setting the record straight on whitehouse landing camps

[weary]

the matc is selective in businesses they support, kinda rediculous to have to play politics with something so simple as a wooden sign in the woods.

weary, your claim that the the road was "reconstructed" is disingenuous at best, the trail going to WHL is so rustic, it's very easy to miss.....

I was just summarizing Camper Mom's comment. Reconstructed was perhaps too strong a verb. But I think she said the road had been cleared.

Your suggestion that we or anyone "played politics," over "something so simple as a sign in the woods" is simply not true. If you have evidence to the contrary, other than the claims of a business that may be interested in calling attention to its facility as a new season opens, please tell us what it is.

Multiple signs were placed on the trail contrary to the rules MATC is required to enforce. Our trail overseer for the area reported the violations. The MATC notified the National Park Service of the violation. A ranger from Washington showed up and the matter was cleared up until now when the owners reopened the controbersy.

Weary

[camp mom]

I was just summarizing Camper Mom's comment. Reconstructed was perhaps too strong a verb. But I think she said the road had been cleared.

Your suggestion that we or anyone "played politics," over "something so simple as a sign in the woods" is simply not true. If you have evidence to the contrary, other than the claims of a business that may be interested in calling attention to its facility as a new season opens, please tell us what it is.

Multiple signs were placed on the trail contrary to the rules MATC is required to enforce. Our trail overseer for the area reported the violations. The MATC notified the National Park Service of the violation. A ranger from Washington showed up and the matter was cleared up until now when the owners reopened the controbersy.

Weary

the tote rd. was never cleared, the side trail off from that1/4 mile off the a.t. where the sign you saw posted by shutterbug..which only has the 1 sign there now.we moved only dead trees that blew down(small ones) which most could be picked up and moved to the side. which we got by permission from the paper co.to have this path, has nothing to do with the matc. if you would only hike in to our boat dock things might be a lot clearer to you. as far as you think we are trying to call attention to a new season,you are so far from the truth.the reason this has come about is clearing up all the rumors that i have been reading to long.when i read about folks that won't stop because we cut an illegal trail.we are telling it the way it should be. we are going to submit a application for a sign,as we were never told that that was what we were suppose to do,as told by the pres. in 1999 that he was going to address that at a meeting and was shut down fast, what would you think if that happened to you. was never going to happen,right? this mutible sign crap. yes we did tack a business card(which rick st croix took a picture of and sent to the natl park sevice) it has taken me over 10 years to respond,as i have said before.thats not what i am on here for. i am tired of hearing about this. as i am sure everyone else is too. we will do what we have to do,with or without the blessings of the matc.

[camp mom]

well, i don't remember all the details of matc affairs that happened 10 years ago. But i vaguely remember board members being upset with the at trail being posted with blatant signs, without first talking with the only on the ground representatives of the landowner.

We may have thought of you as a rogue business upset with the whole idea of rules and regulations, and federal ownership of the land surrounding the appalachian trail.

sign not signs

[rcli4]

Weary,
You have brought up the fact that it was the beginning of the new hiking season. This thread started on April 27. Most thru hikers going north have left and those going south won't leave for another 6 weeks. Unless you think thru hikers read this crap while on the trail, your arguement don't make much sense.

Clyde

[white_russian]

we will do what we have to do,with or without the blessings of the matc.

Pure contempt for the law. Keep screwing with the MATC and eventually they will make the case to the NPS to fine you instead of just having a little chat.

[white_russian]

Well, I don't remember all the details of MATC affairs that happened 10 years ago. But I vaguely remember board members being upset with the AT trail being posted with blatant signs, without first talking with the only on the ground representatives of the landowner.

We may have thought of you as a rogue business upset with the whole idea of rules and regulations, and federal ownership of the land surrounding the Appalachian Trail.

Makes sense to me. Has WHL ever apologized for breaking the rules? My guess is no.

[ed bell]

Well, I don't remember all the details of MATC affairs that happened 10 years ago. But I vaguely remember board members being upset with the AT trail being posted with blatant signs, without first talking with the only on the ground representatives of the landowner.

