Baxter State Park AT concerns - Wow

[TJ aka Teej]

When should northbounders call to secure their reservations for on of the KSG leen-tos, TJ?

Perhaps they can contact the ATC with their concerns about this.

Jensen Bissell is a loon. Locals know it. The AT brings a lot of income to BSP and the surrounding economy. Thruhikers have two choices. Obey the rules and deal with the overzealous persecution or find an alternative.

Locals know Jensen to be an excellent steward of Governor Baxter's generous gift to the people of Maine. The AT is/has been a minor player in the local economy. "overzealous persecution"? Without mentioning Jurek's Circus, please give examples.

Any system put into place will be "gamed" by a percentage of hikers

True, even the 12 person/first come plan for the Birches gets gamed by ATers who send someone ahead to sign up 12 buddies.

If BSP gets so many visitors that it starts to damage the park, access will be restricted. Simple enough.

That's being true to the mission.

The thruhiker issue didn't happen suddenly but as has been documented its been building since prior to his [Jensen's] tenancy.

True. When I first started writing for the ALDHA Companion many years ago I'd have to sit through scoldings related to a litany of poor ATer behavior.

ATC could also implement a voluntary registration fee at the start of the journey that would give those who finish a discounted price for their entrance to BSP.

There is no entry fee for hikers entering Baxter. There is already a 50% discount for ATers to camp inside the Park.

[rickb]

Bottom line, the existance of the Birches provides a great benefit for a traditional user of the park with regard to his ability to secure a reservation at KSCG for himself and his family.

To think otherwise is foolish.

[peakbagger]

Bottom line, the existance of the Birches provides a great benefit for a traditional user of the park with regard to his ability to secure a reservation at KSCG for himself and his family.

To think otherwise is foolish.

I guess I don't see where you are coming from. The Birches cant be reserved and is limited to folks who sign in at the turnstile at Abol Bridge. Unless the traditional user wants to park at Abol Bridge with his family and represent they are distance hikers I don't see where the Birches does much for him. I really haven't seen any reports where family occupying spaces that should have gone to thruhikers is the primary problem, the problem is that the number of distance hikers exceeds the Birches capacity on a frequent basis during peak season.

[rickb]

I guess I don't see where you are coming from. The Birches cant be reserved and is limited to folks who sign in at the turnstile at Abol Bridge. Unless the traditional user wants to park at Abol Bridge with his family and represent they are distance hikers I don't see where the Birches does much for him. I really haven't seen any reports where family occupying spaces that should have gone to thruhikers is the primary problem, the problem is that the number of distance hikers exceeds the Birches capacity on a frequent basis during peak season.

If the Birches were not available to thru hikers, those thru hikers would seek an alternative.

One alternative -- the one I would take as a Nobo -- would be to call ahead for a reservation at KSCG.

Others would elect to take thier chances of finding space at KSCG, and just go with the flow if none was available. Which, is fine, of course. Everything would work out, one way or another.

But how many "planners" would think like me? How many northbounders would call from Monson to see if they could get a reservation. How many would call from Gorham? Heck, how many would call from Harper's Ferry "just in case"?

Even if the percentages are small, that would amount to a whole lot of 5+ person lean-tos being tied up by type A thru hikers. Right?

The problem is, for every thru hiker that makes a reservation for one of those shelters, there is a traditional user (family or group of friends on vacation) that will be unable to do so.

Right now, there really is not a compelling reason for a thru hiker to make a private reservation in advance. That is a good thing. It is efficient.

The Birches represent t a win-win. Good for thru hikers (of course) but also for everyone else.

[takethisbread]

Jensen Bissell is a loon. Locals know it. The AT brings a lot of income to BSP and the surrounding economy. Thruhikers have two choices. Obey the rules and deal with the overzealous persecution or find an alternative.

Interesting contention, I haven't heard that from the locals I know. The traffic to BSP and the local whitewater rafting industry far exceeds any contribution from thru hikers to the local economy. Sure there are a couple of locals scratching out a living running shuttles and a hostel and the one remaining diner in town gets propped up by thru hikers but its a very seasonal business. The proprietors do it well but I expect if you look at the books they do it as much as a hobby as for a living.

.

