View Full Version : the AT as a "sucky trail"
this came up on another thread, but I think it is more a separate topic -
My slant to this is a "what if "
so what if this trail that is within a few hours of a 100 million people was well graded/ fully developed - had a huge maintenance budget/ crew - ample convenient parking, public transportation access/ bathroom, lodging, laundry, food services - had the sight lines open for every possible view - a nice wide natural corridor
so basically an "idealized" situation free of many common (present) complaints
what would it mean? - I think it would become somewhat a clone of the situation at other big volume park areas ie - south rim of the grand canyon - much of Shenandoah park
the usage would increase possibly tenfold
much of which is now free would be fee based
there would be little challenge
any sense of "community" would be replaced by administration
personally, I prefer it as it is and think the whole package of management/ maintenance level / access decisions have been damn good to keep the AT as a more unique experience
what about the rest of you?
coolness
12-15-2012, 16:58
I like it just the way it is.......
MuddyWaters
12-15-2012, 17:28
I think what it is works pretty well today.
But it already is not what it once was.
Cell phones, computers, gps, PLBs, have made our world much smaller and less exciting
The numerous hiker services, free food, and generally excellent trail maintenace, guides, and signage have made it much easier also
Its not the adventure it once was.
Yep I agree with Muddywaters. If you read walking with spring and then go for a hike it has drastically changed. It's it's going to get worse I'm afraid.
atmilkman
12-15-2012, 18:04
The Appalachian Trail brought to you by Verizon.
hikerboy57
12-15-2012, 18:05
I think what it is works pretty well today.
But it already is not what it once was.
Cell phones, computers, gps, PLBs, have made our world much smaller and less exciting
The numerous hiker services, free food, and generally excellent trail maintenace, guides, and signage have made it much easier also
Its not the adventure it once was.
youre right but it doesnt have to be.go sobo. less hiker feeds, less crowds, less crap.
ps without computers we couldnt argue/debate about this stuff, nor coud we give good/bad advice to the newbies. so are we part of the solution or part of the problem?
MuddyWaters
12-15-2012, 18:13
Never said it was bad.
Just different.
In 50 more years, it will be more different still.
Will that be good, or bad, is the question.
atmilkman
12-15-2012, 18:34
I think all the trees and bushes and foilage should be manicured like Palm Beach FL.
yellowsirocco
12-15-2012, 18:41
The only thing that annoys me is places where the trail is obviously routed to create a false wilderness experience. You know the places, like where the trail parallels a road but the trail is thrown off in the woods a hundred yards. I just wish it would be more honest about the fact that town exists.
hikerboy57
12-15-2012, 18:46
The only thing that annoys me is places where the trail is obviously routed to create a false wilderness experience. You know the places, like where the trail parallels a road but the trail is thrown off in the woods a hundred yards. I just wish it would be more honest about the fact that town exists.
i dunno, the towns are marked on maps, and listed in both the at guide and the companion, as well as most of the atc guidebooks. and many of those parallel trails actually replace actual roadwalks.
The AT is an awesome trail - I love it.
But it's not the ONLY trail. If you're looking for another, or should I say - different, experience - hike another trail.
Lone Wolf
12-15-2012, 19:48
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
atmilkman
12-15-2012, 19:55
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
I wish I could say that. I had my chance. I'm glad I got the sections in that I did way back when. I'm gonna make the best of it the best I can.
So we should not make major improvement to the trail so as to not encourge more hikers to come out and enjoy what you have almost to yourself today? A might selfish don't you think? We should strive to improve the trail so more people will come out to enjoy it. It should be the ATC's job along with the trail clubs to do just that.
Mostly the internet version sucks. The bad parts of everything are multiplied 1000 times.
Actually only multiplied 10 times but it's the internet.
The numerous hiker services, free food, and generally excellent trail maintenace, guides, and signage have made it much easier also
Its not the adventure it once was.
The Vermont mud has not changed much. :)
The Vermont mud has not changed much. :)
True! And as far as I can tell, the Long trail hasn't changed much in the 50+ years I've been hiking on it. A few more people in the popular spots, more gadgets (I'm not fond of electronics on the trail, but they don't particularly bother me, either) and more female hikers, which I'm all for! Near as I can tell, the rocks haven't moved much.
hikerboy57
12-15-2012, 20:39
seems like everything was better when we were younger.
maybe were just younger
I think in some ways the trail is better today than it was years ago. It's been moved away from towns, road walks have been reduced to practically nothing and the corridor is protected from development almost its entire length. Also the trail is longer and better maintained. Yes there's more people hiking but I see that as a good thing. More interest means the trail will continue to get the funding it needs to continue.
magic_game03
12-15-2012, 21:52
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
...from a know it all. By the way are you on the internet posting this? No hard feelings but you know you're troll-ing to throw that out there.
P.S. call me on your cell phone any time. :)
Lone Wolf
12-15-2012, 21:54
huh? i ain't got a cell phone
magic_game03
12-15-2012, 23:59
26,941 posts. :) How about internet?
HikerMom58
12-16-2012, 00:01
It's Lone Wolf... you know him, magic_game03, don't you? :)
LIhikers
12-16-2012, 00:10
Sounds like the OP is describing the C+O Canal trail. It's level, smooth, has a campsite about every 5 miles which include port-a-potti, water pump,and picinic table. There are numerous trailheads and access points and some days you walk past more than one town. There are people out walking their dogs, going for a jog or run, bicyclists on rides long and short or people just sitting by the side of the trail enjoying the day and even an occasional backpacker :)
Nothing wrong with all of that, just very different than the AT experience. And there were no fees to use the trail or campsites. It's under the jurisdiction of the Park Service (if I remember right) like the AT is.
Sounds like the OP is describing the C+O Canal trail. It's level, smooth, has a campsite about every 5 miles which include port-a-potti, water pump,and picinic table. There are numerous trailheads and access points and some days you walk past more than one town. There are people out walking their dogs, going for a jog or run, bicyclists on rides long and short or people just sitting by the side of the trail enjoying the day and even an occasional backpacker :)
Nothing wrong with all of that, just very different than the AT experience. And there were no fees to use the trail or campsites. It's under the jurisdiction of the Park Service (if I remember right) like the AT is.
not familiar with the C + O trail - I was more describing a "fixed" version of the common complaints about the AT - steep grades, no view, dirty shelters, mommy not at the privy to wipe the tushy etc.
SCRUB HIKER
12-16-2012, 02:49
Bunch of crotchety old whiners. The AT is awesome and I'm thankful that it has survived in any form for 75 years to be enjoyed by me and everyone else.
Starchild
12-16-2012, 08:51
Things evolve over time. The adventure a person may have had at one time could be had by another at a future time but perhaps in a different place. Change is good stagnation is bad. We have a very big world with many such opportunities and the adventure that could be had on the early AT are still available on the earth and for Those who crave it they should be able to find it. Over regulation and fees will just direct the people seeking the old AT adventure to where they can now experience it.
