Is ATC the problem

[shelterbuilder]

IMHO, one of the things that the hiking community could do RIGHT NOW to help to mitigate the overcrowding problem is to learn and practice dispersed, L-N-T camping. There is a lot of talk about L-N-T, and yet most folks still tend to congregate around shelters. Short of additional regulations that would limit the numbers of people on any given section of trail at any time, this seems like a reasonable alternative. But I could be wrong....

[bobp]

Never mind.

[MuddyWaters]

IMHO, one of the things that the hiking community could do RIGHT NOW to help to mitigate the overcrowding problem is to learn and practice dispersed, L-N-T camping. There is a lot of talk about L-N-T, and yet most folks still tend to congregate around shelters. Short of additional regulations that would limit the numbers of people on any given section of trail at any time, this seems like a reasonable alternative. But I could be wrong....

Part of me would like to believe it would help. Shelters are congregating areas, promote crowds and group think behavior.Places without shelters, dont have these issues.

Part of me thinks we would just find trash and discarded gear located across 100 miles of woods, instead of concentrated at shelter sites. The real problem is a concentration of ignorant, selfish, uncaring hikers. They are always there, just less of them most of the year.

[hikeandbike5]

IMHO, one of the things that the hiking community could do RIGHT NOW to help to mitigate the overcrowding problem is to learn and practice dispersed, L-N-T camping. There is a lot of talk about L-N-T, and yet most folks still tend to congregate around shelters. Short of additional regulations that would limit the numbers of people on any given section of trail at any time, this seems like a reasonable alternative. But I could be wrong....

Actually, this is backwards- see the key tenet of LNT is below:

Travel and Camp on Durable Surfaces

• Durable surfaces include established trails and campsites, rock, gravel, dry grasses or snow.
• Protect riparian areas by camping at least 200 feet from lakes and streams.
• Good campsites are found, not made. Altering a site is not necessary.
  
  • In popular areas:
    
    • Concentrate use on existing trails and campsites.
    • Walk single file in the middle of the trail, even when wet or muddy.
    • Keep campsites small. Focus activity in areas where vegetation is absent.
    • In pristine areas:
    • Disperse use to prevent the creation of campsites and trails.
    • Avoid places where impacts are just beginning.

[Lauriep]

One thing I'd like to point out: ATC runs several trail crews that do work on any part of the A.T. from Georgia through New York that needs special expertise or more manpower than the local volunteer club can provide. Over the years, we've been so focused on promoting the local volunteer trail clubs that we've often neglected to really highlight our own volunteer trail crews.

In fact, much of the new treadway that has been built since the '80s in these areas have been ATC-led projects. Often the original impetus for project comes from the local club; the local trail club almost always provides volunteers to support.

Over time, some of the local trail clubs have gained enough expertise through working with our trail crews and by participating in our skills training courses that their skill levels are increased and they need the ATC crews less and less. (That was the original intention of the trail crews).

It is true that ATC crews rarely do routine maintenance, although that's a big part of what the ATC S.W.E.A.T. crew does in the Smokies (because it's so very remote it's hard for local volunteers to maintain those sections when it can take a whole day just to walk in).

Information on all the ATC Crews can be found at appalachiantrail.org/crews. We help recruit for the Green Mountain Club, which maintains trail in Vermont, the Maine A.T. Club that maintains trail in most of Maine. AMC and DOC do the rest.

[July]

I f you need some help jus Holler" We are Here To Help>

[Dogwood]

Some of you are nuts.

On New Years day my wife and I walked up Mount Monadnock-- which is widely reported as the second most climbed mountain in the world.

While we didn't go up one of the main 2 trails we started from the main entrance along with over 250 other people from that lot and guess what? It was great.

This mountain (in southern NH but not on AT) is holding up fine. We found a place above tree line for lunch in total privacy, and frankly I was encouraged to see a great many young people out. The birds and beasts could care less hat 100,000 climb to the top each year, and so couldn't I. New Hampshire had MANY mountains without a sole on them that day, and had we wanted to climb one, we would have.

