Shelter dwellers

[Tater1]

I have been reading the forums for over a month and have heard of homeless people living in shelters along the trail. How prevelent is this? How much of a problem has this caused people using the shelter system legitemately?

[takethisbread]

I have been reading the forums for over a month and have heard of homeless people living in shelters along the trail. How prevelent is this? How much of a problem has this caused people using the shelter system legitemately?

I do not see this very often at all, if ever. I can't tell the diff between a thru hiker and a homeless person, though. And I don't stay in shelters either, as I prefer hammock or tent.


I wouldn't worry. Mice are a bigger problem than homeless folks

[flemdawg1]

Very rare, I've only heard of 2 on these forums and never actually seen any. Most shelters are just too isolated to be useful for homeless people.

[Tennessee Viking]

Usually only for shelters close to roads or towns.

[The Weasel]

I have been reading the forums for over a month and have heard of homeless people living in shelters along the trail. How prevelent is this? How much of a problem has this caused people using the shelter system legitemately?

What a breathtakingly insensitive post. Where to begin?

First, "homeless people" stay in shelters - if they do - for the same reason others do: They provide (are you ready for this?) shelter. So it's not clear to me how that isn't using them "legitemately" [sic].

Second, "homeless people" are "people" too. (If in doubt, look at the phrase: It calls them people.) So if they choose to walk along the trail, for whatever reason, the shelters are as open to them as to all those who, I guess, must be called "homehaving people."

Third, despite the desires of some, there is no "means qualifying test" for shelters, either like Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady used ("the desarvin' poor and the undesarvin' poor") nor based on anything else. Yes, in this case the law does allow the rich and the poor to sleep under shelter.

Fourth, "homeless people" are generally pretty good folk. They eat, sing, laugh, cook, wash, work and do all the other things that "good" people do. A proportion have health and emotional issues, but generally no more than the "homehaving" people that they today probably were not that long ago, before Countrywide and Chase foreclosed them out of their homes. So I'm not sure why anyone should care.

Lastly, despite the desires of a few, we aren't at the stage of having special badges for people to wear to identify their "status". So, as noted, it's kind of hard to tell the difference between some "homeless" people and long distance hikers. (Or, as Will Smith showed, between the "homeless" and "stockbrokers" who might even be both!).

Sorry, Tater. I don't think you'd be happy on the AT. You'd worry too much about who all "these people" are.

TW

[Luddite]

I have no problem with homeless people sleeping in the shelters but no one should squat in them for more than a couple of days.

[max patch]

I think the OP is drawing the distinction between "hikers" who spend the nite and move on versus "homeless people" who may treat the shelter as a permanent residence.

To answer the OP I've never seen a "homeless person" take up residence in a shelter. I've read about a couple, but, then again, don't believe everything you read on an internet forum.

Bottom line, no need to worry about "homeless people." The fornicaters, masturbaters, snorers, alarm clock setters, people that arrive at midnite, people that leave at 5 a.m, 3 a.m pissers, smokers, etc etc etc are the ones who should concern you.

[The Weasel]

Max, I think I know what you mean, and I agree that the others are more of a problem, except I don't think I saw enough "fornicaters."

But shelters in parks and forests (state and federal) permit "residence" up to the max time in the park, which is usually about 2 weeks. Doesn't matter if you're homeless or not; you can stay that long, and no longer. But up to that amount of time, it also doesn't matter.

TW

[YohonPetro]

On the Finger Lakes Trail a couple families took permanent residence in some of the shelters - unfortunately they weren't there at the time so I could give them the stink-eye.

[Gray Blazer]

What a breathtakingly insensitive post. Where to begin?

(Or, as Will Smith showed, between the "homeless" and "stockbrokers" who might even be both!).

Sorry, Tater. I don't think you'd be happy on the AT.

TW

Breathtakingly insensitive? Relatively mild if you ask me.

I did not know Will Smith was a homeless stockbroker.

Last statement was more insensitive, but, not breathtakingly, (is that a legal word?) again, if you ask me, which you did not.


The 2 homeless guys I saw last summer may have been nice guys, but, IMO, I had the feeling they were trying to avoid the law. (I realize my feelings may be breathtakingly insensitive. YMMV)

[max patch]

I did not know Will Smith was a homeless stockbroker.

YMMV)

You need to get out more often. Blockbuster express. Worth the buck.

[Gray Blazer]

You need to get out more often. Blockbuster express. Worth the buck.

