Shelters Only for Thru-Hikers?

[Dogwood]

If we are going to reserve shelter space and give priority to "special" and/or "privileged" groups of people, how about we start with ATC members, trail maintainers, and disabled veterans?...

In all my yrs rarely, like I can count on one hand, thru-hikers reserving shelter space for another thru hiker ON ANY TRAIL WITH SHELTERS. MOST OFTEN PEOPLE DOING THAT ARE SELF ASSUMING ENTITLED SPECIAL OR PRIVLEGED GROUPS LIKE SCOUT and FEMALE ONLY GROUPS and SECTION, WEEKEND, or WEEK LONG HIKERS THAT ARE COUPLES. - HIKERS.


I'ver NEVER seen a THRU-HIKER in a packed shelter erect their shelter in a lean to taking up more than a 1 p space. I certainly have seen self entitled assuming section hikers do that several times.

AND, if I really wanted to take this thread further sideways revealing how inconsiderate and imposing - entitled - some hikers can be I immediately can name two categories that IMHO outweigh the imposition of the AT thru-hiker used category.

[BuckeyeBill]

I suspect like someone above said and the couple was not telling the whole truth. Then again it could be they thought the permits/reservations gave them exclusive use of the shelter sorta like a hotel room. either way, they did seem to act a little strange.

[rickb]

AND, if I really wanted to take this thread further sideways revealing how inconsiderate and imposing - entitled - some hikers can be I immediately can name two categories that IMHO outweigh the imposition of the AT thru-hiker used category.

Dog owners, of course.

But what is the other category?

Smokers (pot, cigarette and cigar)?

Liked your post though -- seems like some of the replies in this this this thread are more in response to a "Strawman" than anything else.

[Traveler]

One difference is that the change of lifestyle that is required while thru hiking. Forging what most take for granted for months. This gives an opportunity for others to give to people who will gratefully accept. It is easy and sometimes fun to forgo real food, in favor for backpacking food, for a weekend, but to do it regularly (and when you get to town restaurant food which also gets old fast too), some real food given allows a exchange, a easy gift that means so much to another, that is the defining difference. Gratefully receiving very simple stuff, that is the cornerstone of thru hiker trail magic and what attracts trail angels to the AT.

Sounds like a great concept for helping at soup kitchens.

[Traffic Jam]

I suspect like someone above said and the couple was not telling the whole truth. Then again it could be they thought the permits/reservations gave them exclusive use of the shelter sorta like a hotel room. either way, they did seem to act a little strange.

I could be wrong, but my first thought is the couple planned an amorous, outdoor experience and the smelly hiker ruined it.

[rickb]

Another difference with thru hikers is that many tend to hike later in the day, and often in a bubble.

Nothing wrong with a weekender who is done at 3PM after a 6 mile hike to set up a tent, rather than taking a shelter spot (but hang out / cook by the shelter as if he owned it) -- out of respect for those who are hiking differently.

Nothing wrong with a weekender avoiding AT shelters at the very busiest times/places (GA in April) out of respect for those whose hiking itineraries are more strictly defined.

Nothing wrong with a weekender accepting that the AMC only offers "work for stays" to thrus, because they respect that that accommodation was made for good reasons.

Nothing wrong with any of that at all. In fact I respect people who might think that way.

If they don't, that is fine too. Except for those who are bitter about thru's exclusive benefits in the Whites. That is just petty.

[TexasBob]

I could be wrong, but my first thought is the couple planned an amorous, outdoor experience and the smelly hiker ruined it.

That is what I was thinking too.

[tdoczi]

Another difference with thru hikers is that many tend to hike later in the day, and often in a bubble.

Nothing wrong with a weekender who is done at 3PM after a 6 mile hike to set up a tent, rather than taking a shelter spot (but hang out / cook by the shelter as if he owned it) -- out of respect for those who are hiking differently.

Nothing wrong with a weekender avoiding AT shelters at the very busiest times/places (GA in April) out of respect for those whose hiking itineraries are more strictly defined.

Nothing wrong with a weekender accepting that the AMC only offers "work for stays" to thrus, because they respect that that accommodation was made for good reasons.

Nothing wrong with any of that at all. In fact I respect people who might think that way.