We may have thought of you as a rogue business upset with the whole idea of rules and regulations, and federal ownership of the land surrounding the Appalachian Trail.

Just a suggestion, but wouldn't it be smart at this stage of the saga to mark the tote road with a simple sign and be done with this? Saying that the MATC "may have thought of WHL as a rogue business upset with the whole idea of rules and regulations, and federal ownership of the land surrounding the Appalachian Trail" sounds about as political as you can get in the context of this entire issue. It makes it sound like a judgment call that the MATC thinks is germane to the issue has colored their decisions. I'm sure the MATC wouldn't want it characterized that way, but you did say it was a possibly in this case. Even if the owners of WHL have those views, it shouldn't create some sort of additional obstacle for simply identifying a tote road that, for all intensive purposes, has existed and has been used by folks on the AT since the early days. As someone has pointed out before, the sign isn't for WHL, it identifies the Mahar Tote Road, which hikers could utilize for any of a number of reasons. The MATC's work is for the AT and the folks who use it. Considering that the AMC received signs and NEW connector trails intersecting the AT in the "100 Mile" speaks volumes about the true nature of this issue. If there weren't any examples of new signs being added by the MATC in the "100 Mile" then there would be a reason to object and deny the sign outright. Evidently that is not the case.

If this entire issue is simply the fault of WHL for failing to fill out the proper paperwork, then it should be easily rectified and put to bed. Who knows, with a little goodwill and understanding from MATC and WHL, a partnership might be established that would advance the cause of the AT in ways not previously recognized. I know one thing, the discord and failure to get along sure isn't helping anyone at all.

[Jack Tarlin]

This may have been mentioned before, I don't have time to look at the whole thread.

But having hiked the Maine section many, many times over the past 15 years, I seem to remember (and somewhere I have some lovely photographs) signs smack on the trail, with directional arrows, etc., that informed hikers of the existence and general direction of the Shaw place in Monson. These signs educated, informed, and delighted countless hikers.

It is inconceivable that MATC officialdom was unaware of these signs; as I said they were very visible and were there for years.

It seems obvious that MATC's pique over unauthorized trail signage in regards to telling folks about the existence and location of private businesses is selective.

Meaning some folks get a hatful of grief and some folks don't. For whatever reason.

In any case, enough already. This is a reputable business, run by good people, and there are hundreds and hundreds of folks who'll happily attest to this.

Whoever has the beef here, whether it's MATC, AMC, or anyone else, it's time to let it go. The argument that this is all about improper or illicit trail signage and the need to protect poor hikers by controlling such threatening stuff......well, this is a clearly false argument. WHL was evidently targeted and singled out for a long time, and it's long past time to move on.

[ed bell]

Makes sense to me. Has WHL ever apologized for breaking the rules? My guess is no.

C'mon, it's not like these folks work together side by side or have dealings with each other on a regular basis. Who knows how this all played out through the 10+ year time frame and what, exactly, has been said. Apologized for breaking the rules? To whom would this be directed to and when would it have taken place? Not to mention what someone would apologize for. WHL ain't exactly right up the road from any meeting place and it's doubtful I would feel compelled to travel a fair distance to apologize for any actions involved with the issue here. The remedy here is to straighten it out and move on. If it's not that simple, then the public needs to know why. Am I missing something here?

[mudhead]

Somebody irritated somebody else, and being Maine, the irritation will go to the grave.

Small town mindset with a memory.

[weary]

Weary,
You have brought up the fact that it was the beginning of the new hiking season. This thread started on April 27. Most thru hikers going north have left and those going south won't leave for another 6 weeks. Unless you think thru hikers read this crap while on the trail, your arguement don't make much sense. Clyde

Well, I was just speculating. I'm not good at reading people's minds. But I suspect most southbounders are in the planning stages for their walks. If so, this might be a good time to remind them of the existent of WHL.

Weary

[weary]

This may have been mentioned before, I don't have time to look at the whole thread.