Peace
coach lou
12-16-2012, 08:57
It started to go down hill right after Earl finished his walk.
hikerboy57
12-16-2012, 08:57
communication is the primary difference. this siteee and others help plan hiker feeds, support, whcich has allowed more people to get out . whats taken the adventure out of it is being able to plan a lot better.
there are plenty of "better"trails.
you dont think they couldnt have routed the trail around the lemon squeezer? or blazed a trail through western maine other than the one designed by the marquis de sade?
i like it sucky.
Sarcasm the elf
12-16-2012, 09:46
not familiar with the C + O trail - I was more describing a "fixed" version of the common complaints about the AT - steep grades, no view, dirty shelters, mommy not at the privy to wipe the tushy etc.
I'm just curious, what discussion prompted you to ask the question? As this thread shows, you will find that most people who use the A.T. like it just the way it is.
I think you'll find that hiking is a lot like boxing, anyone who complains about it probably doesn't participate much...
magic_game03
12-16-2012, 10:02
It's Lone Wolf... you know him, magic_game03, don't you? :)
I've had the pleasure. Fabulous dude. But I got to stand up for the integrity of all the trail hikers before him and after him too. So it's like the old saying, "guns don't kill people, people kill people" likewise, "technology doesn't ruin the trail, people ruin the trail." :-? Of course I don't believe the trail is ruined but I've never had the pleasure of hiking anywhere near a bubble or my opinion might be swayed.
humm.... now that I reread your post is sounds like sarcasm. :)
Drybones
12-16-2012, 10:11
I only know what it is like now but my guess is that I'd like better the way it was 20 years ago, maybe even 100 years ago, make that 200.
Monkeywrench
12-16-2012, 10:37
True! And as far as I can tell, the Long trail hasn't changed much in the 50+ years I've been hiking on it. A few more people in the popular spots, more gadgets (I'm not fond of electronics on the trail, but they don't particularly bother me, either) and more female hikers, which I'm all for! Near as I can tell, the rocks haven't moved much.
The shelters no longer have garbage dumps out behind them. Hikers no longer, for the most part, need to sleep with a pile of rocks next to them to fend off porcupines at night. The areas around the popular places like Stratton Pond and Little Rock Pond have been rehabilitated and are much more natural nowadays.
I do miss the shelter on the island in Little Rock Pond...
Boo Boo 2013
12-16-2012, 11:04
I agree, and can't wait to hike it in February!
Doing a thru-hike of just a long section you can come away with the kind of experience you want to have. Modern conveniences , like a cell phone, are not required. Stays in trail towns are not required. You surely don't need a GPS. You don't have to experience any of the "trail feeds." all this stuff has changed the trail from what is was say 25 years ago, but the world has also changed.
The tail foot path has changed because land has been gotten to protect the trail. It has been moved from a lot of road. The last I have heard is that well over 95% of the AT is now on federal or state land. Some small sections have been modified for the use of the handicaped. but, it's only a small amount. So, yes it has changed.
A hiker can have the same experience as those who hiked in the past. Look at the AT for what it is and what it offers. A chance to get away from the everyday world. Take the bare minimum of equiptment, adventure out into the vast sections of wilderness that still exist and enjoy the nature of it.
Cookerhiker
12-16-2012, 12:55
this came up on another thread, but I think it is more a separate topic -
My slant to this is a "what if "
so what if this trail that is within a few hours of a 100 million people was well graded/ fully developed - had a huge maintenance budget/ crew - ample convenient parking, public transportation access/ bathroom, lodging, laundry, food services - had the sight lines open for every possible view - a nice wide natural corridor
so basically an "idealized" situation free of many common (present) complaints
what would it mean? - I think it would become somewhat a clone of the situation at other big volume park areas ie - south rim of the grand canyon - much of Shenandoah park
the usage would increase possibly tenfold
much of which is now free would be fee based
there would be little challenge
any sense of "community" would be replaced by administration
personally, I prefer it as it is and think the whole package of management/ maintenance level / access decisions have been damn good to keep the AT as a more unique experience
what about the rest of you?
I agree with you that if the literal changes as you describe were somehow implemented Trail-wide, I wouldn't like the result and the AT experience would be drastically different.
Fortunately, I don't perceive a clamor to make such changes. I realize that in National Parks as a whole, visitor surveys have resulted in desires for more creature comforts e.g. plenty of bathrooms with hot water, hot showers in campgrounds, paving gravel roads, WIFI access, etc. But the AT is a unique National Park. Even the casual users among the estimated 2-3 million who set foot on the Trail each year are out for a hike - that's why they're there. Any threat to the AT won't emanate from users (hikers) wanting paved paths, railings, and hot dog stands but rather from moneyed interests who want to use the Trail and corridor for their own reasons, and others who philosophically object to its existence in the first place.
Regarding changes that have already occurred, I've been section hiking for over 35 years and what strikes me is how much (1) the hiking experience has not changed; and (2) most changes on the Trail itself are for the better. Now certainly the world and society around the Trail has changed. The population has increased, parts of the Trail corridor are more threatened with sprawl, technology (internet, cell phones) hovers over us, the services offered AT hikers have mushroomed. But these changes are all around the perimeter. It is still quite possible - if you so choose - to gain a wilderness experience little different than 35 years ago. Meaning: you don't have to thru hike "in season," you don't have to stay at hostels, you can skip past the hiker feeds, you can bypass the food stands in Shenandoah NP, you can hike using only maps and your own initiative for resupply.
Shelter creep? Bull! When I heard Jeff Marion assert at the ATC biennial in '07 that hikers were less likely to use shelters 30 years ago, I thought man, that statement shows you didn't hike 30 years ago; I remember crowded shelters in 1977! Crowds in the Whites? I hiked the Franconia Range in '09 and most of the Presidentials in '08 - no more people than I encountered in '82. Same with Shenandoah NP. Hell, SNP may be famous for its food stands but they've actually reduced them; the Panorama facility at Thornton Gap has been closed for years.
I regard the most important change from Shaffer's day as the fact that the Trail enjoys legal protection, a most welcome development that has kept the Trail remarkably close to MacKaye's vision of a wilderness footpath in the midst of the sea changes in the outside environment. Perhaps not "wilderness" as a pristine, virgin territory, but a Trail whereby the hiker can enter the woods (still) and experience nature, if he/she really wants to.
I dunno, being on the shore of Jo Mary lake a summer day, seeing the sun set and hearing the water lap at the shore is one of my favorite outdoor memories.
The AT is not as remote and wild as other places I have been over the years, but many years later i still remember the beauty, the joy and the magic of being on that footpath for five months.
And that campsite in Maine? I think it is in my top five campsites ever (maybe even top three? :) )
The AT sucks?..nah. It was wonderful.
18450
Wise Old Owl
12-16-2012, 17:35
It started to go down hill right after Earl finished his walk.