If they don't, that is fine too. Except for those who are bitter about thru's exclusive benefits in the Whites. That is just petty.

ive seen someone who was not a thru hiker ask for and receive work for stay at a hut in the white mountains. it wasnt even during a time of year when it was realy even likely he was a thru hiker (first weekend in june.)

another thought i had re: your repeated statements about GA during the bubble.

were i to go there next march, i'd go there having already completed 1500 miles of trail.

the "thru hikers" you're suggesting i defer to have hiked nothing, and most of them are going to quit and go home (and probably never hike again) long before they get anywhere near 1500 miles in.

so what am i deferring to exactly? you say something like they have a more rigid schedule. thats hogwash. a section hiker generally has to go home on a certain day and probably has to be in a certain place by that time. thats a rigid schedule. not the people who are out for months and have some vague notion of when they think they might like to be finished by. in fact, the accommodations like work for stay in the whites exist precisely because you can not put thrus on a rigid schedule.

on my last AT hike i got up early one morning and quit by 3pm (something i never do) to make sure i beat a group of thrus to a shelter. when they arrived, as i predicted they would, they didnt seem to care the least that i (and others) were there already and set up there tents. no biggie.

and if they wanted shelter space so badly they should have not stayed up until 2 am the night before and then slept until 9 and then hung out on top of a mountain for 3 hours. but they did. and deferring to that is somehow some sort of noble thing to do? please.

[Greenlight]

This was my thought, too, TV.

Few thru hikers I met between Pearisburg and Damascus when I hiked into Trail Days wanted to rack out in a shelter. While offering protection from the elements, shelters are generally filthy. They may pitch a tent or hammock near the shelter because the water source is usually close by, but ... yeah. who wants to sleep in a shelter unless you have to?

Most experienced thru-hikers will prefer to camp away from shelters.

And how do you identify thru-hikers from weekenders?

[rickb]

Just to be clear, I have not been to GA during the bubble.

I have no first hand knowledge of whether weekenders contribute to the overcrowding that time of year.

If they do, I think it would make sense for many of them not only to avoid staying inside the shelters, but away from the AT altogether -- at that particular time.

But it only if they feel such an accommodation is not too great a burden. They have as much "right" to be there as anyone else. Everyone's situation is different.

Seems like common sense.

[tdoczi]

Just to be clear, I have not been to GA during the bubble.

I have no first hand knowledge of whether weekenders contribute to the overcrowding that time of year.

If they do, I think it would make sense for many of them not only to avoid staying inside the shelters, but away from the AT altogether -- at that particular time.

But it only if they feel such an accommodation is not too great a burden. They have as much "right" to be there as anyone else. Everyone's situation is different.

Seems like common sense.

there are two reasons that are "common sense" for avoiding the trail altogether at that time and palce-

1) because you feel your experience is going to be negatively impacted

2) because you dont want to cause more impact to the trail than it is already suffering

this idea that its somehow thru hiker's time and we should give them space to do what their doing because they somehow are deserving of it something though??

youre trying to have it both ways. you're being passive aggressively critical of a behavior while saying you have the right to behave that way.

[Another Kevin]

I don't hike in hiker bubbles. And I pass by shelters as often as not.

Last time I stayed in a lean-to, it was in the middle of winter, and the big group I was joining had the place to themselves. I was the last to arrive on Friday evening and they'd saved a spot for me so I wouldn't have to set up in the dark.

Previous time, I had a nasty sprained knee. Even then, when a big church group came by, I offered to move to a tentsite nearby. (I wasn't yet all moved in, I was sort of starting to set up, would have been no trouble, really.) The big group hiked on, the trail was going by a lake and there were three lean-tos about a mile apart.

Previous time to that, I confess, I just felt like it. It was the cleanest lean-to I've ever been in, and I had it to myself.

Previous time to that, I was one of three hikers in the lean-to just as an epic thunderstorm was starting. We could hear the widowmakers come crashing down all around. By morning, there were seven in the shelter, and the four arrivals were pretty miserable. Their gear had not stood up to the weather. None of us got very much sleep. There was too much rain and debris blowing in the front of the lean-to, even with tents and footprints and what not wrapped around everyone's feet. And the place leaked! (And with all the moisture, it smelt like a hamster cage.) Still better than getting my tent shredded. We all wound up sitting in sort of a semicircle around the walls in the back, talking and watching the weather. Someone had built a hot fire before I got there, and piled huge logs on it so that it managed to burn the rain off and stayed going. One poor guy had had everything he brought either soaked or shredded, and wound up hiking out hauling a huge pile of wet, heavy stuff wearing his only dry clothing - a blaze orange T-shirt and a pair of lime green boxer shorts. I'm sure there's a possible trail name in that story. (He turned out to be a good guy, I've hiked with him a few times since.)

The rest of the last couple of dozen nights on the trail were in my tent. (Well, except for one that was under my little tarp because I wasn't really expecting to sleep rough. No real trouble, just a bunch of pesky little delays on a route that I didn't feel safe night-hiking.)

In the 'no good deed goes unpunished' department, one time that I tented near a shelter, I trashed it out - it needed it badly - and then got threatened with a ticket when I tried to dispose of the trash at the next campground . Because the recyclable cans didn't have their labels on and the aluminium ones had been crushed. The jobsworth at the recycling center couldn't grasp the concept that it was OTHER people's garbage, I was just cleaning it up!