In the Whites, the AT is also full of people in the summer, and again say hurray! If you want solitude you can find it even on the 4th of July-- just start hiking at 5:30AM and you will have ANY stretch of trail all to yourself for hours. And when the people do emerge, only a small percentage will be thru hikers. The rest? Just people who are lucky enough to live in an area where the backcountry is accessible to all.

Are there ways to make the AT experience better? Of course. The ATC and the maintaining clubs will get there. But really, just repeating the mantra that the number of hikers is too high misses the mark. Don't forget that some 8 million or more people walk some part of the AT each year.

This is a good thing.

If you are referring to comments like Muddy Waters saying, "there are known overcrowding issues in the springtime in the south. Trash, discarded items, overflowing privies" by saying "some of you are nuts?", in regards to overcrowding as MW described it, you obviously have not been on the AT in the south during late March into early May particularly in fair weather. On many occasions I've arrived at AT shelters late on a rainy or cold day during those months especially when the AT thru-hiker masses are entrenched at these locations counting as many 40+ campers/hikers at one AT shelter and the immediate area surrounding the shelter. As Lone Wolf said, "you been to georgia lately?

Then, you follow up, only after being challenged, by amending/changing your position saying:

No. And I recognize there is a problem.

Possible solutions:

1) Reduce the number of people on the trail
2) Change conditions for those who are out there

Just saying that too many are too quick to see the first one as the future, and too few may be looking at the second (at least on line).

One of the things you are surprisingly missing is that even though Mt Monadnock is touted as one of the most climbed mountains(uh hem) in the world it is accomplished in a system of trails that resemble an octopus of trails so the usage is dispersed more so than on a single trail as the AT is mostly perceived especially from a thru-hiker perspective. And, even though it may be one of the most climbed ah hem mountains those numbers are spread out over a period of time having less of a concentration on one trail in the short term as can happen on the AT in the south during spring. I'm surprised you missed these important differences in regard to number of users since you've been actively participating in a few AT numbers related threads making several insightful well written posts.

The very perception of the AT as a single "official" maintained trail with fixed termini rather than a trail system with multiple TH termini in relation to a 2000 mile Certificate is part of what leads to concentration issues especially among the AT thru-hiking crowd in the spring. The Mt Manadnock experience you relate could be somewhat similar on the AT IF the AT, in regards to 2000 mile Certificates, included the allowance for using miles gained on some alternates. The AT could hold a larger % of users and likely ease some number related issues by dispersing the crowd.

[Connie]

The problem of crowds and their trash doesn't happen when no "conveniences" are provided.

If you get 10 minutes from the parking lot, you will see practically no one, and that is at Glacier National Park

If you want to see "the hoards" in Glacier National Park, go where there is a hiker hut or public restrooms.

You would have virtually no trash, if you didn't make it "easy" for hikers and non-hikers.

In fact, my last out-and-back up and down mountain ridges in Glacier National Park, I saw no trash whatsoever.

Glacier National Park is one of the most heavily used parks, but these park visitors don't go hiking because there aren't the conveniences. They stop where there are conveniences. They take photos. Some of the park visitors have an overnight stay in the campgrounds. They enjoy the fresh air. They have their campsite. They participate in the programs. Others ride the boats on the lake. Others ride in the historic cars. Others stay in the park hotels.

Almost no hikers. This is great for the hikers!

[rickb]

Then, you follow up, only after being challenged, by amending/changing your position saying:

You miss the point.

If you define the problem as the number of people, the fix is limited to finding ways to reduce the number of people. Period.

If you define the problem as crappy and overcrowded camping areas etc. the potential fixes include other solutions as well. Better solutions, IMO.

The AT can be made to absorb a great many people. My examples -- the Whites and Mount Monadnock were presented to illustrate examples of where that is done well.

[MuddyWaters]

Again, you must define what you want it to be 30 yrs from now , to address the issues.