But having hiked the Maine section many, many times over the past 15 years, I seem to remember (and somewhere I have some lovely photographs) signs smack on the trail, with directional arrows, etc., that informed hikers of the existence and general direction of the Shaw place in Monson. These signs educated, informed, and delighted countless hikers.

It is inconceivable that MATC officialdom was unaware of these signs; as I said they were very visible and were there for years.

It seems obvious that MATC's pique over unauthorized trail signage in regards to telling folks about the existence and location of private businesses is selective.

Meaning some folks get a hatful of grief and some folks don't. For whatever reason.

In any case, enough already. This is a reputable business, run by good people, and there are hundreds and hundreds of folks who'll happily attest to this.

Whoever has the beef here, whether it's MATC, AMC, or anyone else, it's time to let it go. The argument that this is all about improper or illicit trail signage and the need to protect poor hikers by controlling such threatening stuff......well, this is a clearly false argument. WHL was evidently targeted and singled out for a long time, and it's long past time to move on.

Well I remember seeing a Shaw's sign before the National Park Service had bought the trail corridor and imposed national park regulations. The last time I looked the tree had grown around part of the sign, making it impossible to remove. But an MATC volunteer at some point painted out the visible words and arrows.

I can assure you that MATC tries to treat everyone as equally as possible for a club run by several hundred volunteers with different perceptions of what is allowed and what isn't.

We don't spend much time sitting around discussing such matters. We spend our time in the woods and hills, building bog bridges, constructing water bars, clearing blowdowns and brush, correcting trail erosion, and keeping the trail as wild as possible.

Each year volunteers devote 20,000 or more hours to such work. We moved on months ago. We haven't spent more than a couple of minutes, if that, discussing WHL since the visit to Maine by the National Park Service ranger. Our responsibility was to notify the park service of a possible violation. We did.

Weary

[The_Saint]

WHL could be one of the best hostels on the trail with some help. I stayed there late last fall on my finish of THRU and was appauled by the amount of money it cost to be there. The books were incorrect on pricing, which made me think the pricing was raised mid season, or the books were misinformed.

Before you say, you didn't have to stay, think again.

They intentionally set it up so that if you want food or resupply, you almost have to stay in order to get any food.

That being said, it's set on a beautiful lake and the grounds are very nice. The pizza is delicious, I'd recommend that if you want to pay out over 80 dollars to stay including food, drinks, etc.

I had to pay 39 dollars for one night, nothing included. That's twice to three times what almost any other hostel on the trail.

The fact that the magazines in the bunkhouse were "Fortune 500" and "Yachting" made me realize the actual goal.

[blaneyge]

i suppose the "actual goal" is to have folks read Fortune 500 and Yachting .............................

[Roland]

WHL could be one of the best hostels on the trail with some help. I stayed there late last fall on my finish of THRU and was appauled by the amount of money it cost to be there. The books were incorrect on pricing, which made me think the pricing was raised mid season, or the books were misinformed.

Before you say, you didn't have to stay, think again.

They intentionally set it up so that if you want food or resupply, you almost have to stay in order to get any food.

That being said, it's set on a beautiful lake and the grounds are very nice. The pizza is delicious, I'd recommend that if you want to pay out over 80 dollars to stay including food, drinks, etc.

I had to pay 39 dollars for one night, nothing included. That's twice to three times what almost any other hostel on the trail.

The fact that the magazines in the bunkhouse were "Fortune 500" and "Yachting" made me realize the actual goal.

Did the Sysco Foods distributor happen to deliver while you were there?

There may be good reasons why the cost is higher there; inaccessibility, short season, limited market, etc. But whenever there is only one game in town, prices tend to be higher than when competition exists nearby. No one is forced to buy, or stay.

[bulldog49]

WHL could be one of the best hostels on the trail with some help. I stayed there late last fall on my finish of THRU and was appauled by the amount of money it cost to be there. The books were incorrect on pricing, which made me think the pricing was raised mid season, or the books were misinformed.

Before you say, you didn't have to stay, think again.

They intentionally set it up so that if you want food or resupply, you almost have to stay in order to get any food.