Huh? ..... I read his book,
HikerMom58
12-16-2012, 20:24
I've had the pleasure. Fabulous dude. But I got to stand up for the integrity of all the trail hikers before him and after him too. So it's like the old saying, "guns don't kill people, people kill people" likewise, "technology doesn't ruin the trail, people ruin the trail." :-? Of course I don't believe the trail is ruined but I've never had the pleasure of hiking anywhere near a bubble or my opinion might be swayed.
humm.... now that I reread your post is sounds like sarcasm. :)
No, I wasn't being sarcastic. :)
I agree with you that people "make" or "break" the trail, bringing with them their negative and positive attributes.
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
Not knowing about what lay ahead to the degree hikers seem to now added to the experience, I think.
hikerboy57
12-16-2012, 21:36
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
would you have accepted an offer to slack pack you from say.....you ?
topat2011
12-16-2012, 23:12
Agree with you on that one. Try the BMT. You'll find out which kind of trail you like. BMT'12NOBO. Saw one other hiker in 25 days.
cliffordbarnabus
12-16-2012, 23:57
some thru's I met told me they wanted an electronic sign in system at the shelters, i.e. you sign in for the night. this would "somehow" allow a hiker to check nearby shelters for bookings and fullness factors. then one could decide whether to stop or push on etc.
after this is installed, I was thinking USB cameras should follow so one could judge, by appearance of other "house guests" whether to stay or go...
Mountain Mike
12-17-2012, 00:14
Like LW I'm glad I hiked before electronics took over. I carried a then state of art analog brunton altiimiter that helped me predict weather. Town stops were more often a week & not 3-4 days. There were a lot less hostels. People where on the trail because thy wanted to be on the trail. Not hoping from hostels to hotels in towns. To each his own, HYOH but when hiking I like to get away. I like to be part of nature learning from it signs as what is to come.My quest is to see & experience something new. If I want a groomed path I would just go walk a local park & sleep in my own bed.
My slant to this is a "what if "
so what if this trail that is within a few hours of a 100 million people was well graded/?????? - had a huge maintenance budget/ crew - ample convenient parking, public transportation access/ bathroom, lodging, laundry, food services *(you forgot to add schools and gardens)* - had the sight lines open for every possible view - a nice wide natural corridor
so basically an "idealized" situation free of many common (present) complaints
what would it mean? - I think it would become somewhat....
Ummm, with my deletions and astericked addition - like Benton MacKaye might have envisioned it?
magic_game03
12-17-2012, 00:50
Like LW I'm glad I hiked before electronics took over. I carried a then state of art analog brunton altiimiter that helped me predict weather. Town stops were more often a week & not 3-4 days. There were a lot less hostels. People where on the trail because thy wanted to be on the trail. Not hoping from hostels to hotels in towns. To each his own, HYOH but when hiking I like to get away. I like to be part of nature learning from it signs as what is to come.My quest is to see & experience something new. If I want a groomed path I would just go walk a local park & sleep in my own bed.
So here you are doing a comparative; the old AT vs. the new AT and you're saying that you prefer the old AT without computers, people, and hostels. You do realize that ya could just go to Canada and hike for weeks without a manicured trail, hostels, and people? you live in SD so you are close. But in reality here you are posting in a forum of people, giving your opinion over a computer. Sounds like you don't really know what you like or maybe you wouldn't be on a computer exchanging dialogue with others about the most highly traveled trails in America if all you really wanted to do is just, "get away."
Lone Wolf
12-17-2012, 00:51
would you have accepted an offer to slack pack you from say.....you ?
no. i've never slackpacked
magic_game03
12-17-2012, 01:06
no. i've never slackpacked
Well ya missed out. It's awesome. Wait, you never slackpacked? And you're trying to say the AT is not as good as when there was hostels and cell phones to keep up with hoochie mammas? When did a double cheeseburger loose to a single?
Mountain Mike
12-17-2012, 01:34
So here you are doing a comparative; the old AT vs. the new AT and you're saying that you prefer the old AT without computers, people, and hostels. You do realize that ya could just go to Canada and hike for weeks without a manicured trail, hostels, and people? you live in SD so you are close. But in reality here you are posting in a forum of people, giving your opinion over a computer. Sounds like you don't really know what you like or maybe you wouldn't be on a computer exchanging dialogue with others about the most highly traveled trails in America if all you really wanted to do is just, "get away."
You miss my point. I bought my first comp when I learned how much info there was out there about the trails. When I am out on the trail I want to disconnect from the modern world & reconnect with nature. When I hike I'm on vacation. I see no need to hike from sun up to sun down. If I hit a pretty spot I will linger over a long lunch, stop & read for a while & enjoy the surrounding. When I did the PCT there were about 30 NOBOs that year, now the Saufly's limit their hostel to 50 people a night.
I prefer a challenge. I have moved on from the At because of that. I plan to start hiking the CDT this year before it gets to the point where there is a constant trail. Where you have to know how to use a map & compass.
I am on here because I have hiked the AT & sometimes I can help provide some insight from time to time. I did not just do a thru & not hike any part of it again or before. On short hikes I try & help out with maintenance. In the whites it has included helping with trail building, helo drops of a composter privy parts & worst was helping with composter privy tasks. Shoveling S*** & mixing it with wood chips takes some resolve.
& actually I love to "just get away" There are still many places on or close to the AT where you can still do that.
......People where on the trail because thy wanted to be on the trail. Not hoping from hostels to hotels in towns. To each his own, HYOH but when hiking I like to get away. I like to be part of nature learning from it signs as what is to come.My quest is to see & experience something new. If I want a groomed path I would just go walk a local park & sleep in my own bed.
I agree.
I personally go hiking (most of the time) to get away from work, home, deadlines and the constant sensory bombardment from TV, radio, computers, machinery, recorded music etc. When I see some modern hikers, I wonder why they even bother to go out backpacking if they are going to spend such significant amounts of time in town--and/or---if they (frequently) stay electronically connected to work, home, family, friends, social media, news and entertainment etc. If you are going to bring work, home and civilization to the woods with you---why not just stay at home and stay at work? (This is not meant as an attack. It is meant as a serious question.)
I respect people's right to "HYOH". However, I also become frustrated when one hiker's desire to stay "electronically connected" negatively impacts another hiker's desire to DISCONNECT from electronics and society.
I don't mind if you want to bring your electronic music with you to the trail. I would just invite you to listen to your music in such a way that other hikers don't have to hear the music too. If you want to text or (especially) talk on your cellphone---Go for it. Please use your phone quietly and use it away from the rest of us. Set your phone on "vibrate"--instead of subjecting all of us to some loud, obnoxious, ringtone. If you want to check sports scores or the news headlines with your Smartphone (or at the library in a trail town)---no problem. Just ask me if I wish to know such data before you share it with me.
Cookerhiker
12-17-2012, 07:50
...Town stops were more often a week & not 3-4 days. There were a lot less hostels. People where on the trail because thy wanted to be on the trail. Not hoping from hostels to hotels in towns. To each his own, HYOH but when hiking I like to get away. I like to be part of nature learning from it signs as what is to come.My quest is to see & experience something new. If I want a groomed path I would just go walk a local park & sleep in my own bed.