I like your well thought out response and some of this I agree with. In many respects the park has been revitalized and the over zealousness of Park Rangers and the aggressive public relations stance has it's reasonable genesis. That said, in recent years, Thruhikers are being politically targeted by BSP for what I believe are unfounded claims. I visit quite a bit, and I'd say there is less a preponderance of Thruhikers excessive drinking, than locals/section hikers. Just an observation. The Jurek case, and the statement issued by Bissell preceding the hearing, was absolute garbage and I felt the locals thought he was losing it. It was a dumb move. There was a shred of authenticity in their reaction.
The Appalachian Trail is crucial to the community, economically. The Trail brings not only Thruhikers into the area but section hikers and Prestige to the region. Part of BSP appeal to tourists is Katahdin and the idea that it's the northern terminus of the AT. Take that away, and tourism will drop significantly over the next ten years.
If the BSP doesn't want us, then no problem, but the thruhiker behavior bs is a red herring. Absolutely no difference that I can see outside of shear numbers. There are more unruly Thruhikers bc there's more of them. What Jurek did has been going on for 30 years. I feel bad for ferryman dave, but the evidence put forth was hardly the type of empirical data that's convinced me. The douche bags could have easily been lying section hikers, or maybe the Ferryman perspective is colored by the attitudes at the home office. Who knows.
If they don't want us fine. There are plenty of wonderful options to finish the AT and we should start exploring.
-The Canadian Border using the Cohos Trail
-the Canadian Border using the IAT (Peaked Mtn) or LT
I'm sure there are others. Thruhikers must behave themselves and don't take my frustration with any absolving of misdeeds by Thruhikers. What I don't like are the public mischaracterizations of some in our community with apparent malice. I find Thruhikers to be great ambassadors for BSP and Maine. It be hard to think otherwise.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr. Clean]

The other option that folk seem to keep forgetting is when they get to KSC, take the shuttle into Millinocket. Simply take the shuttle back on the day you want to climb, then take it back to Millinocket when you're done.

[HighLow]

I agree with previous posts, un-respectful behavior should never be tolerated. I also believe it is up to us as a community not to condone and ignore instances of such. We must work actually and actively to prevent, even shame those who would spoil the lot. It's unfortunate to say the least.

Populations an issue.

[The Wanna Bs]

This being my first hike on the Appalachian Trail, I don't think my question was answered with any sort of consideration of my newbie status. How can a hiker be sure just when he will arrive at Baxter. We are starting at Harper's Ferry. We are taking it easy, being older to not push ourselves and end up not making it. We will stop and rest when we need to do so, we will hike shorter days on days when we need to. I do not see anyway we can pre-plan a time when we will get anywhere except maybe the next nero.
Is that soon enough to make the reservation required?

[egilbe]

This being my first hike on the Appalachian Trail, I don't think my question was answered with any sort of consideration of my newbie status. How can a hiker be sure just when he will arrive at Baxter. We are starting at Harper's Ferry. We are taking it easy, being older to not push ourselves and end up not making it. We will stop and rest when we need to do so, we will hike shorter days on days when we need to. I do not see anyway we can pre-plan a time when we will get anywhere except maybe the next nero.
Is that soon enough to make the reservation required?

You can't, until you know how many miles you are going to do. When you get to Abol bridge, arrange to spend the night at the Birches or arrange a shuttle into the Park, or Millinocket, or see if they have space available at KSC. By this point you should have learned to be flexible and deal with the situation as it arises. If you arrive in the Summer, expect KSC to be filled. If its the fall, and not a weekend, its a very good chance there will be space available at the campgrounds.

[MuddyWaters]

This being my first hike on the Appalachian Trail, I don't think my question was answered with any sort of consideration of my newbie status. How can a hiker be sure just when he will arrive at Baxter. We are starting at Harper's Ferry. We are taking it easy, being older to not push ourselves and end up not making it. We will stop and rest when we need to do so, we will hike shorter days on days when we need to. I do not see anyway we can pre-plan a time when we will get anywhere except maybe the next nero.
Is that soon enough to make the reservation required?

You cant be sure. As a newbie you have a high possibility of quitting before then, probably 50%-ish.

But, on average, it would take around 13 weeks. By the time you are 6 weeks away you can nail it to the exact hour of day IF you want. Nobody wants, thats part of the problem.

If you are hiking with the concept that you will just do whatever you feel like, when you feel like it, you probably arent going to finish an AT thru hike.

Plan a daily mileage you can make relatively easily. Leave one day per week as a zero. When behind, hike more. When ahead, take more time off or build a cushion for future time off. Look at resupplies and adjust for any extra time needed. Its EASY to stick to a REASONABLE schedule. Reasonable is different for different people.

All the crap about not knowing when arrive is excuses to not have a schedule, because they dont want a schedule. An in shape thru hiker can choose to hike 12 miles or 20 miles on most days, depending on what they need to do. That gives a lot of adjustability.

[LoneStranger]

The Hundred Mile gives you a great place to adjust to arrive on a given reservation date. Plenty of miles if you are behind and need to stomp some out to catch up, including some "relatively" flat sections. On the flip side if you need to waste some time there are lots of great places, so doing a series of short days with long, relaxing camps lets you slow down to get there on the intended day with the bonus of arriving with rested legs for the final climb.

