apply to everything from shelters to hostels to trail magic.
Maybe that philosophy will change once my fracture heals and I'm back on the trail. :)
Pennsylvania Rose
05-03-2006, 20:24
Although most shelters are first come, first serve, the Smokies have a reservation system. I have had problems when I took the trouble to plan my trip, register with rangers, and get my spots in a shelter reserved. I show up at the shelter, it's full of thru-hikers, but I have a reservation. They claim that since they got there first, I have to tent. I always carry a tent (or tarp now) with me, so I don't have to sleep in the shelter. It's the attitude that bothers me. I've seen the same attitude in several trailjournals. It really irks me because I gave up my spot in shelters in the Smokies when I hiked from Springer to Erwin since I was the last long distance hiker to arrive and weekenders with reservations showed up later. I was always reminded by a multiple time thruhiker I was with that we all return to being weekend warriors eventually.
That being said, all the thruhikers we shared shelters with last month in the Roan Highlands were positive influences on my kids.
SGTdirtman
05-03-2006, 20:52
If someone ever asked me to leave a shelter because they were a "thru-hiker" and had more right to use it than me I'd laugh at them.
granted I have not, nore will I ever sleep in a shelter but regardless. Everyone on the trail is equal and no one deserves any special treatment because they walked more miles. Suck it up, if your late you dont get a seat, The trail is getting more and more popular and a thru-hiker especially should be well aware of this and have planned it.
In my opinion and I know I'll get ragged for it, hikers need to use tents, hammocks, tarps etc more and stop relying on shelters so much. theres millions of acres of forest and you all try and cram into a 12 foot wooden box. Then again I generally dont fit in with the majority of hikers so I keep to myself at all costs anyway whereas most hikers are social creatures it seems.
Please, no quotes from that model citizen, Rodney King!
DawnTreader
05-03-2006, 22:02
SGT.. good post. I realize now that I should have stood up for myself in this situation, however, I was (generally still am) a newbie, and I seriously thought there might be some rule or regulation giving first dibs to thrus. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't let that happen again, and I would take the opportunity to educate. I agree that hikers should utilize their personal shelters more. Its dangerous not to carry one, so when you do, why wouldn't you use it more often..it seems silly to carry such a high weight item for such a long time, and not use it. Shelters are just not my cup of tea I guess.. HYOH..
Rusty: Prevalant was not a smart word. your right, thank you..
Programbo
05-03-2006, 22:06
Unless society has changed more than I think I never met any thru-hikers back in the 70`s who would have dreamed of thinking they had priority..As a matter of fact they would have been the ones giving up their spot to a new arrival.Of course the trail was a lot les traveled back then and I can`t recall but a handful of times I saw a shelter exceed it`s capacity
It seems odd to me that there is such a fight for space in a mice infested, dark and dirty, hell hole in the woods that at best sleeps a few stinking, snoring, farting drop-outs from society (of which, I count myself one - proudly). Being the courteous type, I leave shelters to those who consider them a place worth fighting over.
sliderule
05-03-2006, 23:00
Although most shelters are first come, first serve, the Smokies have a reservation system. I have had problems when I took the trouble to plan my trip, register with rangers, and get my spots in a shelter reserved. I show up at the shelter, it's full of thru-hikers, but I have a reservation. They claim that since they got there first, I have to tent.
You are right and they were wrong. In fact, a non-thruhiker is not permitted to tent! Unless they missed the big sign down at Fontana Dam, they knew they were wrong. The sign was put up because of this very situation. The NPS is holding four slots per shelter for thruhikers from April 1 - June 1. So after the first four thruhikers arrive, its "space available " if they don't have a reservation.
It seems odd to me that there is such a fight for space in a mice infested, dark and dirty, hell hole in the woods that at best sleeps a few stinking, snoring, farting drop-outs from society (of which, I count myself one - proudly). Being the courteous type, I leave shelters to those who consider them a place worth fighting over.:sunTin Man Rocks, Only time I was ever glad to see one was when I reached High Roan Knob in Feb. with cold temps, bad wind, and snow everywhere. I had a tarp and had considered hunkering down like the outdoorsman I wish I was, but damn if that empty shelter wasn't the easiest alternative. Slept like a baby. 3 deg F.:cool:
Traction
05-03-2006, 23:44
i just carry a shelter on my back..
gets heavy after a while though.
fiddlehead
05-04-2006, 00:22
You know the best way to solve this whole problem is simply to tear them all down!
And what would be wrong with THAT?