That being said, it's set on a beautiful lake and the grounds are very nice. The pizza is delicious, I'd recommend that if you want to pay out over 80 dollars to stay including food, drinks, etc.

I had to pay 39 dollars for one night, nothing included. That's twice to three times what almost any other hostel on the trail.

The fact that the magazines in the bunkhouse were "Fortune 500" and "Yachting" made me realize the actual goal.

If you don't like the price don't stay there. It is entirely possible to hike 100 miles without resupply.

[Jack Tarlin]

Are the prices at WHL more expensive than at other A.T. hostels?

Yes, they are, but what Saint doesn't recognize is that this place is in the middle of nowhere.

I can think of all sorts of other Trail facilities that are minutes away from stores, supermarkets, Wal-Marts, etc. EVERYTHING at WHL has to brought from many miles away, and this is time-consuming and expensive; the reason you can get a Lipton dinner at a big Trail town supermarket for ninety-nine cents is because the chain buys them thousands at a time, gets a great deal on them, and has them delivered by truck. A tiny little place in the middle of nowhere buys Liptons a few dozen at a time, and has to send an employee away for hours at a time in order to go get them, using their own vehicle and at their own expense. What this means is that you're not gonna pay .99 for a Lipton out in the middle of nowhere; your cheeseburger's gonna cost more, your Ben and Jerry's will, and so on.

And if this is too much for some folks, well they can leave.

Oh, and the remark about divining what folks are all about based on the magazines they put out for their guests was simply snotty........the living room at Kincora Hostel is full of upscale magazines that are aimed at moneyed, well-heeled readers. Just because the room is full of Outside Magazines and National Geographics, does this mean Kincora is all about money?

Ridiculous.

Finally, Saint's remark about if you don't have to stay there, "think again"......well guess what? Plenty of folks DON'T stay there, for any number of reasons, some of which involve money and some of which don't.

Nobody is compelled to patronize any Trail business, but to voluntarily elect to do so, and to do so when one KNOWS what it's gonna cost, and then to publicly carp about the place later.......well sorry, this seems sort of childish to me.

You think a place is asking too much for goods and services?

Then don't patronize them.

This is not that difficult a concept.

[Jack Tarlin]

Roland and Bulldog beat me to it.

And they are right.

[kanga]

WHL could be one of the best hostels on the trail with some help. I stayed there late last fall on my finish of THRU and was appauled by the amount of money it cost to be there. The books were incorrect on pricing, which made me think the pricing was raised mid season, or the books were misinformed.

Before you say, you didn't have to stay, think again.

They intentionally set it up so that if you want food or resupply, you almost have to stay in order to get any food.

That being said, it's set on a beautiful lake and the grounds are very nice. The pizza is delicious, I'd recommend that if you want to pay out over 80 dollars to stay including food, drinks, etc.

I had to pay 39 dollars for one night, nothing included. That's twice to three times what almost any other hostel on the trail.

The fact that the magazines in the bunkhouse were "Fortune 500" and "Yachting" made me realize the actual goal.

first, you didn't have to stay. period. you had a tent, right?
second, you can carry 10 days worth of food. my pack weighed 35 lbs going through there with 10 days of food.
third, $39 nothing included is EXACTLY what you would pay in franklin to stay at one of the motels.
fourth, it's not a hostel. it's a camp.
fifth, they have to drive well over an hour, alot of it down dirt road, to get to resupply. they most likely buy in bulk and stock up massively to make trips fewer. had they not made this effort, you would likely being paying more.
sixth, nobody beat you and took your money out of your pocket.
seventh, they have "yachting" and "fortune 500" cause our smelly hiker asses aren't the only people that stay at that camp. people come from far away to fish and hunt. people that do that sort of thing that don't live in the area usually have a decent amount of money.
you are one of those entitled thru-hikers my friends that live on the trail tell me about. it is not about you darlin. try to open your mind.

[bulldog49]

And by the way, that $39 per bight stay is a huge bargain compared to the $87 the AMC charges for hut stays in the Whites.