Right now I have a two week trip from Stratton penciled in for June with my wife and daughter coming to meet me at a BSP campsite after I come down from the peak. I have no worries making that reservation months in advance because I'll use the approach described above. Hopefully I'm ahead of schedule and relaxing with my toes in the water, but if not, having that hard finish date will certainly be a good motivator to put the miles in. Well that and the cooler full of goodies my wife will be bringing

[takethisbread]

I agree with previous posts, un-respectful behavior should never be tolerated. I also believe it is up to us as a community not to condone and ignore instances of such. We must work actually and actively to prevent, even shame those who would spoil the lot. It's unfortunate to say the least.

Populations an issue.

There are instances of poor behavior. What is up for debate is who is the culprit. The forces at work in BSP point fingers at Thruhikers at each instance when in many cases it's tourists with little respect for nature and their rules. Imo the whole thing is a red herring, and Thruhikers are being scapegoated. I visit BSP a lot and this is what I see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[squeezebox]

Right or wrong . Baxter's attitude is what it is. And there's not much we can do to change it. Pretty much a put up and shut up situation. I doubt Baxter will change their attitude but we can change ours. The easiest thing is to follow their rules. Whether you like it or not.

[takethisbread]

Right or wrong . Baxter's attitude is what it is. And there's not much we can do to change it. Pretty much a put up and shut up situation. I doubt Baxter will change their attitude but we can change ours. The easiest thing is to follow their rules. Whether you like it or not.

Exactly. Except I don't think there is anything you can do to dissuade them. They see problems where there aren't much to see, then cast blame in the easiest direction. The AT doesn't need BSP. BSP doesn't need the AT. Some marriages weren't meant to last forever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TJ aka Teej]

The easiest thing is to follow their rules.

Hike in small groups, sign out at the trailhead, camp in designated areas. The rest is stuff you shouldn't do anywhere.

[4eyedbuzzard]

There are instances of poor behavior. What is up for debate is who is the culprit. The forces at work in BSP point fingers at Thruhikers at each instance when in many cases it's tourists with little respect for nature and their rules. Imo the whole thing is a red herring, and Thruhikers are being scapegoated. I visit BSP a lot and this is what I see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would venture that thru-hikers aren't completely innocent though either. Thru-hikers tend to complain a lot when they get "singled out" and disciplined (as in arrested, fined, removed, etc.) for doing things they know they shouldn't. Just a few examples:

For many years, there were complaints of hikers mooning the cog railway on Mt. Washington. It was damn near a thru-hiking tradition. Over the past decade fines and arrests have ended a lot of this practice.

For many years thru-hikers have complained about being fined for swimming in Sunfish Pond in NJ, when it is clearly marked as being prohibited.

Some hostels have closed and cited thru-hiker behavior as at least part of their reason for doing so - predominantly due to drinking and drug use and associated behavior, even when the hostel rules clearly state such behavior is prohibited. Most notable recent closure was the Jail House in Palmerton, PA. Many, if not most, hostel owner/operators can cite numerous instances of behavior issues.

Note also the continuing whining from some thru-hikers over rules in GSMNP, WMNF, BSP, etc. regarding camping restrictions, permits, dogs, rescue policies, etc - along with the incessant bashing of the AMC. Even though all these rules and expenses are known well in advance of ever setting a foot on Springer mountain.

Sorry, but thru-hikers as a community are hardly innocent. It may be only a few who create this issue, but this element of the thru-hiking community draws a disproportionate amount of negative attention to the group as a whole. And that's a problem that thru-hikers need to address through education and peer pressure.

Exactly. Except I don't think there is anything you can do to dissuade them. They see problems where there aren't much to see, then cast blame in the easiest direction. The AT doesn't need BSP. BSP doesn't need the AT. Some marriages weren't meant to last forever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the AT needs Baxter more than Baxter needs the AT. The same goes for the WMNF. And GSMNP. And SNP. And [insert park entity of choice]. They all would do fine from both a revenue and mission fulfillment standpoint without the few thousand AT thru-hikers they see every year. They all have their own trail systems and plenty of other visitors and section hikers. Serving as a backdrop and routing for the AT is not these parks primary reason for existing. The AT, and thru-hikers especially, are guests and should behave as such.

That all said, I think the worst of it will simply blow over. Time heals most wounds. But there is both an opportunity and a need here for the hiking community to better educate other hikers when they draw negative attention, and through peer pressure to police its own members better so that thru-hikers set a more positive example to other hikers and the community at large.

[takethisbread]

I would venture that thru-hikers aren't completely innocent though either. Thru-hikers tend to complain a lot when they get "singled out" and disciplined (as in arrested, fined, removed, etc.) for doing things they know they shouldn't. Just a few examples:

For many years, there were complaints of hikers mooning the cog railway on Mt. Washington. It was damn near a thru-hiking tradition. Over the past decade fines and arrests have ended a lot of this practice.