You miss my point. I bought my first comp when I learned how much info there was out there about the trails. When I am out on the trail I want to disconnect from the modern world & reconnect with nature. ....I prefer a challenge. I have moved on from the At because of that. I plan to start hiking the CDT this year before it gets to the point where there is a constant trail. Where you have to know how to use a map & compass......& actually I love to "just get away" There are still many places on or close to the AT where you can still do that.
I agree.
I personally go hiking (most of the time) to get away from work, home, deadlines and the constant sensory bombardment from TV, radio, computers, machinery, recorded music etc.....
As I said earlier, you can choose to plan your hike to experience a quieter and less crowded AT. But you can also hike other trails in the East and you don't have to stray that far from the AT to "get away." Example: West Virginia's Allegheny Trail (http://wvscenictrails.org/AlleghenyTrailOverview.aspx) - nearly 300 miles - plus other trails in the Monongahela National Forest only see a fraction of the people found on the AT. Challenges? Some river fords, parts of the trail where blazing is spotty and overgrown, rocky areas interspersed with easy stretches along old FS roads. Logistical planning was much more involved than the AT - and I enjoyed it! There are no "Trail towns" a la AT, no guidebook to services, no hostel, only one Trail Angel that I know of (who left the AT corridor because of disgruntlement with the entitlement mentality of thruhikers), no public transportation. I did an 82 mile section hike in October (http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?id=395525) in which we only saw one trail user in the woods - a hunter. There are more road walks but most don't detract from the experience as they're remote rural roads.
Oh, and even the roads in the valleys usually don't have cell phone reception.:)
In 1947 when Earl walked the trail, you could walk down a street without seeing a mobile phone, go to a house and see friends without computers or game consoles.
You sent letters by post and generally didn't spend hours in traffic jams.
The world changes.
The AT is not the trail Earl walked. It is actually a lot less road and a lot more trail.
It is also the inspiration and model for trails worldwide.
Given the increase in population living within a few hours of the AT since 1947 the ATC and helpers have done an incredible job keeping it as remote as it is.
If you seek a more remote experience there are a multitude of other trails both in North America and other parts of the world you can go to.
The AT is about the only trail known worldwide by people who don't hike.
It is a magnet that draws many people into the hiking experience. Many don't continue hiking but a lot do.
You cannot stop change. By uniting you can direct it somewhat and it seems to me the ATC and others have done a lot of that rather well over the last 75 years.
If the hiking experience and the HYOH philosophy do anything to an individual, it should be to help them "roll with the flow". If you feel uncomfortable somewhere move on - you will eventually find another place that suits you more.
Whether they make it more "sucky" or not the AT will still be there at the top of the heap. Not the best trail perhaps but undeniably the greatest.
fredmugs
12-17-2012, 09:32
the usage would increase possibly tenfold
There have been many times I was going through a tough section thinking if this were easier there would be more people out here doing it.
Pedaling Fool
12-17-2012, 09:34
If you'll want to talk about a sucky trail, then open a thread on the Florida Trail...
Drybones
12-17-2012, 10:52
In 1947 when Earl walked the trail, you could walk down a street without seeing a mobile phone, go to a house and see friends without computers or game consoles.
You sent letters by post and generally didn't spend hours in traffic jams.
The world changes.
The AT is not the trail Earl walked. It is actually a lot less road and a lot more trail.
It is also the inspiration and model for trails worldwide.
Given the increase in population living within a few hours of the AT since 1947 the ATC and helpers have done an incredible job keeping it as remote as it is.
If you seek a more remote experience there are a multitude of other trails both in North America and other parts of the world you can go to.
The AT is about the only trail known worldwide by people who don't hike.
It is a magnet that draws many people into the hiking experience. Many don't continue hiking but a lot do.
You cannot stop change. By uniting you can direct it somewhat and it seems to me the ATC and others have done a lot of that rather well over the last 75 years.
If the hiking experience and the HYOH philosophy do anything to an individual, it should be to help them "roll with the flow". If you feel uncomfortable somewhere move on - you will eventually find another place that suits you more.
Whether they make it more "sucky" or not the AT will still be there at the top of the heap. Not the best trail perhaps but undeniably the greatest.
Well said mate!
As I said earlier, you can choose to plan your hike to experience a quieter and less crowded AT. But you can also hike other trails in the East and you don't have to stray that far from the AT to "get away."
If you seek a more remote experience there are a multitude of other trails both in North America and other parts of the world you can go to.
The AT is about the only trail known worldwide by people who don't hike.
It is a magnet that draws many people into the hiking experience. Many don't continue hiking but a lot do.......You cannot stop change.......
If the hiking experience and the HYOH philosophy do anything to an individual, it should be to help them "roll with the flow". If you feel uncomfortable somewhere move on - you will eventually find another place that suits you more......
I think that you are missing my point....I am not against change. I also think that your responses (which both essentially boil down to "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere") misses my point too---and they are perhaps indicative of the problem.
I am not advocating that people abandon technology (or completely stop bringing it to the trail)---nor am I suggesting that crowds stay away from the AT or that we return to the trail experienced by Earl Shaffer.
I am merely asking people to be CONSIDERATE OF OTHERS--so that we ALL might enjoy the trail.
I don't mind if someone wants to bring their electronics and the outside world with them to the AT. (Yes, I may not agree with them--but HYOH). HOWEVER, what I DO challenge is the concept that such people have a "right" to impose their electronic devices and their connection to the outside world upon other hikers (and that people, such as myself, are "wrong" when we expect people to be a just little bit more considerate when using their electronic devices). I am fond of saying: "I will support and defend your right to swing your fist--but just remember that your right to swing your fist ends at my nose!"
You are expected to shut off (or silence) your electronic devices at at a movie, a theatrical production, an important meeting, a courtroom or a funeral. If you are at a nice restaurant, they will kindly ask you to take your phone conversation outside. Why not be equally considerate on the AT? Feel free to use your phone and other electronic devices (discreetly)--just don't impose your (loud) cellphone conversations and your loud, obnoxious, ringtones (and loud alarm clocks) on other people! BE CONSIDERATE--keep such things to yourself!
I am disappointed that so often people will respond with "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere" (and that people like myself suddenly become the "villains").
I don't think that it is extreme, unreasonable or inconsiderate--to expect people to use their electronic devices quietly and privately. For me, such discreet use of electronic devices is just plain old-fashioned common decency and respect for others. I would think, in these days of "Leave No Trace" hiking and camping, that instead of saying "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere"---the hiker community would actually exert some gentle "peer pressure" upon people who impose loud conversations and loud electronic sounds upon the "wilderness" experience.
It is amazing that we think it is "wrong" to inconvenience certain people by expecting them to use their electronic devices discreetly. Yet, we have absolutely no problem expecting folks (such as myself) to hike a whole different trail. (I would submit that hiking a whole different trail is far more inconvenient than simply putting one's phone on vibrate--or walking a short distance away from a group if you can reasonably expect that using your device might detract from the hiking experience of others).