You mean he's not the Fresh Prince of Bellair anymore? Where does he teach?

[Helios]

I knew a nice dude who stayed at the Ed Garvey shelter for over a month. He wore blue jeans, and was always there as I hiked up that way each weekend for a month. He kept the place clean, and a nice fire going. This was January 2009. He said he had an apartment in Baltimore, but just wanted to stay out in the woods for awhile. He'd hike down the AT, then follow the C&O Canal towpath into a small town to resupply - opposite direction from HF - forgot the name. He'd thought about hiking the AT up into PA and back, but didn't really have good hiking stuff - as he said. He rather enjoyed just hangin' out there.

I've been back through there many times since, but haven't seen him again.

[LoneRidgeRunner]

A "homeless" person has the same rights as any of us as long as they don't stay past the designated time limits in the particular area and as long as they don't steal from people. But who says the "homeless" are thieves? Certainly not me. Many of the thieves are people who have homes. Discriminating against the homeless is no different than racial discrimination. In today's screwed up economy more and more people are becoming homeless.
Watch "Rambo First Blood" and see what can happen to people who discriminate against the homeless. I know, I know, it was just a movie but those Oregon hick town cops got what they had coming to them! Go Rambo!!
Go honest homeless folks!:banana

Just think about it....the next homeless person could be you. Would you want to be discriminated against because you were a victim of the economy? Many may have part time jobs that don't pay enough to pay rent...etc....So, they take shelter wherever they can and not be ran off because they are poor....

[LoneRidgeRunner]

The 2 homeless guys I saw last summer may have been nice guys, but, IMO, I had the feeling they were trying to avoid the law. (I realize my feelings may be breathtakingly insensitive. YMMV)

Did they give you reason to believe they were trying to avoid the law or is that just your biased opinion of people who may be good folks but just down on their luck?
Sounds like discrimination against the poor to me....Yes..I took this sort of personally ...I have been homeless in the past but never stole a dime form anyone and never "squatted" in an AT shelter that are apparently only for the wealthy...in your opinion...Can't never tell ..I may be homeless again sometime and just hope I don't meet some of the people who posted negatively about them here..Enough said...

[Tater1]

Weasel it apears to me you are not happy in life, you can not answer a simple question. I feel sorry you can not read a simple queston for what it is worth. Before you go assuming I have no knowledge perhaps you could come back with a clarifacation but I guess that would be to easy for someone who lovess to preach.

[bulldog49]

What a breathtakingly insensitive post. Where to begin?

First, "homeless people" stay in shelters - if they do - for the same reason others do: They provide (are you ready for this?) shelter. So it's not clear to me how that isn't using them "legitemately" [sic].

Second, "homeless people" are "people" too. (If in doubt, look at the phrase: It calls them people.) So if they choose to walk along the trail, for whatever reason, the shelters are as open to them as to all those who, I guess, must be called "homehaving people."

Third, despite the desires of some, there is no "means qualifying test" for shelters, either like Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady used ("the desarvin' poor and the undesarvin' poor") nor based on anything else. Yes, in this case the law does allow the rich and the poor to sleep under shelter.

Fourth, "homeless people" are generally pretty good folk. They eat, sing, laugh, cook, wash, work and do all the other things that "good" people do. A proportion have health and emotional issues, but generally no more than the "homehaving" people that they today probably were not that long ago, before Countrywide and Chase foreclosed them out of their homes. So I'm not sure why anyone should care.

Lastly, despite the desires of a few, we aren't at the stage of having special badges for people to wear to identify their "status". So, as noted, it's kind of hard to tell the difference between some "homeless" people and long distance hikers. (Or, as Will Smith showed, between the "homeless" and "stockbrokers" who might even be both!).

Sorry, Tater. I don't think you'd be happy on the AT. You'd worry too much about who all "these people" are.

TW

What a breathtakingly over the top response. He's obviously referring to squatters who take up permanent residence in the shelters. Like the homeless you find on city streets, they aren't hard working folks who lost a job, they are people with mental disorders and/or drug or alcohol addictions. So go ahead and get your panties in a bunch Mr politically correct. :rolleyes:

[LoneRidgeRunner]

What a breathtakingly over the top response. He's obviously referring to squatters who take up permanent residence in the shelters. Like the homeless you find on city streets, they aren't hard working folks who lost a job, they are people with mental disorders and/or drug or alcohol addictions. So go ahead and get your panties in a bunch Mr politically correct. :rolleyes:

Another stereotype ....What a CROCK!! Do you know this for a fact...."Mr. Politically correct?" :rolleyes:

[LoneRidgeRunner]

On the Finger Lakes Trail a couple families took permanent residence in some of the shelters - unfortunately they weren't there at the time so I could give them the stink-eye.

