[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[at-l] GSMNP poop disposal

Hello Wildbill (and All) -

You answered:

>The shelter is Double Springs Gap Shelter. I have the info in my head...

Thanks!  It always helps when things are made a little more specific in a
discussion.

>The Smoky Mountain Mine fields. Is the problem, the lack of knowledge or
>is it "this is the only time i'll be here, so the hell with it."
>attitude. I think it may be both.

There probably is a little of both in the average hiker's attitude.  I like
to think that most of us will do the right thing if we can just ever figure
out what it is <g>.

>A sign that said "Leave No Trace", waste-disposal area. This can be
>confusing, what are they trying to said, leave your waste here or take
>your waste with you.

By '93 (when I hiked thru GSMNP) the NPS had joined forces with the other
major federal recreation land managing agencies to develop and implement
LNT as their formal minimum-impact backcountry use program of choice.
Unfortunately, at that time the NPS had sent few (if any) of their folks
thru the LNT training (the BLM and USFS were hogging all the slots <g>).  I
doubt seriously that GSMNP had anyone on staff who understood LNT!

I would have to guess that they hung the sign up with absolutely no
well-thought-out plan on how to use LNT to help solve any of the many major
ecological problems existent in GSMNP.  I groused and grumbled a LOT when I
came down through GSMNP...I got the distinct impression that it was WAY
overused, that park management was ineffective (at best!), and that the
local trail maintenance club must have simply given up.  It was the low
point of my thru-hike.

Wildbill said:

>Having a toilet near the shelter, will not solve the problem, if they
>are NOT maintained. The one at Ice Water Springs Shelter is a case in
>point. Every time I have been there it has been, full to overflowing.
>The problem is overuse and lack of money for the proper maintenance.
>
>Because of overuse of the AT within the GSMNP. Maybe it is time to
>require the use of poop tube's along the trails within the park....

Priest said:

>The reservation/permit system in the Smokies is already poorly
>enforced.  I don't expect you'd be able to enforce this idea any better,
>probably less.
>
>Icewater is an exceptional location because of the huge dayhike traffic
>out to Charlie's Bunion.  Also, the soil is quite thin at that location,
>making the capacity of any dug privy quite limited...

Ginny said:

>A friend who maintained trail in the Smokies told me that the main
>problem is with people using the privies as garbage dumps.  They would
>fill within a year. The FS got tired of having to either dig new ones or
>clean out the old ones (not a job I would relish.)  Even with signs
>saying, "Pack it in, pack it out" they quickly fill with garbage. What
>to do?  For a while the Park Service just decided, No more privies. But
>that didn't work any better. People just left their garbage (and worse)
>on the ground beside or behind the shelters. The answer is education,
>but what do you do about those who refuse to learn?

Good ideas!

I wonder if there might still be a few things yet to try before we start
requiring "poop tubes" <g>.  I do think that "group solutions" will be MUCH
easier to make happen than "individual solutions."

The problem at shelters like Icewater Springs is obviously one of
concentration...a LOT of folks come wandering by each day!  In this kind of
place factors combine to guarantee extra heavy use (big parking lot,
elaborate trailhead displays, proximity to major tourist flow thru the
park, interesting destination not too far up the trail, etc.).

Lotsa years of experience with this pattern of backcountry use allows the
managing agency to consider the above factors and to make a number of
(reasonably accurate) predictions something like:

a given number of people will pass thru the area as sightseers;
a given number of people will pass thru the area as day hikers;
a given number of people will pass thru the area as destination hikers;
a given number of people will pass thru the area as distance hikers;
a given number of people will pass thru the area because they are lost;
a given % of these people will need to take a dump;
a given number of pounds of poop will be left in the woods each day;
a given volume of trash will be carried into the area each day; and,
a given volume of trash will be dumped (not packed out) by users who don't
know any better.

Would anyone care to bet whether the above figures would lead to an
Icewater Springs potty usage rate that exceeds anything the potty could
ever be expected to handle? <VBG>

The potty problem should have been included in the "master plan" that
produced the big parking lot and the elaborate trailhead displays <g>.  If
it proves to be impossible to position (in some convenient location) a
potty that will handle the expected usage, then the "special" inducements
that serve to attract all those folks to that area need to be "adjusted"
somehow...so that the usage will fall within the level that CAN be handled.
It isn't an ecology problem...it's a management problem!

Some possible solutions that come to mind (without restricting usage):

separate the flow of sightseers and walkers (visiting Charlie's Bunion)
from the flow of "real" hikers and backpackers passing thru the area;
make the heavy-day-use flow path as bombproof as possible (as is done in
Yosemite NP);
place appropriate potty and trash facilities at some convenient location(s)
along the heavy-day-use path (pump-out type?);
station an appropriate number of uniformed "official" persons (seasonals,
volunteers?) along the heavy-day-use area to educate the casual users and
to gently "enforce" rules/regs (radio contact with LEO's);
station caretakers at the heavily used shelters that serve the
hiking/backpacking users;
place composting or pump-out potties at shelters sites that can't handle
pit latrines;
station ridge runners along the trails that get heavy use from hikers and
backpackers; and,
set up a proactive LNT education effort aimed at future users of GSMNP.

Last, but not least, I would set up appropriate "usage fees" so that each
type of user could pay their fair share for all the above costs.

I would be willing to bet (the money I would have won from the "potty-use"
bet <g>) that folks on this list could add plenty more possible solutions!

Trace No Leaves,

- Charlie II


* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | For info http://www.hack.net/lists *

==============================================================================