Do you want 200 hikers per day on the trail in GA? An unbroken string of people stretching for 10 miles?

At some point limits are necessary, its a single trail.

All our national parks, state parks, and forest areas have limits on usage to protect the user experience and keep environmental impact to a manageable level. The model for sustainability exists.

Or, you can decide the AT is not a wilderness experience at all, but something else all together.

Building parallel trails instead of a single trail works too. Using the BMT is an option, but one day it would be maxed out as well.

What is the long term plan to handle growth?

There is none, that is the problem.

[Furlough]

talking ATC harpers ferry or boiling springs? ATC doesn't actually do trail maintenance.

Totally incorrect. In fact if you go to their web site, and you are so inclined you can read about, maybe even volunteer for the upcoming 2015 trail crew opportunities.

Furlough

[Connie]

I think the ATC must not be thinking about sustainability of a trail, but sustainsbility of income to "trail towns".

It seems to me the AT idea was "conceived" at a time when rich city people started going out of the cities to the Pocanos and the Adirondacks and other mountain resorts. There were private resorts constructed along the proposed AT.

It seems to me, the AT is seen as a commercial enterprise, not at all a part of conservation of a trail.

It seems to me, the AT never had an authentic trail history, like other trails in early american history.

I know "our" CDT never had an authentic history.

Thr "Old Trail" was the length of The Continental Divide along The Rocky Mountain Front from present-day Canada to Mexico.

It is my impression, the AT needs to "define" itself. Is it a trail? Is it a walkway? A thoroughfare? A corridor?

I read, here, at WhiteBlaze people only need sign-in at two locations, then, how do you know the 30% or 20% are thru-hikers?

How do you know they aren't driving up to the next stop to put in an appearance, to get in on the next "party"?

Is the AT for serving thru-hikers? Is that how the AT wants to define itself?

It seems to me a Statement of Purpose is lacking, or, not generally known.

The only thing that is apparent is "cashing in" on the trail. Get the kids. They will drop out, eventually.

[Poppins]

"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded." --- Yogi Berra

[Starchild]

Or, you can decide the AT is not a wilderness experience at all, but something else all together.

The AT Thru is a 'journeying experience' more then a 'wilderness experience' IMHO

It is not a backcountry trail experience anymore as used by thru hikers - it evolved, mostly naturally, to a journey experience. The AT is their main 'day to day' highway - aside: I often visualize the AT trail as a ribbon of light and can sometimes use that to locate the trail when not well blazed, yes I do actually see the AT' as this at times ( I attribute this as sort of a spiritual reflection of so many people traveling it, and even though I can sometimes see it I do believe it also attracts others who may not be able to conscientiously detect this, but on some level feel some attraction to it).

It is a combining, a merging, of wilderness and community trail thru the journey. Both working together to form the AT thru hiking experience. That I believe is what is so attractive about the AT Thru hike.

If a Thru hiker wants to have a more of a pure wilderness experience, that's when they typically get off the AT and step onto a side trail, do a blue blaze, or a out and back. But usually on the 'AT highway' it is the journey that typically motivates, not the wilderness.

As it stands, the 'Journey Experience' is not going to go away anytime soon as such a thing has always resonated at a very deep level with people. I also believe it is greatly beneficial to have such a opportunity as the AT Thru to allow such a journey experience and perhaps, and IMHO, a greater use for the AT then the 'wilderness experience' as that does not need a 2000+ mile long trail, and perhaps because the AT is a linear trail is exactly why it became what it is today, it's simply a better fit for what the AT is.

[dudeijuststarted]

"It seems to me" that ^Connie has never stepped onto the AT or seen the extravagant splendor of an AT trail town!