For many years thru-hikers have complained about being fined for swimming in Sunfish Pond in NJ, when it is clearly marked as being prohibited.

Some hostels have closed and cited thru-hiker behavior as at least part of their reason for doing so - predominantly due to drinking and drug use and associated behavior, even when the hostel rules clearly state such behavior is prohibited. Most notable recent closure was the Jail House in Palmerton, PA. Many, if not most, hostel owner/operators can cite numerous instances of behavior issues.

Note also the continuing whining from some thru-hikers over rules in GSMNP, WMNF, BSP, etc. regarding camping restrictions, permits, dogs, rescue policies, etc - along with the incessant bashing of the AMC. Even though all these rules and expenses are known well in advance of ever setting a foot on Springer mountain.

Sorry, but thru-hikers as a community are hardly innocent. It may be only a few who create this issue, but this element of the thru-hiking community draws a disproportionate amount of negative attention to the group as a whole. And that's a problem that thru-hikers need to address through education and peer pressure.



I think the AT needs Baxter more than Baxter needs the AT. The same goes for the WMNF. And GSMNP. And SNP. And [insert park entity of choice]. They all would do fine from both a revenue and mission fulfillment standpoint without the few thousand AT thru-hikers they see every year. They all have their own trail systems and plenty of other visitors and section hikers. Serving as a backdrop and routing for the AT is not these parks primary reason for existing. The AT, and thru-hikers especially, are guests and should behave as such.

That all said, I think the worst of it will simply blow over. Time heals most wounds. But there is both an opportunity and a need here for the hiking community to better educate other hikers when they draw negative attention, and through peer pressure to police its own members better so that thru-hikers set a more positive example to other hikers and the community at large.

They don't need 3000 Thruhikers. they do need the AT and the over million visitors it brings. Absolutely. The AT needs none of those places except WMNF, but that isn't in peril. The purely anecdotal evidence u site is the same stuff that's been going on for as long as I remember. Hostels have been opening and closing since I started doing this. Thruhikers Have poured champagne and partied a bit on katahdin since I was a child. I am a regular at BSP. Never in history have I ever seen more well informed and aware Thruhikers than now. Is there a few bad apples? Yes ! That's life. There's no amount of effort gonna change that. BSP drinking partying issue is almost certainly more impacted by weekend warriors and enhanced by bigger Thruhiker numbers. The ATC has been amazing at educating and providing alternate routes. There are plenty of folks like me who are glad to see some attention to detail in BSP, but turned off by the rhetoric of of the FOBSP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sly]

They don't need 3000 Thruhikers. they do need the AT and the over million visitors it brings. Absolutely.

Baxter State Park would be seriously overwhelmed with 1 million AT hikers. The yearly attendance stands around 75,000 of which AT thru-hikers (those doing the 100 mile wilderness and the AT in Baxter) make up 3%. If the AT were rerouted lots of visitors would still be hiking the Hunt Trail.

Which the exception of Baxter, the AT needs all of those places. How would trail get around the Smokies, or the Shennies? Any alternative starts in the middle of the parks. However, if the trail were to end outside of Baxter, or Maine, it would be a lesser trail.

The ATC hasn't encouraged alternate routes such as the BMT or Tuscarora Trail, the LT or Cohos Trail to lessen impact, but alternate hikes such as flip-flopping.

What Baxter and the AT don't need is this.



Anyone look familiar?

[Don H]

That group summited on 8/29/14. Other photos are easy to find.

[takethisbread]

Baxter State Park would be seriously overwhelmed with 1 million AT hikers. The yearly attendance stands around 75,000 of which AT thru-hikers (those doing the 100 mile wilderness and the AT in Baxter) make up 3%. If the AT were rerouted lots of visitors would still be hiking the Hunt Trail.

Which the exception of Baxter, the AT needs all of those places. How would trail get around the Smokies, or the Shennies? Any alternative starts in the middle of the parks. However, if the trail were to end outside of Baxter, or Maine, it would be a lesser trail.

Nobody said a million people go to BSP and don't try to shame me u hypocrite. I still get out there, a lot. which more than almost everyone in this thread. U sit on your computer and judge others. This champagne issues has been done every day on katahdin since who knows when 30 years? we both know that. It became a major issue in 2015 (and a dumb one)
The beer spilled every night in campsites all over BSP isn't a problem but Jurek's was or mine ? Makes no sense. Some of the Rangers get it. It is a political issue. Next time I'm up there why don't u join me and we can discuss this issue off the record with the people working on the ground and they will be honest with you what's going on.

Don't sit in judgement of what others do what u don't . I never said the ATC encourages use of the COHOS trail I wish they would . They have done a good job encouraging other ways. Of course I know that . And no the trail doesn't need the other sites as trails already exist to the west of the AT and there is a cooperative arrangement between the national trails and the national parks as they are susceptible to public influence. The BSP situation is different


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk