Camping outside of shelters no longer permitted (unless it’s full and you have a thru

[Ohyouteakast]

After talking to a park official last week, it seems the Smokies have reverted back to their pre-Covid regulations on shelter camping. Over the past three years, we’ve had the option to legally tent/hammock in the areas surrounding shelters in the Smokies. Being a hammock camper, this was a game changer for me and I found myself camping more and more at shelter sites than I did before.

The park has finally reverted back to their original rules according to a park official I talked to last week, and after going on the backcountry permit site it seems that they did indeed remove the message that said something like ‘to allow social distancing, staying in the area around the shelters is permitted’

Sad news. Wish we could petition to allow it again.. honestly I didn’t really notice firsthand much resource/environmental damage but they probably realized everyone was camping outside and hardly anyone was using the actual shelters. Curious what others think on this topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ohyouteakast]

The title got cut off, but through hikers who have an AT thru hiker permit for the smokies are allowed to camp outside if the shelter is full. This doesn’t apply to section hikers or general backcountry campers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HankIV]

Oct of ‘21 I stayed at Tricorner Knob and Russell Field, both shelters full. Two tents at Russell Field. Passing Mollies Ridge going south early morning and it looked pretty full, no tents or hammocks visible.

[LazyLightning]

I'm not really against this but the thing they need to change is kicking thru hikers out of the shelter after dark when somebody that's not a thru hiker comes rolling in... That's messed up. Everybody should be included in the rule that you set up outside when the shelter is full.

[Slugg]

That sucks. Forcing strangers to sleep together sardine style on the same floor just seems a fundamentally illogical policy. And yes I know the reasoning for it. I’d be curious to know if any other national parks or areas have a similar policy? Not that I’m aware of.

But won’t affect me too much personally since I was lucky enough to hike the Smokies AT section while camping was allowed. I hope to be 900-miler so I guess I’ll just have to not use shelters; just a minor inconvenience..

[Ohyouteakast]

That sucks. Forcing strangers to sleep together sardine style on the same floor just seems a fundamentally illogical policy. And yes I know the reasoning for it. I’d be curious to know if any other national parks or areas have a similar policy? Not that I’m aware of.

But won’t affect me too much personally since I was lucky enough to hike the Smokies AT section while camping was allowed. I hope to be 900-miler so I guess I’ll just have to not use shelters; just a minor inconvenience..

Yup I’m with you on this one. And there are no other parks with this policy that I know of. It’s pretty wild because if they were truly worried about human impact on certain backcountry areas they would limit day hikers on bush trails. I think we all know that most of the trash/off trail issues come from the day hikers. Simply because of the high volume if nothing else… there have been days where I’ve seen 100-200 people a day on the trail to Mt LeConte and hardly any of those stop by the backcountry shelter up there. Plus there’s literally an entire functioning lodge on the top of LeConte?? I even mean 100 years of dispersed camping can’t get more environmentally destructive than that lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alligator]

That sucks. Forcing strangers to sleep together sardine style on the same floor just seems a fundamentally illogical policy. And yes I know the reasoning for it. I’d be curious to know if any other national parks or areas have a similar policy? Not that I’m aware of.

But won’t affect me too much personally since I was lucky enough to hike the Smokies AT section while camping was allowed. I hope to be 900-miler so I guess I’ll just have to not use shelters; just a minor inconvenience..

Yup I’m with you on this one. And there are no other parks with this policy that I know of. It’s pretty wild because if they were truly worried about human impact on certain backcountry areas they would limit day hikers on bush trails. I think we all know that most of the trash/off trail issues come from the day hikers. Simply because of the high volume if nothing else… there have been days where I’ve seen 100-200 people a day on the trail to Mt LeConte and hardly any of those stop by the backcountry shelter up there. Plus there’s literally an entire functioning lodge on the top of LeConte?? I even mean 100 years of dispersed camping can’t get more environmentally destructive than that lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most national parks don't have AT style shelters in the back country. I haven't noticed them as being common on other units units either in the back country.

[gpburdelljr]

Most national parks don't have AT style shelters in the back country. I haven't noticed them as being common on other units units either in the back country.

GSMNP is the most biodiverse of all national parks, which is the reason for more protection. It is also the most visited park in the system, making protection more difficult.

“….Great Smoky Mountains is the most biodiverse park in the National Park system. Biological diversity, or ‘biodiversity’, means the number and variety of different types of animals, plants, fungi, and other organisms in a location or habitat. Encompassing over 800 square miles in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, no other area of equal size in a temperate climate can match the park's amazing diversity. Over 19,000 species have been documented in the park and scientists believe an additional 80,000-100,000 species may live here….”

https://www.nps.gov/grsm/learn/natur...0of%20insects.

[Alligator]

GSMNP is the most biodiverse of all national parks, which is the reason for more protection. It is also the most visited park in the system, making protection more difficult.

