Appalachian Trail Thru-Hikers Will Soon Need to Register in

Sounds to me like it is a real problem. Baxter State Park, in which Mount Katahdin is located, is actually controlled by a restrictive covenant on the land, as I recall. So even though it is a state park, its rules are determined largely by stipulations in the covenant of those individuals who bequeathed the land to become a wilderness preserve. The rules are not really government in action but rather private-trust law in action — restricting what the board of directors can and cannot do in administering the covenanted land.

I think what HSF refers to as "the other shoe falling" are the repercussions from people like runner Scott Jurek and many before him defying the rules regarding group size and public consumption of alcohol atop Katahdin. Being the northern end of the Appalachian Trail, Katahdin has become a place for celebration for thru-hikers. And even though thru-hikers account for only 3% of those who visit Baxter State Park, they have a disproportionate impact upon Katahdin itself.

Backpacker Magazine had a short article on this a few months ago titled, "Could the Appalachian Trail Lose Katahdin?" And we had a thread about Hikers Behaving Badly back in late August and early September. The article linked in the opening post was Hikers behaving badly: Appalachian Trail partying raises ire. A few excerpts from the article:

TipiWalter wrote:Is there a road to the top of Mt Katahdin? All I see are foot trails on the map.

TipiWalter wrote:None of those vehicles reach the top of Katahdin, where the incident involving Scott Jurek took place.

TipiWalter wrote:Scott Jurek did not backpack the AT to the top of Katahdin. He ran and speed walked it, slept in a van with his wife at night, and relied entirely on those rolling vehicles you speak of to fuel him and take care of him all the way to Katahdin — where he was met by a crowd of people who had arrived in rolling vehicles to make the final ascent of Katahdin with him.

Whatever their merits and demerits, I don't see "picking on" Scott Jurek and his crowd as tantamount to picking on backpackers and hikers in general. It is enforcing laws against public consumption and impact on a natural area by people who sleep in vans and dump alcoholic beverages on the rocks of Katahdin.

TipiWalter wrote:By definition, it is not "backcountry" if it is accessible by "cars." And Katahdin is not accessible by cars, is it?

TipiWalter wrote:You mean the kind of easy rolling access that fed Scot Jurek and gave him and his crowd places to sleep at night?

TipiWalter wrote:"Baxter" is dead. He can't rewrite anything.

The land he bequeathed for enjoyment of the Maine citizenry is controlled by laws of property rights and a Deed of Trust, which cannot legally be changed. The people of Maine can accept or reject it. But neither they nor the Baxter State Park Authority can change it.

That's provided in the link I forgot to include (now corrected above)
"There are times when the long-distance hiker facility— the Birches—is full and hikers have to find space in the campground,” Bissell says. But that happens infrequently. The bigger issue, he says, is that the park never planned for AT thru-hikers, let alone the popularity of Katahdin during peak tourist season, from July through October 15. “When I started working with the park 18 years ago, there were a few hundred thru-hikers who came over the course of the summer,” Bissell says. “Now those numbers are surpassing 2,000. We now have to begin to consider what we think would be consistent, equitable, and fair management for thru-hikers and other user groups.”"

Is my suspicion "spooner" is not an expression of affection for their sleeping position of choice correct?

Lol

Ah, Witherspoon.

Thought it had to do with gear.

Recreating a legacy gear hike could be a fun experiment. Certainly as valid as the various games thruhikers play. HYOH and such.

A "Vintage hike" copyright pending.

Thanks for the link as I was an active hiker in 1975 and so this journal looks to be interesting so I'll try and copy some of it with my printer for the next trip in the woods.

1975---When boots were boots and packs were packs and the Tent Police could care less where you went, where you slept, or which permit you had.  Just the opposite of the Baxter tent police.

And Travis N Wood---My basic point all along is that it's difficult to love a place to death without rolling tourists driving as close as possible to trailheads and significant national or state park features.  Overcrowding is often seriously related to adjacent car access to trailheads.  Close these roads (the Yellowstone comes to mind) and then worry about on-foot overcrowding.  It's a comically easy solution:

Put parking lots at West Yellowstone, Gardiner, Silver Gate, East Entrance and South Entrance.  Voila!  All interior travel must happen on foot and NO SNOWMOBILES. 

The current policy of mutli-use access bites. 

The comically part is accurate anyway.