I should not be expected to go somewhere else to hike. I want to see the the sights of the AT---not some other trail. I want to hike the AT---not some other trail. What is so terrible, or unreasonable, about expecting someone to use electronic devices discreetly and quietly?
Cookerhiker
12-17-2012, 13:39
I think that you are missing my point....I am not against change. I also think that your responses (which both essentially boil down to "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere") misses my point too---and they are perhaps indicative of the problem.
I am not advocating that people abandon technology (or completely stop bringing it to the trail)---nor am I suggesting that crowds stay away from the AT or that we return to the trail experienced by Earl Shaffer.
I am merely asking people to be CONSIDERATE OF OTHERS--so that we ALL might enjoy the trail.
I don't mind if someone wants to bring their electronics and the outside world with them to the AT. (Yes, I may not agree with them--but HYOH). HOWEVER, what I DO challenge is the concept that such people have a "right" to impose their electronic devices and their connection to the outside world upon other hikers (and that people, such as myself, are "wrong" when we expect people to be a just little bit more considerate when using their electronic devices). I am fond of saying: "I will support and defend your right to swing your fist--but just remember that your right to swing your fist ends at my nose!"
You are expected to shut off (or silence) your electronic devices at at a movie, a theatrical production, an important meeting, a courtroom or a funeral. If you are at a nice restaurant, they will kindly ask you to take your phone conversation outside. Why not be equally considerate on the AT? Feel free to use your phone and other electronic devices (discreetly)--just don't impose your (loud) cellphone conversations and your loud, obnoxious, ringtones (and loud alarm clocks) on other people! BE CONSIDERATE--keep such things to yourself!
I am disappointed that so often people will respond with "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere" (and that people like myself suddenly become the "villains").
I don't think that it is extreme, unreasonable or inconsiderate--to expect people to use their electronic devices quietly and privately. For me, such discreet use of electronic devices is just plain old-fashioned common decency and respect for others. I would think, in these days of "Leave No Trace" hiking and camping, that instead of saying "if you don't like it--hike elsewhere"---the hiker community would actually exert some gentle "peer pressure" upon people who impose loud conversations and loud electronic sounds upon the "wilderness" experience.
It is amazing that we think it is "wrong" to inconvenience certain people by expecting them to use their electronic devices discreetly. Yet, we have absolutely no problem expecting folks (such as myself) to hike a whole different trail. (I would submit that hiking a whole different trail is far more inconvenient than simply putting one's phone on vibrate--or walking a short distance away from a group if you can reasonably expect that using your device might detract from the hiking experience of others).
I should not be expected to go somewhere else to hike. I want to see the the sights of the AT---not some other trail. I want to hike the AT---not some other trail. What is so terrible, or unreasonable, about expecting someone to use electronic devices discreetly and quietly?
The post you cited, while largely addressing AT alternatives, also referred to my earlier post #36 which was AT-centric. I too want to hike the AT at times and I too do not like being bombarded with electronic devices and agree that courtesy and common sense (so we'd like to think) would have cell phone users conduct their conversations privately.
Just since April 2011, I've done 3 section hikes on the AT: 2 in the popular Shenandoah NP and one a 120 miler from Duncannon to Harpers Ferry. Not once did I hear radios, cell phones, GPSs, et al. either in campsites or along the Trail. Perhaps it would have been different had I hiked "in season" but I didn't.
Furthermore, I was addressing not just "getting away" from electronic technology but the broader concept of hiking on a trail with less fellow hikers that - in Mountain Mike's words - isn't a "groomed path," where finding your way is a challenge.
Trails are like friends. Each one has a different personality. But if I spend all my time with the friend I like most It's not long before I'll start seeing his faults.
Spend some time getting to know some other trails And I'll bet when you come back to the AT It'll be better.
Sorry for the typos I'm talking into my phone....
I think that you are missing my point...
Not at all.
I made my post as an overall contribution to the thread. My "two bobs worth".
I did not reply to any individual post nor do I have any "disagreement" with any of the posts in this thread.
Cheers.
I had a lot of "what if" thoughts like, what if the AT was built to the standards of the PCT though I quickly realized how counter productive it was to morale. It didn't stop me from thinking it when the trail became sucky in parts.
Ignoring the whole electronics thing, I do think that parts of the AT are indeed sucky trail. I loved where the AT went and what I saw, but there were times where I just hated how the trail was built; mainly the in the AMC and MATC areas of Maine, and NH (ironically, some of the most scenic parts of the trail).
I think a NOBO's perspective is a bit different then a SOBO one since the SOBO starts on the hardest part first. In Maine and NH, it often seemed so much harder then it really had to be and there were numerous times I looked around and thought the terrain doesn't jutisfy going straight up here. Other times I thought, a little blasting here would solve everything and it isnt like a few more rocks scattered on the terrain would change anything considering how much rock was already there.
Many times I thought I was risking my life on some of the steep descents, even in dry weather. So I had to laugh the first time I saw a blue blaze alternative route for bad weather in Vermont as I hiked south. If that small spot needed one for safety, then most of the trail in NH and Maine needed a safer bad weather blue blaze route. The AMC often didn't have blazes where they actually were needed, as there were a few times I was actually questioning if I was even hiking on a trail at all (even by AT standards). I started to belive the conspiracy theories that there are Knee Surgeons on some of the clubs boards that helped establish such hard standards for trail construction inorder to improve their business.
At Pinkham Notch, I spent some time talking to a member of the AMC at the Visitor Center and she made a comment on how many of the members there were very proud of how difficult the trail was in their section. That pretty much confirmed my thoughts on how the trail was unecessarily hard. I would have been more proud of having built a nice trail in difficult terrain rather then building a difficult trail. But I often hike out west in places where swtichbacks have literally been blasted out of the side of sheer moutainsides, so my perspective is probably warped on what a trail is suppose to look like. Clearly, Bob Peoples needs to take over maintaining and constructing trail for the entire length. That would quickly solve all sucky issues.
SassyWindsor
12-17-2012, 17:32
If the Postal Service could deliver mail as quick as news travels along the AT, they would probably make a profit. The AT is fine as is, just keep the US Government and other powers that can regulate the trail under tight control. These are the ones who can really screw the AT up.
Cookerhiker
12-17-2012, 17:47
... The AT is fine as is, just keep the US Government and other powers that can regulate the trail under tight control. These are the ones who can really screw the AT up.
Disagree - in fact, I find your statement oxymoronic. The AT would not be "as is" if not for the federal government, empowered by the federal legislation of 1968 and 1978.
And regarding your statement "...keep the US Government and other powers that can regulate under tight control...," just who is doing the "keeping?" Us vigilant citizens?:rolleyes:
If you think the federal government would "screw things up," try privatization and enjoy the hundreds of miles of roadwalks that would ensue. We tried that approach; it didn't work.
The key thing about the AT is there are no bicycles.