May the "stink eye' they give back to you far overpower yours!

[LoneRidgeRunner]

It's interesting that every one of the posts I have seen here discriminating against the "poor" were written by what would be referred to between the years of 1861 and 1865 as "Yankees" but, since the Civil War has been over since that time I used that terminology ONLY as an example of immature and stereotyping discrimination.

It's no different than racial or religious discrimination. Hopefully some of you guys will face the same predicament sometime. It would serve you right to have the tables turned on you.

[hikerboy57]

its very hard to distinguish between a homeless person and a thru hiker. The thru hiker in most cases smells worse, and probably doesnt have a full set of cookware.Anyone who's not abusing theier length of stay has equal rights in a shelter. I assume the OP wasnt talking about homeless shelters, where you seldom find thru hikers.

[Pedaling Fool]

Spend enough time out there and you'll see it, but it's not that common. I wish more homeless people would frequent the shelters, as far as I'm concerned they can have them;).

[elmotoots]

Another stereotype ....What a CROCK!! Do you know this for a fact...."Mr. Politically correct?" :rolleyes:


Kind of like you saying anyone who posted from a northern state was a Yankee. When you really don't have a clue.

I wonder how many Southern Boys living in the North you offended.

Being immature and stereotyping is ok for some I guess.

[Pedaling Fool]

BTW, it's very easy to spot a homeless person vs a thru-hiker. They may smell the same, but it's very easy with minimal observation abilities, to see all the differences.

[LoneRidgeRunner]

Kind of like you saying anyone who posted from a northern state was a Yankee. When you really don't have a clue.

I wonder how many Southern Boys living in the North you offended.

Being immature and stereotyping is ok for some I guess.

I also said in the post you're referring to that I used that terminology ONLY as an example.....of course you wouldn't remember that part....I really don't care where the discriminating people originally came from ..the bottom line it was discrimination either way you look at it..So I really don't care if they were offended or not....In fact I sort of hope they were...

[Pedaling Fool]

It's interesting that every one of the posts I have seen here discriminating against the "poor" were written by what would be referred to between the years of 1861 and 1865 as "Yankees" but, since the Civil War has been over since that time I used that terminology ONLY as an example of immature and stereotyping discrimination.

It's no different than racial or religious discrimination. Hopefully some of you guys will face the same predicament sometime. It would serve you right to have the tables turned on you.
I'm a yankee living in conquered land:D

[LoneRidgeRunner]

I'm a yankee living in conquered land:D

I also noticed in your replies that not once did you badmouth the poor and homeless ....good for you....regardless of where you came from makes no difference.....that's the point I was trying to get across in my last post replying to whatever his name is from Indiana..I done forgot..That's how much I'm concerned about his rantings...

[LoneRidgeRunner]

I also noticed in your replies that not once did you badmouth the poor and homeless ....good for you....regardless of where you came from makes no difference.....that's the point I was trying to get across in my last post replying to whatever his name is from Indiana..I done forgot..That's how much I'm concerned about his rantings...

It was elmoot I think

[restless]

What a breathtakingly over the top response. He's obviously referring to squatters who take up permanent residence in the shelters. Like the homeless you find on city streets, they aren't hard working folks who lost a job, they are people with mental disorders and/or drug or alcohol addictions. So go ahead and get your panties in a bunch Mr politically correct. :rolleyes:

Homeless people come in all varieties. Yes , there are those who have mental illnesses as well as drug and alcohol addictions. There are some who have lost their job, hence their livelihood. There are those who are homeless by choice. There are those who are homeless due to circumstances outside of their control. Some are old. Some are young. Some are working to improve their situation. Some have given up all hope. Some of them decide to hike the AT. Some of them even served our country to provide the freedoms that everyone on this site enjoys. A lot of them, you wouldn't even recognize as homeless if you met them on the street or in the mall. IK should know. I was one.

If homeless people make you uncomfortable, it's not because they have issues. You do.

BTW OP-I have seen squatters take up residence in shelters, but usually for only a brief period of time. 99% of the time, I wouldn't worry about them. Enjoy the ride.