I've got no problem with the shelters being there. I can just take or leave them.

I do have a problem with people who can't seem to manage to get along with each other. There are more of them in here than Out There, fortunately!

[tdoczi]

I do have a problem with people who can't seem to manage to get along with each other. There are more of them in here than Out There, fortunately!

its the nature of websites like this. i dont get into debates about proper shelter usage with people i meet out hiking, even if they are being obnoxious.

[BuckeyeBill]

I could be wrong, but my first thought is the couple planned an amorous, outdoor experience and the smelly hiker ruined it.

TJ I thought that as well, but was giving the couple an embarrassment pass. Also I think that the first time a rodent made their presence known, I think they would have packed up and left to the nearest Motel 8.

[Dogwood]

I could be wrong, but my first thought is the couple planned an amorous, outdoor experience and the smelly hiker ruined it.

Thru-hiker must have ignored the Barry White playing on the XMini speaker, passion fruit scented votives, car camping size 10" thick queen sized inflatable mattress, and the curtain across the lean to with Kamasutra pictographs printed on it.

[BillyGr]

TJ I thought that as well, but was giving the couple an embarrassment pass. Also I think that the first time a rodent made their presence known, I think they would have packed up and left to the nearest Motel 8.

Must have been a not very well reported motel chain merger?

[Traveler]

Thru-hiker must have ignored the Barry White playing on the XMini speaker, passion fruit scented votives, car camping size 10" thick queen sized inflatable mattress, and the curtain across the lean to with Kamasutra pictographs printed on it.

HA! Perfect mental image, including the sub-sonic vocalizations of Barry White performing his popular, "You're my First, My Last, My Shelter Baby".

[BuckeyeBill]

Oh that's should have been Motel 6 or Super 8.

[Dogwood]

"ive seen someone who was not a thru hiker ask for and receive work for stay at a hut in the white mountains. it wasnt even during a time of year when it was realy even likely he was a thru hiker (first weekend in june.)"

Thru-hikes are undertaken with different itineraries. It's not just approached in a straight unbroken linear terminus to terminus NOBO or SOBO hiking fashion. A thru hiker could have for some unlikely reason to me too been at one of the AT AMC huts in early June.
"were i to go there next march, i'd go there having already completed 1500 miles of trail.
After how many hikes?

"the "thru hikers" you're suggesting i defer to have hiked nothing, and most of them are going to quit and go home (and probably never hike again) long before they get anywhere near 1500 miles in."

Quite a few AT section hikers aim to complete the trail largely by breaking down their hikes into states. So, perhaps a AT thru hiker wannabe who gets the GA AT done is doing exactly the same thing as a section hiker who has aim to get GA done. To say a thru-hiker who quits somewhere into their hike even if it is in GA as "having hiked nothing" is inaccurate and perhaps places, again, too much focus on miles? What you're saying further is absolutely correct. Most professing AT thru-hikers by a large majority will in actuality ultimately be section hikers.

"so what am i deferring to exactly? you say something like they have a more rigid schedule. thats hogwash. a section hiker generally has to go home on a certain day and probably has to be in a certain place by that time. thats a rigid schedule. not the people who are out for months and have some vague notion of when they think they might like to be finished by. in fact, the accommodations like work for stay in the whites exist precisely because you can not put thrus on a rigid schedule."

Both groups can be on a schedule. Its not uncommon for thru-hikers having to be done because they have to go back to school, or start a job, or be at specific locations at specific times to meet friends or family members, pick up mailed resupplies, legally fulfill permit requirements, meet a shuttle, get to public transportation options that are seasonal in nature, etc. It's not uncommon for AT NOBO thrus to get stressfully preoccupied focusing on that advised 'summit Mt K by Oct' advice. Overall though it's easily possible thrus tend to have a greater number of scheduling commitments because the length of time out. Putting things on hold and adequately addressing responsibilities at home for thrus can be even more taxing again for the length of time they are out.

[Dogwood]

Being a nit picking curmudgeon about cooperating with different users on trail doesn't always play out to the extent as it seems it will given some of the posters opinions on WB.

There are many skewed opinions about the LD/thru hiking community on WB because this forum has a primary AT focus. The thru-hiker opinions here are offered with a narrowed focus on only the thru hiking community when the larger thru hiking/LD community can be much different. For example, I don't recognize anywhere the level of implied thru-hiker / section hiker relationship issues at lean to's or elsewhere on the entirety of the Long Trail. Even though absent of lean to's I don't see anywhere the level those relationship issues, if any, between JMT thrus and JMT section hikers. Lots of drama here.

My guess is contentious fiery east coast trail drama queens would have difficulty on other trails demonstrating cooperation amongst different trail users. This comment vis not aimed specifically at anyone.