white house landing

[weary]

i wasnt there when whl first butted heads with the matc. but why cant matc put their own directional sign up, just like all the other routered white lettering on maroon wood, directing the hiker to whl's landing? it is a valid hiker resupply point in my mind. the only reasons for not doing it that i can see would be 1. hard feelings over past battles or 2. the desire to maintain the myth of the 100 mile wildnerness.

That's one of the alternatives we discussed years ago. But the thing is out of the hands of MATC now. It rests with the park service. I forget what the NPS ranger and WHL decided. I understand there is some sort of sign there now. But I haven't been up to look. I'll try to find out. Apparently most people this summer didn't find it hard to find the place.

Weary

[DavidNH]

This seems to be a familiar whiteblaze topic. I seem to remember at least another (very long) thread to two on the subject.

White House Landing can be a welcome respinte, especially if you are hiking in the rain. The food is good and the one pound burgers or famous. However it is most absolutely a commercial enterprize where they nickle and dime the day lights out of hikers to the maximum extent possible. If you want to spend a night and eat, I doubt you will get out of there without dropping at least a hundred bucks. You WILL eat.

As for the 100 mile wilderness, I agree it is no longer wilderness in the technical sense. There are several roads punched through it and there are plenty of signs of past logging. However, it is STILL very beautiful and remote. Nothing on the rest of the AT in my oppionion, can touch it for remote wild scenery. It is improtant that this section of trail is protected with even more dilligence than other parts of the trail. The signs pointing to WHL fromthe AT could be more discrete. As of 2006 they where nearly impssible to miss.

I think it is worth noting that White House Landing is much more a commercial enterprise than a hostel. They want to make money first and foremost. Shaw's,for example, is clearly a hiker orientated hostel and is priced accordingly. i had the distinct impression that Bill and ? of WHL did not really enjoy there job. I think they preferred dealing with fisherman and snowmobilers (who spend serious money) but are getting less and less of them.

Just my thoughts.

DavidNH

[weary]

......As for the 100 mile wilderness, I agree it is no longer wilderness in the technical sense. There are several roads punched through it and there are plenty of signs of past logging. However, it is STILL very beautiful and remote. Nothing on the rest of the AT in my oppionion, can touch it for remote wild scenery. It is improtant that this section of trail is protected with even more dilligence than other parts of the trail. The signs pointing to WHL fromthe AT could be more discrete. As of 2006 they where nearly impssible to miss......DavidNH

Technically, it never was wilderness. It has always had logging roads, intensive logging, sporting camps and other commercial activities. But David is right. "Nothing on the rest of the AT can touch it for remote wild scenery."

Interestingly, unlike the rest of the trail, the 100 miles is becoming more remote and more wild. The Nature Conservancy owns 48,000 acres in the area which it is managing as a recovering wilderness. The Appalachian Mountain Club has bought 37,000 acres, a third of which is being managed as wilderness. The rest for remote recreation. AMC's major construction so far has been a network of trails and the restoration of historic sporting camps. Both organizations have closed roads and restricted motorized access.

Another 40,000 acres or so is on the market and pledged to conservation groups if they can raise the money. AMC has a major capital program underway as we debate.

Weary

[the goat]

If you want to spend a night and eat, I doubt you will get out of there without dropping at least a hundred bucks.

that's a bit of an exaggeration.

i spent the night, i ate a lot, i drank many of their beers and i spent less than half that.

[Bluebearee]

Thanks Weary for providing accurate and balanced information about the MATC here as well as the background for the WHL signage issue. You've now said it at least three times that the land is NPS, hopefully that point is heard by those reading this.

[Lone Wolf]

White House Landing can be a welcome respinte, especially if you are hiking in the rain. The food is good and the one pound burgers or famous. However it is most absolutely a commercial enterprize where they nickle and dime the day lights out of hikers to the maximum extent possible.


I think it is worth noting that White House Landing is much more a commercial enterprise than a hostel. They want to make money first and foremost. Shaw's,for example, is clearly a hiker orientated hostel and is priced accordingly. i had the distinct impression that Bill and ? of WHL did not really enjoy there job. I think they preferred dealing with fisherman and snowmobilers (who spend serious money) but are getting less and less of them.

Just my thoughts.

DavidNH

what's wrong with running a business for profit? not everybody loves hikers and worships them. if i ever ran a hostel it would definately be for profit.

keith shaw ran his place as a business. he made money. lots of it

[Lone Wolf]

Thanks Weary for providing accurate and balanced information about the MATC here as well as the background for the WHL signage issue. You've now said it at least three times that the land is NPS, hopefully that point is heard by those reading this.

then maybe MATC members should quit whining about signs

[weary]

Thanks Weary for providing accurate and balanced information about the MATC here as well as the background for the WHL signage issue. You've now said it at least three times that the land is NPS, hopefully that point is heard by those reading this.

The trail corridor is almost all owned by NPS. I'm still worried about the land surrounding the narrow trail corridor.

That's why if I ever win the lottery I'm going to devote some of it to the AMC efforts in the wilderness. At the moment all my surplus goes to my two land trusts.

BTW, I think WHL's landlord may be the Nature Conservancy. With luck the conservancy may end this debate one of these days -- or perhaps carry it to a new low.

Weary www.matlt.org

[weary]

then maybe MATC members should quit whining about signs

Actually, Lone Wolf, the whiners are hikers complaining about not being able to find the place. MATC solved the sign problem several years ago. After being unable to reach a compromise with the WHL owners, we notified the NPS of the violation. They sent up an enforcement person, resulting in the whines from hikers.