Hey! Shelters keep all the rif raff away from all the best tentsites!:D
MedicineMan
05-04-2006, 01:35
and also the chance of Hanta virus
Hey! Shelters keep all the rif raff away from all the best tentsites!:D
Exactly. And they are a good place to hang for meals (especially when the weather isn't cooperating) and sitting around a fire laughing at the hikers staying in the mouse hotel.
Blue Jay
05-04-2006, 07:20
You know the best way to solve this whole problem is simply to tear them all down!
And what would be wrong with THAT?
No, a much easier way would be to realize there is no problem. Let's tear your house down, what would be wrong with that? Don't go away mad, just go away.
thru hikers and long distant hikers should always carry some kind of shelter,the AT has many shelters unlike are other main trails,so people get use to hiking from shelter to shelter,but thru hikers dont have a right to dictate who can come in and who goes,I bet this guy was shocked!I have heard it though!we deserve the shelters we hiked 20 miles!so what!ky
peter_pan
05-04-2006, 09:54
I vote for the tear the shelter down approach....eliminate the attitude problem (regardless of whose they are)....eliminate the "snore zone"....eliminate the mice and possible HV virus... return all hikers to a higher degree of self reliance...increase the value of experience and skill to include LNT....
Come to think of it the best part of current shelters is they concentrate the problems where they can be visited or left...
Pan
PS.... as a realist, I recognize the shelters will probably stay till they fall down (couple are close) or they are replaced by some group, happens all the time.
PSS... thanks to all whose use the shelters....leaving the peaceful, pristine spots to us who seek them out...campsite options are endless for the hammocker with water from the last spring.
if they tore down the shelters, i bet the annual thru-hiker crowd would thin out considerably
Footslogger
05-04-2006, 11:19
if they tore down the shelters, i bet the annual thru-hiker crowd would thin out considerably
======================================
Hmmm ....never thought about it that way.
Not sure what the effect would be on "the anual thru-hiker crowd" but it definitely would cut down on the number of threads here at Whiteblaze.
'Slogger
Shelters are good because it gives considerate people a place to leave their trash, extra gear, books, etc.:rolleyes: It also provides the occasional homeless person a home for the winter. :eek:
I always got a kick out of the hiker who gets up at 4:30am in order to get space at the next shelter, waking everyone up, then complains about others who stay up a little past dark thus preventing them from getting a good nights sleep. Oh yeah, these hikers always snore loud enough to rattle the roof. :(
As for myself, I've come to accept shelters and will use them if I'm in the mood. I always try to leave them cleaner than I found them, even if I don't stay. I do think there would be a lot less people on the A.T. if there were no shelters.:-?
Shelters are part of the AT culture and should remain. Perhaps we merely need to suggest that the local maintenance crews post a Shelter Etiquette sign. You know, for the resident mice to read and understand that they should only break into the packs and food of the rude hikers.
and also the chance of Hanta virus
:D hanta virus can be a good thing:cool: neo
max patch
05-04-2006, 15:47
If there was a "Hillary Clinton Shelter" somewhere (of course) in NY would neo sleep in it?
Two Speed
05-04-2006, 16:00
If there was a "Hillary Clinton Shelter" somewhere (of course) in NY would neo sleep in it?Spend the night? Very high probability. Sleep? Probably not and I sincerely doubt anyone else would, either. :D
RockyTrail
05-04-2006, 17:47
If there was a "Hillary Clinton Shelter" somewhere (of course) in NY would neo sleep in it?
So that's where they filmed "Blair Witch Hunt" :D
I vote for the tear the shelter down approach....eliminate the attitude problem (regardless of whose they are)....eliminate the "snore zone"....eliminate the mice and possible HV virus... return all hikers to a higher degree of self reliance...increase the value of experience and skill to include LNT....
Come to think of it the best part of current shelters is they concentrate the problems where they can be visited or left...
Pan
PS.... as a realist, I recognize the shelters will probably stay till they fall down (couple are close) or they are replaced by some group, happens all the time.
PSS... thanks to all whose use the shelters....leaving the peaceful, pristine spots to us who seek them out...campsite options are endless for the hammocker with water from the last spring.
:D why eliminate the mice and possible HV virus,hanta virus can be a good thing:cool: neo
I checked the pic and almost had a movement myself. :D
grrickar
05-04-2006, 22:09
I enjoy meeting the occasional hiker on the trail and speaking with them, but I have never been a social person off the trail and if someone does not speak do me on the trail I generally keep to myself.
I have met a few people in shelters (in the Smokies) and none of them were thrus. We never had issues with people being asked to leave, but if I was asked to by anyone, unless they were injured or freezing to death I would tell them to pack sand.