If you ever hiked the Pottawatomie Trail in Michigan and have been run over by a bicyclist there (with a bicycle trailer carrying the mini-keg and four Michigan-sized boomboxes, Ha) or have hiked on the PCT in northern Oregon where people use the PCT for bicycling all the time -- day in and day out regardless -- and run you over from behind with an attitude wanting to know why you are on the PCT in their way, you begin to have a devout and sacred appreciation for the Appalachian Trail.
If you've ever hiked internationally, particularly in any of the former British colonies or in Great Britain, you'll find most hikers on the majority of those trails wouldn't think of actually tenting, carrying a tent or carrying there own fuel or a stove -- if there wasn't fuel piped into the British huts on most (but not all) of those trails the hikers wouldn't hike ("I say ol' chap, it wouldn't be civilized hiking, don't you know"). That too gives a person a great appreciation of The Appalachian Trail and to try to keep the politicians from making it one of those dumbbell, politically motivated, ridiculous "mixed use" trails from Georgia to Maine.
Datto
The post you cited, while largely addressing AT alternatives, also referred to my earlier post #36 which was AT-centric. I too want to hike the AT at times and I too do not like being bombarded with electronic devices and agree that courtesy and common sense (so we'd like to think) would have cell phone users conduct their conversations privately.
Just since April 2011, I've done 3 section hikes on the AT: 2 in the popular Shenandoah NP and one a 120 miler from Duncannon to Harpers Ferry. Not once did I hear radios, cell phones, GPSs, et al. either in campsites or along the Trail. Perhaps it would have been different had I hiked "in season" but I didn't.
Furthermore, I was addressing not just "getting away" from electronic technology but the broader concept of hiking on a trail with less fellow hikers that - in Mountain Mike's words - isn't a "groomed path," where finding your way is a challenge.
I apologize if my frustration (which slowly built up from countless other posts over the years) was inadvertently unleashed on you and the other poster that I quoted. In looking back over things, I didn't make it clear enough that the two posts (that I quoted) were NOT particularly problematic themselves. Rather, I am frustrated with a general TREND that I see in posts which frustrates me (i.e. the "if you don't like my/our/their behavior--you should hike elsewhere"). In retrospect, I am not certain that the two posts that I cited were necessarily good examples of that trend. Sorry for unloading on you! Glad to hear that we actually agree on many things.
Cookerhiker
12-17-2012, 19:57
... That too gives a person a great appreciation of The Appalachian Trail and to try to keep the politicians from making it one of those dumbbell, politically motivated, ridiculous "mixed use" trails from Georgia to Maine.
Datto
Good points and yes, if the politicians do act as you describe being politically motivated, it will be because of pressure from those other users (bikers, etc) or from local communities and businesses who think more users = more $$$. And this is why it is so important to support the ATC (with your dues please) to help advocate for the AT as a hiking trail.
magic_game03
12-17-2012, 20:11
Trails are like friends. Each one has a different personality. But if I spend all my time with the friend I like most It's not long before I'll start seeing his faults.
Spend some time getting to know some other trails And I'll bet when you come back to the AT It'll be better.
Fantastic perspective. That's the feeling I felt in my gut but I couldn't express it. In fact I didn't have a firm grasp of what I was trying to express but you captured sunlight in a bottle. Great job 10-K.
I would like to clarify--and expand upon--some of my earlier comments.
One thing that has probably changed a bit since the days of Earl Shaffer (and something which makes all trails--particularly the AT--a bit more "sucky" than they were decades ago) is that people today are probably a bit less considerate than they were in the days when Earl Shaffer first hiked the trail. (NOTE: I would still say that the vast majority of hikers are good, considerate, people. However, I am guessing that the number of inconsiderate hikers has grown considerably since the 1930s/40s and the extent of their inconsiderate behavior has probably increased).
There is an attitude (among SOME hikers) that "I have a RIGHT to do whatever I want--and if whatever I do bothers you or offends you--then YOU should either 'get over it' or YOU should hike somewhere else"
I think that (far too often) the concept of "HYOH" is used as a rationale to "validate" or "excuse" someone's impolite or inconsiderate behavior.
Some examples:
--"So what if my loud electronic devices bother you. I happen to like LIKE my loud electronic devices. HYOH, Buddy!"
--"I have a right for my dog to be off leash anywhere that I want. So what if my wet and muddy dog rolls around on your $500 down sleeping bag. Don't you dare criticize my dog or my dog's behavior. You need to just shut up and HYOH!"
--"I have a right to urinate off of the edge of this shelter (in front of your young daughter). Do you have a problem with that? Hey, Pal, you hike your hike and I'll hike mine!"
The list could go on and on.
HYOH should not be used as an excuse to justify some hiker's inconsiderate behavior. If anything makes trails "sucky"--it is probably inconsiderate hikers (and the people who defend their inconsiderate behavior).
NOTE: I am guessing that--back in Earl Shaffer's day--if a grown man had elected to urinate off the end of shelter in front of a young girl--someone would have probably threatened to deck the guy with a punch (and would not have hesitated to carry out the threat).
I hiked the AT a lot in the 1960's and 1970's, 1000 miles the summer Nixon resigned. At that time the AT was under the whole country's radar screen, so to speak. There were very few thru hikers (I recall about four), and even section hikers like myself were scarce.
Good things about those years were solitude and adventure. There was no prestige; when you went into those small Pennsylvania towns to do wash people looked at you the way they looked at homeless bums. After all what's the difference between an AT hiker and a bum? Bums smell better and eat better. ha ha. The trail was not in great shape, and you got lost fairly often and walked a lot on roads. The shelters were fewer and often leaked when it rained.
Today there's a lot less solitude and the adventure side of it is different, it's a more social adventure because there are always a lot of people around. The trail is more like a big highway, shelters are abundant, and now we're all admired by townspeople who interrupt their daily schedule to do trail magic for us. Last year in one day my friend and I counted 82 "thru-hikers" in one day in Virginia as we headed south to Trail Days. The AT is famous and has the full attention of Government, media, and the worldwide web.
Things are different, in some ways better, in some ways worse. IMO.
But I still fly 3000 miles to hike the AT. (5 times in the last 6 years).
RockDoc
hikerboy57
12-17-2012, 21:00
I would like to clarify--and expand upon--some of my earlier comments.
One thing that has probably changed a bit since the days of Earl Shaffer (and something which makes all trails--particularly the AT--a bit more "sucky" than they were decades ago) is that people today are probably a bit less considerate than they were in the days when Earl Shaffer first hiked the trail. (NOTE: I would still say that the vast majority of hikers are good, considerate, people. However, I am guessing that the number of inconsiderate hikers has grown considerably since the 1930s/40s and the extent of their inconsiderate behavior has probably increased).
There is an attitude (among SOME hikers) that "I have a RIGHT to do whatever I want--and if whatever I do bothers you or offends you--then YOU should either 'get over it' or YOU should hike somewhere else"
I think that (far too often) the concept of "HYOH" is used as a rationale to "validate" or "excuse" someone's impolite or inconsiderate behavior.