[Coffee]

Whether the AT is wilderness depends on the context and reference point. To a European who has walked the Camino or gone hut to hut in the Alps, I'm sure the AT is wilderness. To someone who has hiked in the High Sierras, the AT doesn't seem like wilderness. The best thing about the AT is accessibility to major metropolitan areas. I can be on the AT in under two hours even living a stone's throw from the nation's capital, using either a car or a train. New Yorkers can do the same. With that access comes certain compromises that won't exist on a more remote trail. I've enjoyed my section hikes on the AT and view it as a personal challenge and, at times, a cultural experience. Walking through Maryland, for example, there's a tremendous amount of Civil War history. The towns are interesting as well. HF alone justifies a day of exploration. I look forward to thru hiking the AT SOBO in 2016 or 2017 viewed as a cultural journey, and I'll have my share of solitude simply by the fact that I'm not hiking NOBO. I'm not sure why anyone with a preference for more solitude can't simply do the same, or do a flip flop. As for NOBO numbers, I think that the southern terminus should be changed to include the approach trail and some type of quota should be implemented to limit starts per day, and it should be enforced. At the very least that will move many starts from the weekend to weekdays. Would it solve the problem? Not entirely but it won't hurt. Sure, anyone could enter at a road crossing after the start but if the southern terminus includes the approach trail, bypassing the quota would mean not doing a full thru hike. Most thru hikers won't want to do that.

[cbg]

How anyone feels that any one person or group is to blame for the popularity of the AT is beyond me. IMO, the more people that are hiking in the USA is a good thing considering the obesity rate that we are faced with each day. To see young adults, families, retired couples, etc...on the trail is a great problem to have. I do understand that the more people that use the AT it increases the cost of maintaining the AT. While I know it would not be a popular decision for most hikers but the AT may have to make the difficult decision to charge a fee to hike the AT much like people purchase fishing/hunting license. By requiring a license/permit to hike the AT you would immediately decrease the amount of traffic on the AT. The proceeds from the license could be used for maintaining the AT.

[ki0eh]

Building parallel trails instead of a single trail works too. Using the BMT is an option, but one day it would be maxed out as well.

What is the long term plan to handle growth?

There is none, that is the problem.

Great Eastern Trail http://www.greateasterntrail.net exists as much if not more so than the A.T. in Earl Shaffer '48 days.

It's maybe an hour's drive further in from the coast at any given point than the A.T. is. And, in PA especially, its route is often more scenic.

But you don't even need all of one hand to count the number of people who have thru-hiked it. http://www.gethiking.net

[Grampie]

The "blame" for making the AT what it is becomeing is just the society we live in today. For the youth of today hiking the AT after collage is a way of putting off having to deal with their future. i.e. student loans, finding a job and starting a adult type life.
The ability to post on social media "the good times" make for more and more folks to want to partake in them. If more hikers posted about the dirt, hunger, being wet and cold, hiking with bugs, up hill and down, days on end the readers and followers on social media might think twice before they join "the party", and attempt a thru-hike.

[Almost There]

Most users of the AT are not thru-hikers, and as someone rolling into his tenth year of sectioning I can say that for most of the year the trail is nowhere near overcrowded, and have hiked numerous days where I encounter no one, or perhaps one or two other hikers. Living in Georgia I have also seen the havoc wrought by hundreds of hikers starting in the same week. Do I think that the trail would benefit from a plan to lesson impact (alternates up through the Smokies), absolutely. I also think it would benefit if less trail feeds/magic were provided for hikers...this leads to the "good times" message that is shared and encourages folks to come out and party their way up the trail. I was out last March with my 4 year old son and saw two hiker feeds between Springer and Suches...REALLY?!? Is there really a need for such things in the first 20 miles of trail? I understand that it comes from people wanting to do nice things, but it also leads to increased numbers (think feeding the bears), and it serves to reinforce the idea that thru hikers are special and deserve special treatment.

The ATC does not encourage this behavior, and considering that they operate in conjunction with the NPS I would suggest their focus is on the majority of people who use the trail (day hikers and section hikers). These are the folks more prone to join the ATC, have more money to burn, and who will stay involved in trail issues.