[Majortrauma]

I ran into a homeless dude at I think it was Johns Hollow spring 09. He claimed to be eating crawdads and whatever else he could find. No doubt he ate a few but he was not subsisting on them. He was not an accomplished survivalist for certain and was seriously lusting the cigarettes we had.
We shared the shelter with him and some extra chow we had which he nearly choked on from eating it so fast.
He was no threat to us and all was fine.

[mykl]

What a breathtakingly insensitive post. Where to begin?

First, "homeless people" stay in shelters - if they do - for the same reason others do: They provide (are you ready for this?) shelter. So it's not clear to me how that isn't using them "legitemately" [sic].

Second, "homeless people" are "people" too. (If in doubt, look at the phrase: It calls them people.) So if they choose to walk along the trail, for whatever reason, the shelters are as open to them as to all those who, I guess, must be called "homehaving people."

Third, despite the desires of some, there is no "means qualifying test" for shelters, either like Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady used ("the desarvin' poor and the undesarvin' poor") nor based on anything else. Yes, in this case the law does allow the rich and the poor to sleep under shelter.

Fourth, "homeless people" are generally pretty good folk. They eat, sing, laugh, cook, wash, work and do all the other things that "good" people do. A proportion have health and emotional issues, but generally no more than the "homehaving" people that they today probably were not that long ago, before Countrywide and Chase foreclosed them out of their homes. So I'm not sure why anyone should care.

Lastly, despite the desires of a few, we aren't at the stage of having special badges for people to wear to identify their "status". So, as noted, it's kind of hard to tell the difference between some "homeless" people and long distance hikers. (Or, as Will Smith showed, between the "homeless" and "stockbrokers" who might even be both!).

Sorry, Tater. I don't think you'd be happy on the AT. You'd worry too much about who all "these people" are.

TW


Well said! This should end any debate about the Q. Anyone who thinks different is in on the wrong trail in the wrong country.

[hikerboy57]

One of the great aspects of hiking the AT is the complete lack of status. everyone equal. I've met thru hikers from all over the world- actors, singers, most reluctant for anyone to know what they did, enjoyed the anonymity of the trail.When you pass judgement on someone else, you've already passed judgement on yourself.Turn us all inside out, and you'll be hard pressed to find any difference. if they're not abusing shelter privileges, then they 're entitled to its use like anyone else. And if they are abusing trail or shelter, its up to the rest of us to educate and inform without looking down our noses. Our mutual goal should be for as many people as possible to experience the AT and the kindness of the community that has been created.

[JP]

I think the OP is drawing the distinction between "hikers" who spend the nite and move on versus "homeless people" who may treat the shelter as a permanent residence.

To answer the OP I've never seen a "homeless person" take up residence in a shelter. I've read about a couple, but, then again, don't believe everything you read on an internet forum.

Bottom line, no need to worry about "homeless people." The fornicaters, masturbaters, snorers, alarm clock setters, people that arrive at midnite, people that leave at 5 a.m, 3 a.m pissers, smokers, etc etc etc are the ones who should concern you.

You forgot the 10' from the shelter dumpers.

[tirebiter]

Well my lease is up at the end of February so I'm going to be homeless for my thru-hike.

[Lemni Skate]

I have always played it safe and done exactly what society told me. I made straight A's in school, scored high on the SAT's, majored in something in college which would guarantee me employment no matter what. Married a woman who will never leave me and whom I'll never leave. Never went into debt for anything but my house. Waited 7 years to have kids after I got married. Bought all the proper insurances, don't break the law, etc. etc. I own a very nice house outright.

With the exceptions of the wife and kids I don't care about any of it. I want to be homeless for a couple of years and just hike the trail. I don't want to do anything I'm "supposed" to do ever again.

[tirebiter]

I have always played it safe and done exactly what society told me. I made straight A's in school, scored high on the SAT's, majored in something in college which would guarantee me employment no matter what. Married a woman who will never leave me and whom I'll never leave. Never went into debt for anything but my house. Waited 7 years to have kids after I got married. Bought all the proper insurances, don't break the law, etc. etc. I own a very nice house outright.

With the exceptions of the wife and kids I don't care about any of it. I want to be homeless for a couple of years and just hike the trail. I don't want to do anything I'm "supposed" to do ever again.

Tell me about it. Left college and spent six months in an office before being certain I never want to be like that ever again.

