Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Visitor impact on backcountry campsites in the Great Smoky Mountains

  • Research
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last decade the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP) has experienced a tremendous increase in visitation, especially in backcountry camping. In 1976 there were an estimated 117,500 backcountry visitor nights, with a peak of 16,865 visitor nights in April. The high use season extends from March to October. Visitation tends to be concentrated in certain sections of the park and at specific sites. The Appalachian Trail, which includes about 8 percent of the maintained trail mileage, carried 32 percent of the visitor nights in 1976.

Campsite disturbance is also concentrated in specific sites and sections of the park. Maximum camping disturbance per km of maintained trail was 3,400 m2 for the sites on the Appalachian Trail. Shelter sites have more visitation per site and more total disturbance per site than open campsites, but shelters tend to have less intensive disturbance, such as bare soil, because they concentrate trampling impacts. Visitation levels were strongly correlated with disturbances such as bare soil at open campsites. Visitation was significantly correlated to the number of firepits at shelter sites but not to other types of disturbance. Regressions indicate that for each additional visitor night at a site (annual average), one can expect an additional 9 m2 of total disturbance and 1 m2of bare soil. The distance of a site from the nearest road was not significantly correlated with damage or visitation. Elevation was correlated to visitation levels, especially in the case of the shelters. More legal sites and large illegal sites are in mesic forest types. Illegal camping accounted for 10 percent of the total camping disturbance.

The data imply that the suggested removal of shelters will require redistribution of visitor use or replacement developments, such as tent platforms, in order to mitigate damage. Zone camping is a possible alternative but presents difficulties because campers may concentrate in certain plant communities and topographic positions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  • Barr A. J., and J. H. Goodnight. 1972. Statistical Analysis System. (Computer Programs). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratton, S. P. 1976. Resource division in an understory herb community: response to temporal and microtopographic gradients. Am. Nat. 110(6):679–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bratton, S. P., M. G. Hickler, and J. H. Graves. 1977. Trail and campsite erosion survey for Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Uplands Field Research Laboratory, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Management Report Series No. 16, Vols. I-IV, 567 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, P. B., R. B. Neuman, and J. B. Hadley. 1968. Geology of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee and North Carolina. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 587. 23 pp.

  • Moorhead, B. B., and E. S. Schreiner. 1976. Management studies of human impact at backcountry campsites in Olympic National Park, Washington, U.S.A. First Conference on Scientific Research in National Parks. American Institute of Biological Sciences and the National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Abstr. p. 248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, F. J., and S. P. Bratton. 1977. Black bear management in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Uplands Field Research Laboratory, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Management Report Series No. 13, 42 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, L. A., Jr. 1969. A comparison of climatic elements at four elevations in the Great Smoky Mountains. MS thesis, Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville. 119 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Wagtendonk, J. W. 1976. A conceptual backcountry carrying capacity model. First Conference on Scientific Research in National Parks. American Institute of Biological Sciences and the National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Abstr. p. 118.

  • Whittaker, R. H. 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecol. Monog. 26(1): 1–80.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bratton, S.P., Hickler, M.G. & Graves, J.H. Visitor impact on backcountry campsites in the Great Smoky Mountains. Environmental Management 2, 431–441 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01872918

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01872918

Key words

Navigation