“….Great Smoky Mountains is the most biodiverse park in the National Park system. Biological diversity, or ‘biodiversity’, means the number and variety of different types of animals, plants, fungi, and other organisms in a location or habitat. Encompassing over 800 square miles in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, no other area of equal size in a temperate climate can match the park's amazing diversity. Over 19,000 species have been documented in the park and scientists believe an additional 80,000-100,000 species may live here….”

https://www.nps.gov/grsm/learn/natur...0of%20insects.

I was only pointing out that since there aren't many AT-style shelters elsewhere you can't have many policies about having strangers sleep near each other in them.

Policies limiting back country numbers and using specific sites do exist elsewhere for many NP's and widerness areas. It's not unusual to find that at all.

[RockDoc]

When I went through I was aware of the regs, but I watched as people showed up fairly early and set up tents around the shelter grounds, rather than go in shelters to sleep. Like they didn't even consider the shelters as an option. So the rule was not enforced (2007).

[LazyLightning]

They have 'ridge runners' at random shelters that check permits and enforce the rules, one night on my thru hike one was there. If a ridge runner isn't there then I don't think many other hikers will try enforcing the rules for them or calling in on you, but if somebody happens to show up I'm sure they will remind you of the rules.

[HankIV]

So the park has a capacity issue; they can control usage rates by section hikers, but pretty onerous to do so for thrus.

I like shelters, but recognize that many don’t. They do help minimize ground compression and overall site impact. Maybe they should consider adding 3rd or even 4th floors to existing shelters?

I went thru late Oct, past peak color, okay to crummy weather, and shelters were still pretty full.

[mclaught]

What constitutes a "full" shelter that would allow a thru to set up a tent? If the shelter has a max reservation number of 12, do you have to get to 12 before a thru could say, "no way man, that shelter is too full for me." If there's 9 people in a 12 reservation shelter, would a ridge runner make a thru take down their tent and get in the shelter? I'm genuinely curious how strictly this is enforced. I'm grateful I got to do half of GSMNP during covid because I don't want to sleep in a shelter and people don't want me snoring in a shelter with them.

[Ohyouteakast]

What constitutes a "full" shelter that would allow a thru to set up a tent? If the shelter has a max reservation number of 12, do you have to get to 12 before a thru could say, "no way man, that shelter is too full for me." If there's 9 people in a 12 reservation shelter, would a ridge runner make a thru take down their tent and get in the shelter? I'm genuinely curious how strictly this is enforced. I'm grateful I got to do half of GSMNP during covid because I don't want to sleep in a shelter and people don't want me snoring in a shelter with them.

I highly doubt it. The few ridgerunners I’ve ran into in the park were simply there to check permits and offer information, and seemed pretty laid back overall. I I highly doubt you would get kicked out of your tent in that instance. Especially since we just had a few years of tenting being allowed. Thrus would certainly have even more cushion on the ‘rules’ than section hikers who don’t have AT tags based on my experience in the smokies. I think they’re biggest concern would be folks who are camping without a permit, or camping in a non designated site altogether. Great question though, i may bring it up next time I’m chatting with the smokies backcountry office (which I do quite frequently)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chef4]

While this topic comes up frequently, and was complicated by the Covid ‘pause’ in rules, I’ve never met anyone in the recent past who was either forced to move into an ‘underfilled’ shelter or ticketed (unlike the situation with no thru permit, which they rigidly enforce.) Has anyone on this forum gotten into trouble for sleeping near but not in a gsmnp shelter? My impression of the ridge runners is that they shy away from enforcement and mainly remind you of rules, typically in a friendly manner. The park staff clearly don’t want camping outside of the approved areas, which explains why you don’t see tons of firings and landscape damage.

[Traveler]

Ridge Runners I have met essentially observe and advise. They remind/educate people of things like LNT, camping regulations, fragile terrain/plant life avoidance, and other issues in trail craft that benefit the backpacking community as a whole. Though they can inform people they are in violation of trail/park rules and can advise Park Rangers of violations, as a general observation, they do not issue summons or tickets.

[LittleRock]

When I went through I was aware of the regs, but I watched as people showed up fairly early and set up tents around the shelter grounds, rather than go in shelters to sleep. Like they didn't even consider the shelters as an option. So the rule was not enforced (2007).

Basically the same in 2012 when I did that section.

[wornoutboots]

I'm not really against this but the thing they need to change is kicking thru hikers out of the shelter after dark when somebody that's not a thru hiker comes rolling in... That's messed up. Everybody should be included in the rule that you set up outside when the shelter is full.

What if you're a section hiker with no tent? I mean after-all, that is what the shelter were made for. I personally hiked this way on my 1st section that happened to be in the Smokies be it right or wrong ( wouldn't do it again in case of a breakdown or crazy storm blows in..

Also what about the "entitled" nobo or group of nobo's who come in LOUD after dark, should there be a rule if you're a thru-hiker and come in after dark you Must stay in your tent???

Rules..... :/