[Pioneer Spirit]

I have always played it safe and done exactly what society told me. I made straight A's in school, scored high on the SAT's, majored in something in college which would guarantee me employment no matter what. Married a woman who will never leave me and whom I'll never leave. Never went into debt for anything but my house. Waited 7 years to have kids after I got married. Bought all the proper insurances, don't break the law, etc. etc. I own a very nice house outright.

Or you can do all of that and suddenly realize 35 years has gone by and there are more days behind then ahead and you only played it safe instead of doing what you wanted to really do.

[finskie]

I'm pretty sure that there's not much difference between someone who wanders up the east coast stopping to sleep wherever they get tired for 6 months without returning for periods to a permanent residence (thru hiker), and a homeless person anyway. As always I feel it is best to judge the character of the people you sleep around to the best of your ability, and then trust your choice. If I feel a situation is shady, I will continue hiking for awhile before i settle in. I have run into very few "suspect" people on the trails, and have much more often encountered dangerous people in civilization. That being said, I have been both wronged, and helped by all manner of folk. Use some sense, and don't camp alone if possible IMO is the best you can do without avoiding the trail altogether.

[sixguns01]

What a breathtakingly insensitive post. Where to begin?

First, "homeless people" stay in shelters - if they do - for the same reason others do: They provide (are you ready for this?) shelter. So it's not clear to me how that isn't using them "legitemately" [sic].

Second, "homeless people" are "people" too. (If in doubt, look at the phrase: It calls them people.) So if they choose to walk along the trail, for whatever reason, the shelters are as open to them as to all those who, I guess, must be called "homehaving people."

Third, despite the desires of some, there is no "means qualifying test" for shelters, either like Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady used ("the desarvin' poor and the undesarvin' poor") nor based on anything else. Yes, in this case the law does allow the rich and the poor to sleep under shelter.

Fourth, "homeless people" are generally pretty good folk. They eat, sing, laugh, cook, wash, work and do all the other things that "good" people do. A proportion have health and emotional issues, but generally no more than the "homehaving" people that they today probably were not that long ago, before Countrywide and Chase foreclosed them out of their homes. So I'm not sure why anyone should care.

Lastly, despite the desires of a few, we aren't at the stage of having special badges for people to wear to identify their "status". So, as noted, it's kind of hard to tell the difference between some "homeless" people and long distance hikers. (Or, as Will Smith showed, between the "homeless" and "stockbrokers" who might even be both!).

Sorry, Tater. I don't think you'd be happy on the AT. You'd worry too much about who all "these people" are.

TW

I don't think Tater meant it in the way Weasel assumed. By using the shelter system legitimately I think he meant as thru hikers jump from shelter to shelter instead of tenting it.

I love the way an easy simple question always has a way of being distorted and misinterpreted on WB forums. This entire thread has turned from an innocent question, to easily offended people, to insulting each other over senseless glib comments, back to easily offended people, then to people with too much time on their hands, and finally, well god knows where????

So has squatters every made it difficult to use the shelter system for their thru hike? Probably not.

90% of what I have seen on this forum has been bashing each other with very very little advice, suggestions or assistance. My fault though, thought this was "A Community of Appalachian Trail Enthusiasts" My Bad!

[njordan2]

I hike the A.T. for at least a week out of each year. Most years I run into someone who is homeless. Chances are, you meet a lot more homeless people than you realize. I do not care if someone is taking up space in the shelter as long as there is room for me. And that is one of the calling cards of a homeless person. I have never heard one say there is not enough room in the shelter for someone else. That works out pretty good, because I believe there is always room for one more. It makes the socializing kinda fun. It is only not so fun when someone thinks they own the shelter because they have been living there for an extended period of time. I can see how a homeless person could get that mentality, especially if they have been tending to the place and have not had a constant human companion to keep their wondering mind in check.

The last homeless guy I ran into at a shelter was a nice enough chap. He offered to smoke a joint with me. I declined, so he sat there and smoked the whole thing by himself. He later produced a fifth of Old Grandad he offered to split with me. I declined so he drank the whole thing by himself.

[SassyWindsor]

Lots of reasons why "homeless people" will not stay in shelters provided to them by different agencies. Some good reasons, some bad. I just know they aren't on the trail for the same, or similar, reasons I am. I hike for enjoyment and challenge, not because I have no where else to go or maybe hiding something. Sure, it concerns me, but it doesn't deter me from hiking. Besides, I never stay in shelters and I'm all for doing away with them, and homeless habitants have nothing to do with it. Hikers who enjoy shelters will just have to tolerate any inconvenience they may cause, they have just as much right as anyone to be there.