That is the trouble with society IMO: people thinking they are entitled to something. Just because you are a thru does not mean people should bow before you. I have not seen this behavior, but if I did I would not hesitate to inform them of my opinion if they came at with with that load of crap.
The trail is for everyone's enjoyment, and the shelters are for whoever claims them first. If I ever thru-hike, I would not feel any differently, and I would not expect anything from my fellow man because I decided to go on a long walk one day.
Heck I need to be in the woods more than thrus - I have to sit behind a freaking desk all day and deal with corporate BS. They get to walk in the woods and enjoy nature for a few months - I get a week;)
You can have my spot in the shelter when you pry it from my cold dead fingers you damn dirty apes! LOL :D
MedicineMan
05-04-2006, 22:15
Lone Wolf what say you?
Baltimore what say you?
Thanks Nean for your opinion on this....to me its moot, the shelter is to stop and say hello to everyone, cook, sign the register, then down the trail to find the stealth spot for the HH.
fiddlehead
05-04-2006, 23:34
No, a much easier way would be to realize there is no problem. Let's tear your house down, what would be wrong with that? Don't go away mad, just go away.
My house doesn't have this problem (the one of thru-hikers acting like they have preference) I have a simple rule. Enjoy my house but after 3 days, you must leave. It works. (at least it used to, I now live in Thailand where everyone is welcome but, of course, i would have the same simple rule)
I'm not sure how to take the line about my going away. I don't see it happening.
I know the shelters are a big part of the personality of the AT. They provide the social life because they are a place to gather. The other trails in the country don't have them. Hence there is a bit less social life but a bit more wilderness experience. Who knows which is right or wrong.
But if and when shelters start being reserved for thru-hikers, to me that is wrong. Very wrong. and i would then vote to tear them all down.
One can see how heated the debate on shelters can get. I mentioned the organized groups earlier that take claim to shelters, probably a worse problem is where you get a smaller section group, say 3-5, that try to keep everyone else out of the shelter by spreading their stuff out and not bothering to move. This is how a very bloody fight got started at IceWaterSpgs shelter in GSMNP one year, some guys came in and moved their stuff for them. Hell broke lose. With all the problems with the shelters they'll still remain apart of the trail. If the shelters where tore down, you would start seeing homemade fire rings every 100 yd or so, probably more trail destruction (a lot is concentrated around shelters now) and the log books would be no longer. So, they have their place. Besides, where would the mice go?
One can see how heated the debate on shelters can get. I mentioned the organized groups earlier that take claim to shelters, probably a worse problem is where you get a smaller section group, say 3-5, that try to keep everyone else out of the shelter by spreading their stuff out and not bothering to move. This is how a very bloody fight got started at IceWaterSpgs shelter in GSMNP one year, some guys came in and moved their stuff for them. Hell broke lose. Bloody? Were charges filed? Sounds like rural legend to me, but I wasn't there. I will say that the rules in GSMNP in regards to backcountry stays could lead to conflicts due to the reservation system. I really don't think shelters are worth fighting for.
sliderule
05-05-2006, 01:23
I arrived at Icewater Springs one time in the early afternoon. There were several packs hanging in the shelter and there was a padlock on the gate. A couple hours later two couples showed up. Seems they decided to lock the shelter to keep their gear safe while they hiked out to Charlies Bunion and back. It was lucky for them that I did not have a padlock. I would have been real tempted to leave early and lock the gate on the way out!!!
I now live in Thailand where everyone is welcome but, of course, i would have the same simple rule
Heidi and I may visit you in Thailand this winter, if you are there then. :sun
I arrived at Icewater Springs one time in the early afternoon. There were several packs hanging in the shelter and there was a padlock on the gate. A couple hours later two couples showed up. Seems they decided to lock the shelter to keep their gear safe while they hiked out to Charlies Bunion and back. It was lucky for them that I did not have a padlock. I would have been real tempted to leave early and lock the gate on the way out!!!
Well, want be anymore padlocking, no fence on newest shelter. This shelter has had a lot of problems over the years due to its proximity to 441 (Newfound Gap). I would bet its the most used shelter on the most hiked section of the entire AT. I hope the fences come down on the rest of the GSMNP shelters. After all, the bears need a place to stay. LOL
Tramper Al
05-05-2006, 11:43
I am a sectioneer and make no apologies for it.
My experience, like others', is that a great variety of people, nice or mean, exist in all of these AT hiker categories that we insist on making: thru, section, weekend, day, tourist, etc.
