Regulating thru-hikers

[Lone Wolf]

Every spring a great glob of thru-hikers goes through the Smokies. They make things miserable for everyone and, as a group, probably cause the largest negative impact to the Smokies in any given year. Here is my solution: restrict the number of thru-hikers allowed into the park each day. I suggest 12 as a good number. You could let four go to Mollies, four to Russell and four to Spence, and that's it each day. You greatly lessen the impact by spreading everybody out. You could park a ridgerunner down at the Fontana entrance to hand out permits. This is a great idea, right?

totally a great idea.i'm sick of "thru-hikers".

[MOWGLI]

Moreover, if there was concern the park service itself could steer people away from the AT: In other words, instead of restricting AT hikers from a trail whose modern day purpose to some extent is for those same ambitious souls, move the spring breakers to the underutilized trails. Seems to make as much sense.

Why "move the spring breakers"? Don't they have as much of a right to hike the AT as anyone else? We're talking about promoting alternatives.

At the grand opening for the BMT, George Minnigh of the NPS stated his hope that hikers would choose to take the BMT route in the late winter and early spring because that will cut down on SARs in the park during inclement weather. Morgan Sommerville of ATC made a comment that he hoped ATC would award 2000 miler status to folks who chose the BMT route in the park.

Several Whiteblazers were at that Grand Opening including SGT Rock, and can vouch for the inspiring words shared on that day. It's just another way. It's not better. It's just harder and longer than the AT. And there is only 1 shelter on the BMT in the park.

[Cookerhiker]

most visitors to GSMNP get out of thier cars for less than 30 minutes.

Which I dare say is also the case for Shenandoah.

[rumbler]

A lot of them would love the opportunity to not be forced into a bunk space on the AT in a shelter.

Not disagreeing with your sentiments questioning the "hike every mile" credo. But the AT is a comparatively small portion of the trails in the Smokies, and a trail that has morphed to serve another purpose larger if not greater. Currently that involves hiking the AT through the park.

Limiting the number of AT hikers is - in my opinion - pretty low on the list of available options for whatever usage problems the park may have.

[cowboy nichols]

Sorry dumb ? some days I blonder than others Cowboy


Hiking 'til

[rumbler]

Why "move the spring breakers"? Don't they have as much of a right to hike the AT as anyone else? We're talking about promoting alternatives.

At the grand opening for the BMT, George Minnigh of the NPS stated his hope that hikers would choose to take the BMT route in the late winter and early spring because that will cut down on SARs in the park during inclement weather. Morgan Sommerville of ATC made a comment that he hoped ATC would award 2000 miler status to folks who chose the BMT route in the park.

Several Whiteblazers were at that Grand Opening including SGT Rock, and can vouch for the inspiring words shared on that day. It's just another way. It's not better. It's just harder and longer than the AT. And there is only 1 shelter on the BMT in the park.

I wouldn't do either one. Personally I don't think there is a current problem.

On the other hand, limiting the number of thruhikers able to hike ANY portion of the AT is fraught with the perils of unforeseen consequences.

Nor do I have a problem with redefining the trail. But that should happen BEFORE any hiker restrictions to access of the AT take place.

[MOWGLI]

On the other hand, limiting the number of thruhikers able to hike ANY portion of the AT is fraught with the perils of unforeseen consequences.

Seems to work for the JMT. So I'm just sayin...

PS: The same could be said about Blue Blazing. And look at Lone Wolf. Uh, never mind.

[SGT Rock]

A lot of them would love the opportunity to not be forced into a bunk space on the AT in a shelter.

Not disagreeing with your sentiments questioning the "hike every mile" credo. But the AT is a comparatively small portion of the trails in the Smokies, and a trail that has morphed to serve another purpose larger if not greater. Currently that involves hiking the AT through the park.

Limiting the number of AT hikers is - in my opinion - pretty low on the list of available options for whatever usage problems the park may have.

I don't think I or Mowgli have supported limits on anyone hiking the AT. What I do find interesting is the same people that want the AT freely open to get crowded up by AT hikers also want other people to get pushed off the trail. Sort of self serving IMO. Also short sited. The AT hiker gets special treatment by the good graces of the park, and 75% of the time the AT is not for the thru-hiker at all. It is not a thru-hiker highway in the eyes of the park - it is another trail that gets some heavy use in a couple of seasons.

What we want the ATC to recognize the impact that a reward system makes - it is a real thing, study any military leadership manual about how you can promote something with even minor recognition incentives. For the good of the AT and the park the ATC can make a simple rule change and start incentivizing other options. It ain't hard.

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

Journalist:

According to the ATC website, roughly 1,000 thru-hikers get to Fontana Dam each year.

According to the National Park Service, GSMNP is the most-visited park in the country, with 9 million visitors annually.

Boy, those thru-hikers really get in the way, huh, you pack-sniffer.

http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site...Statistics.htm

http://www.nps.gov/grsm/parkmgmt/statistics.htm

So we have 1,000 would-be thru hikers & probably about 100 section hikers each year. Very few of the 9 million visitors attempt to hike on the AT. From permit info, only about 3,500 people per year do overnight hikes on the AT including the thrus and sectioners -- so those attempting to hike the entire AT make up about one-third of the people who use the trail each year. I would call that significant.

