Illegal camping on Max Patch

[Seatbelt]

I just don't see the "absurd damage" you're talking about with hikers, as compared to horseback riders or bicyclists or ATVs. A perfect example is in the Mt Rogers backcountry which is bisected with the Appalachian Trail and surrounded on both sides with wilderness areas open to horseback riders, i.e. "saddle potatoes."

Hundreds, thousands of hikers and backpackers use the AT thru the area and there is almost no camping damage and no trail damage because it's off limits to horsemen. Go into the Lewis Fork wilderness or the Wilson Creek wilderness nearby and a month worth of horseback riding ruins the trails with long deep mud ruts along with having their scattered poop everywhere. Is it okay for hikers and backpackers to poop right on the trail and leave it above ground? It must be okay since the horseback riders do it---horse poop that is. And in creeks too.

Your "absurd damage" must be in reference to hikers building giant bonfires or leaving 24 empty beer cans or skillets or blue tarps or cutting down living trees or a hundred other acts of idiocy. But for actual trail usage and damage, hikers do little. Some foot trails are much more rugged than others and on rainy days when these trails are used by 20 or 30 people a day such trails can get rutted and muddy and slick since they are so steep. But this can be solved by careful trail construction like wooden steeps and switchbacks.

Now throw a couple 1,000 lb horses on these steep trails and they destroy steps, mark up rocks, and turn a normal trail into a rutted churned up mess.

I agree with this. The two times I have been on Max Patch, there were dozens of visitors all over the place but very few actual hikers. Most were picnicking, flying kites taking pics, etc.

[BirdBrain]

I agree with this. The two times I have been on Max Patch, there were dozens of visitors all over the place but very few actual hikers. Most were picnicking, flying kites taking pics, etc.

I agree as well. However, the agreement over the actions of non hikers is irrelevent on a hikers' site and does little good. See you guys in the next thread about increased regulations. I will make my points there too. No progress will ever occur when it is always someone else's fault.

[Bronk]

What good is a no-camping rule by the forest service if off road vehicles can get to the top? Are the off-roaders camping too? Doubtful, just joyriding and unable to actually walk I guess. So why pick on backpackers and tell them to not camp when no effort is made to curtail off-road vehicle use??

If I remember right they had to pull out a gate or cut some cables to get the off road vehicle up there.

[Bronk]

The day I got to Max Patch I got there at about noon and was so enchanted by the place I stayed all day. There was an awesome sunset there where the sky was blood red and the 20 or so of us that were still there got some awesome photos of black silouettes of people against that red sky. We hung out on top until about 10pm looking at the stars. At that point everybody left...most of the people camped just into the woods and I ended up night hiking to Walnut. I didn't see anybody camp on the bald itself, and I'm not really sure why it would be necessary to do so. Seems to me like you'd be exposed to more wind up there.

[new2hiking]

Absurd given who is doing it. I fully agree with your assessment that damages done by machines is far greater. However, that does not absolve the actions by those that know better. I am not going to list the damages that we do because someone will post a picture of land movers carving up acres. That damage much greater but completely irrelevant to a discussion of what hikers ought to do. It is much like saying Hitler was responsible for the deaths of millions, therefore it is okay for me to shoot the neighbors dog. No it is not okay. It would be absurd. I can't do anything about Hitler. I can keep myself from shooting the neighbors dog. We need to focus on the mote in our own eyes.

Absolutely agree with you. I don't understand the mentality of some here basically along the lines of "hikers are angels"!! I'm newer to hiking so have seen a lot less than many here, yet what I've already seen has me ill. Leaving trash everywhere, cutting down trees to use in newly made fire pits, leaving fires smoldering well after leaving the area, not to mention the postings on another blog site dedicated to the AT regarding hikers killing animals along the trail (groundhogs, chipmunks, snakes, etc) in very cruel ways and then bragging about it .
Hikers are not angels. We can, and do, make incredibly negative impacts on an area. Just because it's not you, or not something you've seen, doesn't mean it's not happening.
BirdBrain, IMO you've got the right idea

[Joey]

Off-road vehicles had done quite a bit of damage atop Max Patch in early 2013, before most that year's crop of hikers had walked through or camped nearby. But by the time we had, just a few months hence, most that damage was difficult to detect. Maybe it was all the rain we'd incurred, but the area didn't look too fragile, and probably still doesn't, though I imagine it is in small, hard-to-see ways. Of course, we shouldn't forget that all the balds are bald for a reason, already altered by the hands of (an earlier) man.

Those particular individuals were apprehended by the USFS Law Enforcement and were prosecuted. They had run through the wooden barrier gate in their 4x4 pickups and did other acts of vandalism. There used to be an information block there at the parking area stating that is was illegal to camp on the top of the Patch. The local thugs who damaged the area were also required to pay a hefty restitution fee for the damage they caused.

[QiWiz]

Actually, there are excellent reasons to camp there: It's a fabulous place to observer meteor showers and other astronomical events.

Camping does not have to equal campfires, either, especially when there is no wood nearby.

I'm sorry to hear camping on the summit has been forbidden. I remember fondly a cold night watching the Leonid meteor shower.

+1
Also a wonderful place to watch a sunrise and sunset from. When I was there I did not see any signs restricting camping on top and it was a high point of my section hike to do just that. When did the prohibition go into effect?

[Lugnut]

I was there in May and I didn't see any signs saying you couldn't camp.

[rickb]

I was there in May and I didn't see any signs saying you couldn't camp.

There is not a closure order restricting camping on Max Patch and as such camping is not prohibited.

-- as per Forest Service on 5/18/2015.

[Pedaling Fool]

I think what's confusing everyone is the No-Hammock rule on Max Patch. Traditional camping is fine.

[Slo-go'en]

I was there in May and I didn't see any signs saying you couldn't camp.

Does there have to be a sign everywhere you shouldn't camp? Sure, camping on an exposed bald can be nice on a good night, but it can also be down right dangerous if a violent thunderstorm rolls in the middle of the night, which is a common thing to happen.

Reading a lot of trail journals this season it seems there is a disturbing trend for thru hikers to camp any damn place they please, regardless of regulations. This could be a result of the overcrowding forcing more dispersed camping in the south and forming bad habits which extend up the trail.

[rickb]

Does there have to be a sign everywhere you shouldn't camp? Sure, camping on an exposed bald can be nice on a good night, but it can also be down right dangerous if a violent thunderstorm rolls in the middle of the night, which is a common thing to happen.

Here is the thread confirming camping is allowed on Max Patch:

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...g-on-Max-Patch

[Slo-go'en]

Here is the thread confirming camping is allowed on Max Patch:

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...g-on-Max-Patch

Max Patch is a pretty big area so in general camping there is okay but hopefully at the established site as you enter the woods on the north end. I still say camping at the top of the bald is likely not a good idea.

[TNhiker]

Sure, camping on an exposed bald can be nice on a good night, but it can also be down right dangerous if a violent thunderstorm rolls in the middle of the night, which is a common thing to happen.

and, fwiw, there was a death a few years ago of a lady who was struck by lightning up at max patch...

not sure if she was camping, but lightning dont care.................

[Ashepabst]

ah, that was a sad story. the guy took his girlfriend up there to propose when it happened.