Some examples:
--"So what if my loud electronic devices bother you. I happen to like LIKE my loud electronic devices. HYOH, Buddy!"
--"I have a right for my dog to be off leash anywhere that I want. So what if my wet and muddy dog rolls around on your $500 down sleeping bag. Don't you dare criticize my dog or my dog's behavior. You need to just shut up and HYOH!"
--"I have a right to urinate off of the edge of this shelter (in front of your young daughter). Do you have a problem with that? Hey, Pal, you hike your hike and I'll hike mine!"
The list could go on and on.
HYOH should not be used as an excuse to justify some hiker's inconsiderate behavior. If anything makes trails "sucky"--it is probably inconsiderate hikers (and the people who defend their inconsiderate behavior).
NOTE: I am guessing that--back in Earl Shaffer's day--if a grown man had elected to urinate off the end of shelter in front of a young girl--someone would have probably threatened to deck the guy with a punch (and would not have hesitated to carry out the threat).
we just finished the etiquette thread last month.
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?85566-Best-quot-Trail-Etiquette-quot-Tip&p=1363437&highlight=etiquette#post1363437
MuddyWaters
12-17-2012, 22:57
If todays AT is just not your thing, I hear the BMT offers up a more remote solitary experience, at least for about 300 miles or so.
Some say its what the AT once was.
hikerboy57
12-17-2012, 23:05
i think it just misses the whole point. is it better or worse than it was? it just is what it is. of course theres plenty of other trails to hike. but theyre not the at.its a commitment,not just a hike.
theres plenty of technology today, cell phones, droids, ipads,etc and one has the choice to use it or not. we also enjoy technological developments in our gear, and communication, websites like this one as well as bpl and others turn us all on to ideas and gear we never would have considered on our own.
plenty of positives and most of the negatives can be ignored.
magic_game03
12-17-2012, 23:06
I would like to clarify--and expand upon--some of my earlier comments.
One thing that has probably changed a bit since the days of Earl Shaffer (and something which makes all trails--particularly the AT--a bit more "sucky" than they were decades ago)...
NOTE: I am guessing that--back in Earl Shaffer's day...
For someone who is a pastor you sure have a poor attitude about your fellow hikers. And, stop trying to justify this poor attitude with the humble nature and name of Earl. Nothing you have said seems to have any rationale with who or what Shaffer stood for. I think you need to read up on some values of Jesus and Shaffer and stop confusing your history. Earlier you confused Shaffer with Mackaye and now you seem to think we will fall for you imposing your poor values in the name of Earl...and you're no Earl Shaffer.
HikerMom58
12-17-2012, 23:25
For someone who is a pastor you sure have a poor attitude about your fellow hikers. And, stop trying to justify this poor attitude with the humble nature and name of Earl. Nothing you have said seems to have any rationale with who or what Shaffer stood for. I think you need to read up on some values of Jesus and Shaffer and stop confusing your history. Earlier you confused Shaffer with Mackaye and now you seem to think we will fall for you imposing your poor values in the name of Earl...and you're no Earl Shaffer.
Nope. Not a poor attitude about fellow hikers or fellow humans. Sadly it's a realistic view, sometimes.
For someone who is a pastor you sure have a poor attitude about your fellow hikers. And, stop trying to justify this poor attitude with the humble nature and name of Earl. Nothing you have said seems to have any rationale with who or what Shaffer stood for. I think you need to read up on some values of Jesus and Shaffer and stop confusing your history. Earlier you confused Shaffer with Mackaye and now you seem to think we will fall for you imposing your poor values in the name of Earl...and you're no Earl Shaffer.
Two points:
1) I merely mentioned the Earl Shaffer ERA (i.e. the early days of the trail). I wasn't writing about Earl Shaffer or what Earl Shaffer might do. And, the only reason I did that was because several other posters had referenced that era in the AT's history. I
2) Would you care to clarify what you were referring to when you wrote: "Earlier you confused Shaffer with Mackaye".
cliffordbarnabus
12-17-2012, 23:48
change is unregulateable. things changed since I just typed "typed". we can make rules like don't announce sports scores or news headlines. and most people won't. but the one fella who says, "hot dang, the dolphins won!" will be remembered and a new thread will be started because of him. if someone's blabbing on his cell phone, well, that's now, for better or worse and as unregulateable, a sound of nature.
sure I prefer the birds. but one morning I also appreciated the girl who told me if I waited 30 minutes the rain should be over for the day.
it's all about the fifteen minute forecast breakdown.
roll with it
magic_game03
12-17-2012, 23:52
Nope. Not a poor attitude about fellow hikers or fellow humans. Sadly it's a realistic view, sometimes.
Is it really? for every 1 bad hiker I meet there are a least 100 great hikers. Therefore I'm not going to harp on the one bad experience. If you choose to hike in a big pack of hikers (the bubble) or stay at shelters, then accept that you are going to get a wide array of personalities.
magic_game03
12-18-2012, 00:48
One thing that has probably changed a bit since the days of Earl Shaffer...However, I am guessing that the number of inconsiderate hikers has grown considerably since the 1930s/40s...).
Mackaye, Avery, and Perkins were the major movers of the AT from '30-'40. Shaffer was around nearly a decade later more like '40-'50 and closer to '50. So which hikers are you referring to in the '30's? Were you referring to Avery or Perkins as hikers, and Still '30's is not Shaffer.
The only hikers from '30/'40's were the hikers in Benton MacKaye's head. Earl didn't come around till a decade later.
Mackaye, Avery, and Perkins were the major movers of the AT from '30-'40. Shaffer was around nearly a decade later more like '40-'50 and closer to '50. So which hikers are you referring to in the '30's? Were you referring to Avery or Perkins as hikers, and Still '30's is not Shaffer.
The only hikers from '30/'40's were the hikers in Benton MacKaye's head. Earl didn't come around till a decade later.
1) In 1931, 1,207 miles Appalachian Trail were already completed. (According to: SPECIAL COMMEMORATIVE ISSUE—JULY 2000 APPALACHIAN TRAILWAY NEWS). Thus, in the 1930s and 40s, people were already hiking the AT in places other than "only...in Benton MacKaye's head".
2) Earl Shaffer as born and raised less than 20 miles from what became the AT. He graduated from high school in 1935. Earl Shaffer WAS already a hiker and avid outdoorsman as a teenager. The AT trail sections closest to Earl Shaffer's boyhood home were completed when Earl was a young teen. Earl Shaffer spent his teenage years hiking near--or maybe even on--the AT. (Hence one of the reasons for my reference to the 1930s)
3) Earl Shaffer first conceived the idea of hiking the entire length of the AT (while hiking with his friend, Walter) in the late 1930's. (Hence, another reason for my reference to the 1930s).