[rumbler]

Allow me to clarify what I didn't make clear: I do not advocate "pushing people" to other trails. My point was that it makes as much sense - or nonsense - to regulate thruhikers as any other group.

Whether thruhikers have a more debilitating impact on the smokies than everyone else is a dubious assertion. That there are a lot of thruhikers in March and April does not equate to a more harmful impact, and the fact that the Smokies are inundated with spring breakers at the same time is because they are part and parcel products of the same phenomenon: Spring.

As for offering a more varied hiking experience to anybody - thruhiker or weekender - I'm all for ya.

[rafe]

So we have 1,000 would-be thru hikers & probably about 100 section hikers each year. Very few of the 9 million visitors attempt to hike on the AT. From permit info, only about 3,500 people per year do overnight hikes on the AT including the thrus and sectioners -- so those attempting to hike the entire AT make up about one-third of the people who use the trail each year. I would call that significant.

Whoa there, Dino. Overnight permits only apply to a small fraction of the AT. I walked nearly 600 miles of the AT this summer and met only two thru-hikers. Maybe two dozen section hikers (defining a "section" loosely as anything more than a weekend hike.)

The only "overcrowding" I saw this summer was in SNP, and then only within 1/2 mile of the busiest, most accessible trailheads.

[SGT Rock]

The only impact I see is the quality of your stay at shelters. I hate them, but that is the rule when staying in the Smokies. But the fact is right now thru-hikers have even less regulation that the typical hiker in the Smokies since they don't need reservations, can self register for shelters, and are not restricted to stay inside the shelter under certain conditions. If one were truly for equal treatment, then thru-hikers get more rules put on them to reduce the load on the infrastructure of the Smokies. IMO this is a bad idea anyway...

Since they are not going to open up more shelters on the AT, the obvious solution is to open up more trails to the thru-hikers by widening the definition of thru-hiking. Man that is simple.

[rumbler]

Man that is simple.

And a far cry from the opening premise of this thread.

I would be very interested to know how many weekenders - of which I am very frequently one - come to the Smokies and hike the trail called "The AT" because of the panache associated with thruhiking versus those who somehow choose the AT trail over the myriad of other trails in the park for merits not associated with the fame and notoriety of the Appalachian Trail.

Your point of thru-hikers not being regulated is taken. I would only extend your comments to note that effective regulation will not be remotely possible until other alternatives have been accepted and embraced by the AT community.

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

Whoa there, Dino. Overnight permits only apply to a small fraction of the AT. I walked nearly 600 miles of the AT this summer and met only two thru-hikers. Maybe two dozen section hikers (defining a "section" loosely as anything more than a weekend hike.)

The only "overcrowding" I saw this summer was in SNP, and then only within 1/2 mile of the busiest, most accessible trailheads.

You are required to have a reservation for all shelters and shelters are the only legal camping options along the AT. Source: http://www.nps.gov/grsm/planyourvisi...ry-camping.htm . Thru-hikers (meaning anyone who started 50 miles before the GSMNP and plans to hike all the way thru according the GSMNP rules) must have a permit, but do not have to reserve shelter space. So between the permits for thrus and the reservations for non-thrus, they park service knows how many people are using the AT (except for the handful hiking without permits or reservations)

As several have noted, the AT is most crowded during the spring. Removing about 1/3 of those would definitely be a great help both to people's experience on that trail and to the health of the area. The AT (and other GSMNP trails) also have a peak in the fall, but not to the point of over-saturation.

[Blissful]

We had a group of 15 of us that went through the SMokies. I didn't care to have it that way, but that's the way it happened. We were together by Sassafras shelter and stayed that way until we got out of the SMokies. NOC tends to stack people up. And then having a huge shelter in Fontana where hikers mass. The shelter areas in the Smokies are getting chewed up for certain (though I did appreciate the tenting privilege). Not sure what the solution is. I know they only give up a certain number of permits in SNP per day to hike Old Rag (or they used to).

[Flush2wice]

Put huts in the Smokies and charge $85 per bunk. Look how well that system has helped the Whites. That would also cut down on the mud snake problem.
The only other reasonable solution is to make the AT off limits to everyone except thru-hikers. Maybe put a few hostels in there too.

[Lone Wolf]

Put huts in the Smokies and charge $85 per bunk. Look how well that system has helped the Whites. That would also cut down on the mud snake problem.
The only other reasonable solution is to make the AT off limits to everyone except thru-hikers. Maybe put a few hostels in there too.

make all thru-hikers take the BMT around the Smokys

[The Weasel]

This thread is the biggest trolling incident since Kerry and the Swift Boaters. Sheesh.

tw

[Flush2wice]

This thread is the biggest trolling incident since Kerry and the Swift Boaters. Sheesh.

tw

Ya think??

[MOWGLI]

This thread is the biggest trolling incident since Kerry and the Swift Boaters. Sheesh.

tw

No it's not. Other popular trails managed by the NPS have a permit system. The JMT & Wonderland Trail come to mind immediately. What's wrong with discussing that relative to the AT?