However, I find any degree of shelter entitlement coming from anyone to be equally ugly and sad. I don't stay in shelters a lot during the busier summer season, but I have had a few problems. Once a couple had set up their tent inside the shelter. Another time on a rainy evening in the 100 Mile I asked (really nicely) if some room could be made for me in the shelter. The answer was no, and I had a rather wet night enduring 3-4 inches of rain under my tarp. For the thru-hiker arriving 10 minutes after me, the answer was yes and space was made. I saw a similar thing happen to a friend just a couple of nights earlier, and that shelter wasn't nearly full.
I carry a tent or tarp on all of my overnight hikes, of course. Everybody should, of course. Shelters are first-come first-served, of course. Good people should (and do) strive to accomodate anyone who comes after them and want to squeeze into the shelter, of course.
Much is made both on trail and online about the "thru-hiker culture". Some would argue that one of the principle differences between a sectioneer's vs. a thru's experience is this culture. The air of entitlement and this professed shelter-priority system is certainly ugly, and disappointing both to hear about and to observe personally. If the experience of being out on the trail for months brings any thru-hiker a sense that he is better than others, and deserves preferential treatment, then I feel sorry for him. This isn't what I want to think of when I consider the positive thru-hiker culture that I am missing out on. And if you want argue that this stuff doesn't happen, why do we see so much discussion about it?
I would think that any member of the thru-hiker "community" or any other AT traveller for that matter, would as a matter a pride welcome the hiker that arrives at a shelter after he does. Is hiking the AT making you a better person or not? As I said, people can be nice or mean, and I naively believe that hiking the trail should make us all more the former.
sliderule
05-05-2006, 12:20
I would think that any member of the thru-hiker "community" or any other AT traveller for that matter, would as a matter a pride welcome the hiker that arrives at a shelter after he does.
That brings up the question of "late arrivals." I have witnessed several situations where hikers show up at a reasonably full shelter well after midnight, then go about their business of unpacking and preparing dinner (or maybe it's breakfast) like they are the only people there. Recently, the first hiker of a late-arriving group shined his flashlight into the shelter, then yells loudly to the other members of his party, "Hey, there's people in here!" Imagine that!!! Who would have guessed?
So, it seems to me that if you get to an occupied shelter after well dark, the proper thing to do is to camp elsewhere.
Ok, I called GSMNP yesterday and got a permit and made reservations at 4 shelters. I asked Rick at headquarters, who was very polite, that if my Sons and I got to a shelter and it waqs full, what would happen if we had to tent. He said that we would be fined, that our permit and reservation ensured a spot in the shelter. I then said well, before a problem started i would just leave. The official answer was to make whoever was in the shelter without a permit leave. That didn't sound cool to me, especially if it required a confrontation, which like stated previously is not worth it. reading this thead has been very interestingto me but how often is shelter space really a problem? We are going through the park from newfoundland gap to the fontana dam. I would like to think that maybe these problems are few and far between but i don't know, never been through a park that requires you to stay in a shelter.
greg
Footslogger
05-05-2006, 12:50
Must be something new about the fines. During my thru in 2003 I never stayed inside a shelter in the Smokies. By the time I got there at night the shelters were already bursting at the seams. I set up a tent within eyesight of the shelter, made dinner, hung my food and drifted off to lala land. Never had anyone say a word about a fine.
I supposed there's a "formal" system and then the way it "really works".
'Slogger
cool, that's the answer i wanted to hear. as long as they exercise common sense that's great, and i imagine they would. They were real helpful with the permit and reservations and telling me where i could go to self register, maybe that is just the "official response to the question".
thanks,
greg
here's the deal in the smokies: if you are a thru-hiker and the shelter is full, you can tent. only thru-hikers are allowed to tent. otherwise, you have to have a reservation and a permit and stay inside the shelter. which is why thru-hikers have to make way for people with reservations. there's rarely a problem. thru-hikers know the drill or they should because there's a big sign at fontana explaining everything.
I believe, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, that thru's are allowed to tent in the Smokies, but not people with reservations. People with reservations have to stay in the shelter, but thrus stay in the shelter only if there's room left after all the permit spaces fill up.
freefall
05-05-2006, 14:23
Ok, I called GSMNP yesterday and got a permit and made reservations at 4 shelters. I asked Rick at headquarters, who was very polite, that if my Sons and I got to a shelter and it waqs full, what would happen if we had to tent. He said that we would be fined, that our permit and reservation ensured a spot in the shelter. I then said well, before a problem started i would just leave. The official answer was to make whoever was in the shelter without a permit leave. That didn't sound cool to me, especially if it required a confrontation, which like stated previously is not worth it. reading this thead has been very interestingto me but how often is shelter space really a problem? We are going through the park from newfoundland gap to the fontana dam. I would like to think that maybe these problems are few and far between but i don't know, never been through a park that requires you to stay in a shelter.
greg
The very last line on the signs in all the GSMNP shelters is : Avoid conflicts.