4) According to Earl Shaffer--as WWII began to loom on the horizon, Earl and his friend Walter, started making plans to hike the entire AT after the War ended. This would have been in 1940/41. WWII delayed and changed those plans. Earl enlisted in the Army prior to Pearl Harbor (1941) and Walter died at Iwo Jima during the war. Earl left the Army in 1945. He started planning his long-delayed thru hike in earnest in 1947. (That is why I linked Earl Shaffer to the 1940s).
5) Earl Shaffer completed his FIRST thru hike in 1948. (Hence, another reason for my reference to the 1940s)
Earl Shaffer's dream of hiking the entire length of the AT took 10-15 years to progress from earliest dreams to actual completion. That 10-15 year process occurred entirely in the 1930s and 1940's. Hence, my reference to the 1930s and 1940s as Earl Shaffer's era.
The Defense rests, your Honor.
OK, so I started this thread that, as could be expected, produced a lot of side topics (and that is fine by me)
I asked the questions mostly to generate thought/ illustrate the points that:
1) solutions to the common complaints are largely impractical/ not going to happen
2) if somehow there was a "fix" the AT would certainly appeal less to a majority of present users than it does now
3) the main point - enjoy/ appreciate the AT for what it is
I would like to clarify--and expand upon--some of my earlier comments.
One thing that has probably changed a bit since the days of Earl Shaffer (and something which makes all trails--particularly the AT--a bit more "sucky" than they were decades ago) is that people today are probably a bit less considerate than they were in the days when Earl Shaffer first hiked the trail. (NOTE: I would still say that the vast majority of hikers are good, considerate, people. However, I am guessing that the number of inconsiderate hikers has grown considerably since the 1930s/40s and the extent of their inconsiderate behavior has probably increased).
There is an attitude (among SOME hikers) that "I have a RIGHT to do whatever I want--and if whatever I do bothers you or offends you--then YOU should either 'get over it' or YOU should hike somewhere else"
I would say the complete opposite is the problem. There are way too many uptight ninnywipes today pushing their values on everyone else and do nothing but bitch and moan and obsess about the most ridiculous nonsense. Too many people bring their spoiled brat suburban sensibilities with them and ruin it for everyone else thinking the world should cater to their pety demands.
That's the impression I get from many here; I don't like radios, I don't like too much talking, I don't like dogs, I don't like guitars, I don't like marijuana, etc, etc, etc
So many trails, so little time.
I don't understand why the people who complain about the Appalachian Trail won't hike a trail that fits their specifications.
If you don't like electronics crowds phones etc, Hike the BMT. I passed one hiker in 200 miles And had the world to myself.
No shelters to speak of either And it's not the kind of trail to attract know it all's.
Oh I almost forgot, No hiker feeds, You have to work for resupply, And large sections of trail are not groomed And require Basic navigation skills due to Lack of blazing.
Love the way Siri deals with capitalization...
yEp, try another spot if the trail is too busy...
I have family in Alaska, the father just came back from a remote island where there were just him, a few grizzlies and martins,<(sable), and that was it....
The other extreme is the A.t. In the Smokies at the beginning of Spring Break.........
Take your pick and there is a lot in between...
You can also hike early and late in the day and run into considerably less people, the way I like it but then, hey, I'm part hermit by nature....
HikerMom58
12-18-2012, 11:50
Is it really? for every 1 bad hiker I meet there are a least 100 great hikers. Therefore I'm not going to harp on the one bad experience. If you choose to hike in a big pack of hikers (the bubble) or stay at shelters, then accept that you are going to get a wide array of personalities.
Yay.... I can agree with you on this point. :) I agree with you that these problems are rare. Most hikers will be considerate & be a pleasure to interact with- on the trail & in/around the shelters.
When I read a post by someone pointing out the negative aspects of fellow humans/hikers on the trail- I ask myself, is the person sharing this info is saying that they believe this is the NORM or are they just talking about their own experience. or sharing things that they are fully aware of that can & does happen? Sharing doesn't = harping, IMHO.
We agreed earlier that people, on the trail, can give you a positive experience or a negative experience. Discussing the negative aspects of some people on the trail does not imply that they, themselves, have a bad attitude.
Don't you think that it's a given when people hike on a popular trail they know they will encounter many things- good and then, not so much?
A wide range of personalities is far different than other hikers being rude, insensitive or inconsiderate out there.
I will say this-cyber hikers are not nearly as kind, considerate or tolerate of others than actual hikers. It's easier to be "nasty" behind a keyboard.
I will say this-cyber hikers are not nearly as kind, considerate or tolerate of others than actual hikers. It's easier to be "nasty" behind a keyboard.
I've met quite a few of these cyber hikers and without exception every encounter has been pretty good. Most people are decent.
walknrow
12-18-2012, 12:23
What 10-K said!
HikerMom58
12-18-2012, 12:50
I've met quite a few of these cyber hikers and without exception every encounter has been pretty good. Most people are decent.
You are absolutely right about that 10-K.... everyone I have meet, from this site, has been very nice! My statement was an exaggeration... my bad. :( It is easier to type things you would never say in person tho, I will stand by that statement. I know it's true for me, anyway.....
Cookerhiker
12-18-2012, 16:36
If todays AT is just not your thing, I hear the BMT offers up a more remote solitary experience, at least for about 300 miles or so.
Some say its what the AT once was.
If you don't like electronics crowds phones etc, Hike the BMT. I passed one hiker in 200 miles And had the world to myself.
No shelters to speak of either And it's not the kind of trail to attract know it all's.
Oh I almost forgot, No hiker feeds, You have to work for resupply, And large sections of trail are not groomed And require Basic navigation skills due to Lack of blazing....
The same goes for the Allegheny (WV), Sheltowee (KY), and Mid-State (PA), all of which are over 200 miles.
TrailTrekr
12-18-2012, 18:41
I would be extremely happy to have a boutique hostel every 20 miles on the AT so I can have a hot shower...a healthy meal and a comfortable bed to lay my sore body down on...just think about how many women would hike the trail then! I've been ready post lately about all the new hostels opening but I haven't seen any new updates to the hostel listing page so where are all these new hostels eh?
slowfeet
12-19-2012, 01:15
so glad i walked the AT a few times in the days before internet, cell phones, AT videos and know-it-alls
"back in my day _____"
as far as the OP:
this is kind of a tricky question..... while sitting at home in a chair, sure, keep it as it is... but, while actually thru hiking I would welcome some of the things you mentioned. (hot showers, laundry, food service, better views, better grades).
I will say that if the AT was a local trail for me and I was only doing a small section/day hiking/car support/etc.... then I'd definitely want to keep it as much a wilderness experience as possible.
If you don't like electronics crowds phones etc, Hike the BMT. I passed one hiker in 200 miles And had the world to myself.
No shelters to speak of either And it's not the kind of trail to attract know it all's.
Oh I almost forgot, No hiker feeds, You have to work for resupply, And large sections of trail are not groomed And require Basic navigation skills due to Lack of blazing.
Love the way Siri deals with capitalization...
I have a similar experience on the AT - because I almost always hike it in the late fall/ winter