Weary

[TD55]

What are the chances that the same folks who seem to need or want another, or, more signs on the trail are the same ones that don't think a hiker needs to carry a map?

[johnny quest]

Actually, Lone Wolf, the whiners are hikers complaining about not being able to find the place. MATC solved the sign problem several years ago. After being unable to reach a compromise with the WHL owners, we notified the NPS of the violation. They sent up an enforcement person, resulting in the whines from hikers.

Weary

im sorry, i thought i was bringing up a valid point. i didnt realize i was whining. i dont know why you people put up with me i really dont.

the whl folks have a different rememberance of the whole sign fight with matc. they have a binder full of newspaper articles about it. but as i said, i wasnt there and dont pretend i know the real deal. might i suggest that weary's pov is going to be weighted in favor of the matc.

my point, again, is that whl is a plus to hikers and ought to be marked. as of september there was no real signage. i deduced the correct trail because of a denim shirt left hanging on a branch.

and what is wrong with making money? whl's prices arent cheap, but they arent rediculous, certainly not in light of where it is and what it takes to get it there.

and i always carry maps. too bad the whl isnt on it.

[weary]

.....the whl folks have a different rememberance of the whole sign fight with matc. they have a binder full of newspaper articles about it. but as i said, i wasnt there and dont pretend i know the real deal. might i suggest that weary's pov is going to be weighted in favor of the matc.

my point, again, is that whl is a plus to hikers and ought to be marked. as of september there was no real signage. i deduced the correct trail because of a denim shirt left hanging on a branch.

and what is wrong with making money? whl's prices arent cheap, but they arent rediculous, certainly not in light of where it is and what it takes to get it there.

and i always carry maps. too bad the whl isnt on it.

All I know about the issue, I learned from discussions at meetings of the MATC board.

A long time ago, the overseer of the section reported illegal blaze orange WHL signs along the trail. We discussed how to deal with the obvious violation. Our discussions dealt with how to best meet the needs of hikers. As I understand it, all the alternatives were rejected by WHL, or ignored by WHL.

After several years of talk, a couple of years ago we notified the AT ranger at Harpers Ferry. The present situation is the result of the ranger coming to Maine and talking with WHL.

There is nothing wrong with making a profit. I doubt if the WHL folks are making a great deal of money. I am positive that Keith Shaw never made "a lot of money," as someone claimed.

Keith made a living. But his mode of living never struck me as reflecting high income. He obvious enjoyed what he was doing. And like a lot of us, chose to stick with a living that didn't make a lot of money, given the advantage of enjoying what we were doing.

I've never been to WHL. But from the comments by those that have been there, it seems that the owner doesn't enjoy what he is doing, which, if so, is sad.

We only live once. It's best to spend it in ways that are enjoyable, I've found.

Weary

[Lone Wolf]

I am positive that Keith Shaw never made "a lot of money," as someone claimed.

Keith made a living. But his mode of living never struck me as reflecting high income. He obvious enjoyed what he was doing. And like a lot of us, chose to stick with a living that didn't make a lot of money, given the advantage of enjoying what we were doing.

obviously you didn't know Keith very well

[Jim Adams]

obviously you didn't know Keith very well

I'll second that!
Keith did way better than just OK. He simply didn't want to live any other way.

geek

[KG4FAM]

I've never been to WHL. But from the comments by those that have been there, it seems that the owner doesn't enjoy what he is doing, which, if so, is sad.

When I stopped by two years ago he said that if someone offered a fair price for it he would sell it in a heartbeat.

[Jack Tarlin]

Jeez, this is turning into another Whiteblaze pissing contest.

It's really simple: Everyone that hikes north from Monson is carrying a trail guidebook of one sort or another, so everyone knows about WHL. They know where it is ; they know what they offer; they have a good idea of what they charge.

Like a thousand other places, hikers can decide for themselves whether or not they wish to patronize this place and spend time and money there. Those that skip the place are welcome to do so. Those that elect to visit the place do so knowing full well what is availablethere.

It's not that difficult, people.

If you wanna go there, feel free.

If you don't wanna go there, well that's fine, too.

But to dump on the place without having been there seems a bit over the top.

And to know full well what is available there and what the costs are.....if you know this, and you still go, and THEN you dump on the place, well this seems petty and small.

The place has services for hikers. The services are pricey compared to some other places. Then again, the place is in the middle of nowhere.

If you want or need this place, then go.

If you don't want or need it, then skip it.

But enough with the whining already.

[Kirby]

Hikers complain about the pricing a lot, but the place literally is in the middle of no where, there's not much happening in the north woods these days except logging.

[Blue Jay]

If you want to spend a night and eat, I doubt you will get out of there without dropping at least a hundred bucks. You WILL eat.

This is complete BS, as always. I've stayed there 3 times, never spent more than $40.

[weary]

I'll second that!
Keith did way better than just OK. He simply didn't want to live any other way.geek

Sure. That's probably why his heirs sold the business, quickly. They didn't want to be bothered by all those big bucks.

Weary

[weary]

....But to dump on the place without having been there seems a bit over the top......

Jack, I think most, perhaps all, of those that "dumped" on the WHL, had used the place.

My objections mostly focused on blaze orange signs on the Appalachian Trail, which were a jarring element in what otherwise seemed to be 70 miles of a particularly wild section of trail, north of Monson.

Weary