Funny, their system seems to open the door to conflicts.
sliderule
05-05-2006, 14:30
there's rarely a problem.
Except during April & May!!!
sliderule
05-05-2006, 14:51
cool, that's the answer i wanted to hear. as long as they exercise common sense that's great, and i imagine they would. They were real helpful with the permit and reservations and telling me where i could go to self register, maybe that is just the "official response to the question".
thanks,
greg
Unlike the volunteers who man the Backcountry Information Office, the NPS employees at the Backcountry Reservation Office typically don't have a lot of actual experiencce in the backcountry. So the "official response" represents reality to them. The Smokies backcountry is long on rules and short on enforcement. The system works fairly well as long as there is voluntary compliance. But there are a significant number of folks who take advantage of the sparse enforcement and "hike their own hike" without the benefit of a permit or reservation. And they are not even smart enough to become a "thruhiker" on paper. A few get caught; the vast majority do not. It's been that way for years. It's not going to change.
Here is another intersting but little known fact. A thruhiker permit becomes null and void if the hiker leaves the AT. So every thruhiker that goes into Gatlinburg and then resumes his hike at Newfound Gap is breaking the rules if he does not get a reservation for the remainder of the park. (I am not suggesting that this rule should be enforced, but it is on the books.)
sliderule
05-05-2006, 15:05
I believe, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, that thru's are allowed to tent in the Smokies, but not people with reservations. People with reservations have to stay in the shelter, but thrus stay in the shelter only if there's room left after all the permit spaces fill up.
But thruhikers are not permitted to tent unless the shelter is full. It gets interesting when the weekend hikers with reservations don't show up until midnight. "Excuse me, Mr Thruhiker, I have a reservation. So wake up, get out of your sleeping bag and go put up your tent."
Personally, I think that a shelter reservation should become null and void if you have not arrived at the shelter by the end of evening civil twilight. (Plenty of hotels cancel your reservation at 6 pm.)
Chef2000
05-05-2006, 16:35
Mingo got it right, you the thruhiker has the least right to shelter space, in the smokies. in 2000 I tented everynight in the smokies. The people with reservations have the right to the spot. This is one of the few places that actually spells out the rules for you. But some thrus do not like rules.
Chef2000
05-05-2006, 16:36
Besides all you shelter rats should try 200 miles on the Colorado trail, zero shelters, zippo, nix, nine.
sliderule
05-05-2006, 16:45
Mingo got it right, you the thruhiker has the least right to shelter space, in the smokies.
The hiker with the least "right" is the one with no permit.
alanthealan
05-05-2006, 17:11
Heck I need to be in the woods more than thrus - I have to sit behind a freaking desk all day and deal with corporate BS. They get to walk in the woods and enjoy nature for a few months - I get a week
I almost want to respond.
Chef2000
05-05-2006, 17:30
ok sliderule got it right
Programbo
05-05-2006, 20:33
Besides all you shelter rats should try 200 miles on the Colorado trail, zero shelters, zippo, nix, nine.
But the shelters are part of the lore..history and charm of the Appalachian Trail..Or at least they were..I always used to get a special feeling at them..Like you could feel the connection with the past in the air..A timelessness
fiddlehead
05-05-2006, 21:24
Heidi and I may visit you in Thailand this winter, if you are there then. :sun
Nean, you and Heidi are more than welcome any time. we have lots of room and live 5 minutes from one of the best beaches in the world here on Phuket. Come on over.
I'd say the vast majority of thru's I've met on the trail did not have this attitude regarding shelter space being given to thru's as a priority
Naturally they thought they were superior :)
If its a problem at a shelter with an adamant thru, just start your thru-hike that night and become a yo-yo'er
Besides all you shelter rats should try 200 miles on the Colorado trail, zero shelters, zippo, nix, nine.
I've never done the CT but I believe it's about 500 miles and has at least 1 shelter, uno, one.:p
:D stealthy hammocking eliminates all these issues:cool: neo
Chef2000
05-06-2006, 15:11
The CT is 469 miles, the 210 miles I did from Waterton to Buena Vista had no shelters.
The CT is 469 miles, the 210 miles I did from Waterton to Buena Vista had no shelters.
Oh, that 200 miles...:D ;)