[Gray Blazer]

Did they give you reason to believe they were trying to avoid the law or is that just your biased opinion of people who may be good folks but just down on their luck?
Sounds like discrimination against the poor to me....Yes..I took this sort of personally ...I have been homeless in the past but never stole a dime form anyone and never "squatted" in an AT shelter that are apparently only for the wealthy...in your opinion...Can't never tell ..I may be homeless again sometime and just hope I don't meet some of the people who posted negatively about them here..Enough said...

This is America fortunately and I'm entitled to my opinion. You weren't there. You did not meet these people. I've met lots of good and bad people from all walks of life. I'm not discriminating against anyone. And yes, I had a feeling that might could to some be considered breathtakingly insensitive. And you not wanting to meet some people who may have a different opinion sounds like a negative experience to me. Just saying ... peace out.

[Gray Blazer]

May the "stink eye' they give back to you far overpower yours!
One of the guys I saw had pink eye and would prolly give it to you if you shook hands with him. Is that breathtakingly insensitive?

[Gray Blazer]

Hopefully some of you guys will face the same predicament sometime. It would serve you right to have the tables turned on you.

That sounds pretty breathtakingly insensitive.

[Gray Blazer]

.So I really don't care if they were offended or not....In fact I sort of hope they were...

Again ... well ... you get the idea.

[Croft]

Met my first "homeless" person at the shelter just north of the Terrapin Station Hostel. Dead giveaway were no backpack and possessions in plastic bags. I had stopped for lunch and to get water and we had a pleasant conversation. He said he travels 50 miles up and down the trail from there staying at the various shelters and goes into town to resupply when he has to. He also yogi-ed me for some food but I was glad to share as I had just received a too heavy mail drop. Being a woman alone I was a bit wary at first but once we engaged in conversation, he was actually very interesting. Just saying--hiker or homeless, we're all people and shouldn't be judged on our real estate.

[elmotoots]

I don't think Tater meant it in the way Weasel assumed. By using the shelter system legitimately I think he meant as thru hikers jump from shelter to shelter instead of tenting it.

I love the way an easy simple question always has a way of being distorted and misinterpreted on WB forums. This entire thread has turned from an innocent question, to easily offended people, to insulting each other over senseless glib comments, back to easily offended people, then to people with too much time on their hands, and finally, well god knows where????

So has squatters every made it difficult to use the shelter system for their thru hike? Probably not.

90% of what I have seen on this forum has been bashing each other with very very little advice, suggestions or assistance. My fault though, thought this was "A Community of Appalachian Trail Enthusiasts" My Bad!



Well said and so true............I quess I am guilty also..thanks for this post.

I will do better....

[mykl]

Bottom line, no need to worry about "homeless people." The fornicaters, masturbaters, snorers, alarm clock setters, people that arrive at midnite, people that leave at 5 a.m, 3 a.m pissers, smokers, etc etc etc are the ones who should concern you.
Just curious, which one of these concerns have you witnessed/dealt with? I'd like to hear stories of some....

[Bronk]

I don't know, when you lower yourself to the point where you will sleep in a filthy wooden box infested with mice, aren't we picking nits when we play the class warfare game? I think it would be much more sensible to ban rich people from the shelters...they'll just complain about how dirty they are anyway.

[CinciJP]

90% of what I have seen on this forum has been bashing each other with very very little advice, suggestions or assistance. My fault though, thought this was "A Community of Appalachian Trail Enthusiasts" My Bad!

Well said. It's why I spend most of my time at Hammockforums these days.

[leaftye]

If I met a hiker that lived on the trail far away from the nearest road crossing, I'd want to sit them down and see what I could learn. Chances are good that they could teach me how to take better advantage of natural resources. I actually did meet one such hiker, but he had just hiked into town to meet a friend that was taking him for a beer.

[RGB]

May the "stink eye' they give back to you far overpower yours!

In the context of this forum, I'm pretty sure that guy was being facetious. Calm down.

[RGB]

I also said in the post you're referring to that I used that terminology ONLY as an example.....of course you wouldn't remember that part....I really don't care where the discriminating people originally came from ..the bottom line it was discrimination either way you look at it..So I really don't care if they were offended or not....In fact I sort of hope they were...

So in other words, you were discriminating while covering your ass. Lovely.

