setting the record straight on whitehouse landing camps

[Don H]

Please put up a reasonable sign so I don't walk past the Mahar Tote Rd and miss WHL next year. If I miss getting one of those 1 pound burgers I'll be upset!

[weary]

[I][B]....This is the first time Linda is "raising" the issue here.

I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."

I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.

I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.

But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.

Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.

Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.

I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.

Weary

[ARambler]

...
Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.

...Weary

So, you like whl but hate the amc? You may be brilliant, but are siding with a self center bunch who do not have hikers welfare in mind.

In 2004, I turned on a tote road, because: 1) It was know that the matc were vandelizing whl signs, so no sign meant anything. 2) The road was not on my matc map, and the road had no sign. 3) I didin't think there was much new raod building in the wilderness and I was a little optimistic about how far I may have hiked. Fortunately after a short time, the road bent a little in the wrong direction and was not heading down to a lake. This is the only time I have had to use a compass on the AT.

It should not be necessary to know about these secret puddles to navigate to a reasonable resupply point.

When I got to Baxter Park, I wanted to hike out on the IAT. They would only allow me to camp at one campsite, and it was full. The rangers said the site I wanted to hike to was to far. So, not only are Maine bureaucrats not helpful to hikers, they really don't know or care who we are.
Rambler

[weary]

So, you like whl but hate the amc? You may be brilliant, but are siding with a self center bunch who do not have hikers welfare in mind.

In 2004, I turned on a tote road, because: 1) It was know that the matc were vandelizing whl signs, so no sign meant anything. 2) The road was not on my matc map, and the road had no sign. 3) I didin't think there was much new raod building in the wilderness and I was a little optimistic about how far I may have hiked. Fortunately after a short time, the road bent a little in the wrong direction and was not heading down to a lake. This is the only time I have had to use a compass on the AT.

It should not be necessary to know about these secret puddles to navigate to a reasonable resupply point.

When I got to Baxter Park, I wanted to hike out on the IAT. They would only allow me to camp at one campsite, and it was full. The rangers said the site I wanted to hike to was to far. So, not only are Maine bureaucrats not helpful to hikers, they really don't know or care who we are.
Rambler

Ah. Well, that's life, I guess. We all have disappointments. I said MATC is not bureaucratic. I haven't said anything about Baxter Park. But Mainer's are not just one breed. We have our differences, just like White Blaze members do.

There are several reasons why you got lost. One of which might have been White House Landing. "My way, or no way," is not always a wise choice.

Weary

[camp mom]

I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."

I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.

I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.

But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.

Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.

Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.

I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.

Weary

so what do we have to do after all these years where all sides know our position ,get down on our knees and request forgiveness and please ,please grant us the holy grail in the form of an approved sign? our first step was the welcome meeting with the PRESIDENT of the matc in 99 when we re-opened to hikers after 50 years and said an approved sign was forthcoming....not.feathers were ruffled and have yet to be smoothed.we just want to be left alone to do what we do best and that is to meet the hikers needs as best we can and live our life without this bull,tho i must admit this has been a bit FUN!clearing the air and hearing from our fans has made this more than worthwhile.Remember[not to sound like a promotion]we are here for the hikers not the beaurocrats who dont get the whole picture!!

[Skidsteer]

I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."

I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.

I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.

But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.

Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.

Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.

I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.

Weary

Years of violations???

All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.

Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.

Just sayin'.

[warraghiyagey]

Years of violations???

All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.

Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.

Just sayin'.

Well said Skids. . . I've been through 4 years running and the only sign is one that appears to be a decades old wood AT style sign that says Mahar Landing. . . if the AMC or MATC is taking down signs pointing to White House Landing they are going well off trail to do so. . .

[Hikerhead]

All hikers carry a sign for whl and nail it to a tree when you go past.

[warraghiyagey]

all hikers carry a sign for whl and nail it to a tree when you go past.

:d:d:d . . . .

[warraghiyagey]

Will do . . .

[fascinated]

Years of violations???

All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.

Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.

Just sayin'.

Well said Skids. . . I've been through 4 years running and the only sign is one that appears to be a decades old wood AT style sign that says Mahar Landing. . . if the AMC or MATC is taking down signs pointing to White House Landing they are going well off trail to do so. . .

Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.

It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.

[camp mom]

Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.

It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.

Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!!

[Skidsteer]

Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.

It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.

Weary has already said that he can't remember an instance that the NPS didn't take MATC's recommendation in a matter.

Try to keep up.

[fascinated]

Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!!

Signs for commercial businesses are not allowed on the corridor. If you want an MATC sign on the trail indicating a side trail (to the lake and then your business) you need to fill out paperwork with the NPS. Since the logging road only leads to your business, your application might be declined. But I don't know that to be true.

In the absence of filling out paperwork with the NPS, your best hope is word of mouth and that more AT hikers will learn how to find your place the old fashioned way. By themselves with the aid of a map and compass or GPS.

In the meantime, you are no different than any thru-hiker. You ain't special, and you don't deserve special treatment.

[fascinated]

Weary has already said that he can't remember an instance that the NPS didn't take MATC's recommendation in a matter.

Try to keep up.

That doesn't eliminate the need to file the paperwork. Smartass.

[camp mom]

[QUOTE=camp mom;1007070]Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!![/QUO i really want to know why weary won't respond to our questions to him,i find that to be strange .i do not trust someone that does not look you in the eye when they speak,or not speak directly to you at all. think about it, as i said before speak to me weary.not everyone else's response.

[camp mom]

Signs for commercial businesses are not allowed on the corridor. If you want an MATC sign on the trail indicating a side trail (to the lake and then your business) you need to fill out paperwork with the NPS. Since the logging road only leads to your business, your application might be declined. But I don't know that to be true.

In the absence of filling out paperwork with the NPS, your best hope is word of mouth and that more AT hikers will learn how to find your place the old fashioned way. By themselves with the aid of a map and compass or GPS.

In the meantime, you are no different than any thru-hiker. You ain't special, and you don't deserve special treatment.

we do not want special treatment,we are tired of there lies ,see i am beating my head against a wall here. some people just don't get it. hello why haven't someone hiked in to see us or call,just like weary won't respond to us here. thats the issue.lack of comunication on there part.

[Skidsteer]

Smartass.

See? We agree on something already.

[camp mom]

That doesn't eliminate the need to file the paperwork. Smartass.

have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.

[fascinated]

have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.

You are asking for special treatment. No one owes you a visit or should send you a form. You need to do that yourself. But I will provide a link for you to contact the NPS offices in Harpers Ferry. No charge.

http://www.nps.gov/appa/

Good luck. Seriously. I mean it.