[LoneRidgeRunner]

So in other words, you were discriminating while covering your ass. Lovely.

WHATEVER!!!! GET OVER IT..and yourself!!

[njordan2]

I discriminate against people who discriminate.

[leaftye]

Another friendly whiteblaze thread.

[The Weasel]

Weasel it apears to me you are not happy in life, you can not answer a simple question. I feel sorry you can not read a simple queston for what it is worth. Before you go assuming I have no knowledge perhaps you could come back with a clarifacation but I guess that would be to easy for someone who lovess to preach.

Well, in my misery I nevertheless failed to see a question in there, Tater1. You asked if people "using shelters legitimately" had a problem with homeless - who thereby were persons, you consider, not using them "legitimately". That's preaching, albeit more briefly than mine, by saying, "It's not legitimate for the homeless to use trail shelters."

So I don't know how much knowledge you have, or lack. I just think it was unfortunate that you, like a lot of other people who (at least for the present) have homes, to publicize your desire that the homeless stay away from shelters, especially since they can, for some, be suspected of causing "problems".

TW

[The Weasel]

Actually, this topic - as initially (and as I still believe, insensitively phrased) posed does have a very trial-appropriate aspect: Why, and how, do those who feel themselves "non-homeless" treat those who appear to be homeless so badly? That affects hikers, especially thrus. Here's what I mean:

A long-distance hiker - someone out 2 months or more, for example - is going to appear very scruffy. If a guy, he may have a long beard; women may have less-than-boutique hairstyles and visible body hair. The hiker is going to be somewhat dirty, with clothes that aren't clean (until a laundramat appears) and perhaps a bit shabby, with a variety of bandanas, gatorade canteens and other effluvia (look it up) about them. In trail towns, especially 'in season' they're clearly known as hikers.

But you don't need to get far off the trail to have others view them as "homeless people" who may have all of the suspected defects of that group, such as drug use, mental illness, criminal behavior and more. I saw it in Johnson City, and Mars Hill and even Cherokee, including aggressive police antipathy to what were suspected to be vagrants but were, in fact, "legitimate" hikers. I never thought of it that way before; my wife still laughs about how, when I moved to Laguna Beach and saw neatly dressed men with beards carrying backpacks with bedrolls, I asked, "Where is the trail?" That's how homeless appear out here. They look like thrus.

So I identify a bit more with the "homeless" along the trail (and elsewhere) since I can't identify them quite as easily (and accurately) as others can.

TW

[Mr Boston]

When I start my hike, I will be homeless.

[SassyWindsor]

I think complaints about scout groups taking control of shelters are still leading those concerning the homeless. I could be wrong.

Shelter motto: The shelter is not full until everyone is inside.

[Tuckahoe]

[never mind I should just stay out of this]

[Chillfactor]

"I have been reading the forums for over a month and have heard of homeless people living in shelters along the trail. How prevelent is this? How much of a problem has this caused people using the shelter system legitemately?"
This was the original posted question. There's been some deviation regarding shelter problems. I encountered a guy last year near Delaware Water Gap. He spoke about how he chose to roam from shelter to shelter and went into town periodically to get drunk. He would go back to civilization when it got cold. He didn't have a home, and his personality might have prevented close friends, but said he had a trust fund. He was very scary. I was warned by other hikers to steer clear of him.
At Kirkridge shelter, where I planned on staying, I chatted for a while and he offered this information. He also made it clear that I could camp down the way. He was enjoying his hand heldT V and didn't want to be disturbed. He was short, muscular, and had a shaved head. He also had 2 dogs, a white one with blue eyes that was vicious and one that looked like a huskie. He commented he'd harm anyone that messed with his dogs.

His growling dogs were tied next to shelter. I pushed one. I wanted to believe he wasn't a dangerous person so I tried to engage in conversation (hikers are generally great folk and share a bond of sorts) but I quickly learned he was not a good guy. I had been advised by 3 different people that I would encounter him and to beware. He was mean and nasty and the thought of him haunted me for a few days. That was the only time I thought a weapon would be warranted. Say what you like, not all shelter people are great. I'm sure there's someone on WB that also encountered him this year and can verify my statements.

[Chillfactor]

Meant to say I pushed on. And by camping down the way, he meant several miles from the shelter.

[Slo-go'en]

Thankfully, encounters like Chillfactor had are rare, but if it does happen at the very least let the ATC know so action can be taken.