PDA

View Full Version : AMC huts



trudger
10-10-2007, 17:58
For you thru-hike veterans. What are the alternatives for hikers who don`t want to shell out $85 average to sleep in AMC huts in the Whites?

rafe
10-10-2007, 18:03
1. Work-for-stay (but don't count on it)
2. Tent platforms, where possible
3. Stealth (tricky on the AT corridor)
4. Stealth on blue-blaze access trails

Jack Tarlin
10-10-2007, 18:22
Actually, "stealth" camping implies camping in a spot where it is technically against the rules, or even against the law, to camp.

Except for the areas immediately adjacent to Huts; shelters; established campsites; and obviously not at or above treeline; (and a few other places as well, which are often signed) you can camp pretty much wherever you please in New Hampshire, same as on most of the rest of the Trail. Keep in mind that there are also many pay-a-fee shelters throughout the Whites, so this is another option. The cost for overnighting at these sites is minimal.

But it is not necessary to rely on stealth or illegal camping to get thru the Whites.

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 18:51
In the Whites, just observe distance restrictions which I believe are: minimum of 1/4 mile away from Huts, 200 feet from the trail and water sources, and below treeline defined as where the trees are 8 feet or taller.

rickb
10-10-2007, 18:55
Provided none of the other restrictions apply, you only HAVE to camp 200 feet away from the AT where it passes through Wilderness areas in the WMNF (and perhaps the short stretch north of Route 2).

rafe
10-10-2007, 18:56
I was sloppy with my use of "stealth" above, but my experience on the AT in the Whites seems to be that any place that looks useable for camping is also illegal. ;) Which is why, these days, I do day hikes on the AT, and camp elsewhere. I'll also allow as how the Whites are probably more friendly to hammockers than tenters in this regard, since flat ground is scarce. Eg., most of the flat ground is above treeline and thus verboten. And if it's not above treeline, it's next to a stream, so that's out, too... :rolleyes:

There are a few inexpensive tent platforms and plain old lean-tos; Liberty Springs, Garfield summit, Guyot, Ethan Pond, and The Perch. It's been a while since I've stayed in or at these.

celt
10-10-2007, 18:56
In the Whites, just observe distance restrictions which I believe are: minimum of 1/4 mile away from Huts, 200 feet from the trail and water sources, and below treeline defined as where the trees are 8 feet or taller.

... and a 1/4 mile from Shelters and Tentsites too.

celt
10-10-2007, 19:15
In the Whites, just observe distance restrictions which I believe are: minimum of 1/4 mile away from Huts, 200 feet from the trail and water sources, and below treeline defined as where the trees are 8 feet or taller.

... and a 1/4 mile from Shelters and Tentsites too.


my experience on the AT in the Whites seems to be that any place that looks useable for camping is also illegal. Most of the flat ground is above treeline and thus verboten. And if it's not above treeline, it's next to a stream, so that's out, too... This is far from the truth. Hikers have compiled lists of servicable tentsites in the Whites. Beyond the above mentioned "Forest Protection Areas" (FPAs) around existing managed overnight sites there are few restrictions on the A.T. in NH (off the A.T. there are more) Zeta Pass in the Carters and Liberty Springs Trail in the Franconias are the two that I can remember and most others are at busy trailheads.


There are a few inexpensive tent platforms and plain old lean-tos; Liberty Springs, Garfield summit, Guyot, Ethan Pond, and The Perch. It's been a while since I've stayed in or at these.There are more than a few. The AMC manages eight sites that charge $8 per camper and five more with no fee. The USFS manages three free sites and the Randolph Mountain Club two cabins and a shelter with a fee comparable to the AMC's.

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 19:18
I was sloppy with my use of "stealth"



Yes, that definition is new to me to. In all the time I've read about it, heard about or spoken about it I've never heard it related to anything remotley illegal.
My understanding is that it was icamping in an area where there were no facilites, in your tent or under the stars. Is the true B. Jack?

Jack Tarlin
10-10-2007, 19:26
Maybe other folks have heard it differently used, but my understanding over the years is that when one "stealth camps" one is camping in a place where one technically knows one shouldn't be camping, hence, the use of the word "stealth" which implies something furtive or covert. The word goes back to the Middle Ages, and probably derives from the word "steal."

So yeah, stealth camping generally implies camping where you shouldn't.

Jack Tarlin
10-10-2007, 19:28
Cool thing....if you Google "stealth camp" you get almost 2 million hits.

And the very first one?

It's a Whiteblaze thread! How cool is that?

Lone Wolf
10-10-2007, 19:34
For you thru-hike veterans. What are the alternatives for hikers who don`t want to shell out $85 average to sleep in AMC huts in the Whites?

if and when you get there you'll know how and where to camp without paying a dime

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 19:35
Cool thing....if you Google "stealth camp" you get almost 2 million hits.

And the very first one?

It's a Whiteblaze thread! How cool is that?

If stealth is illegal, then being the first google hit might not be so cool. :eek:

If stealth is illegal, what does that say about our stealthy war birds and other military hardware? :-?

If stealth is illegal, why are beans legal? (oh, never mind). :o

Midway Sam
10-10-2007, 19:36
Maybe other folks have heard it differently used, but my understanding over the years is that when one "stealth camps" one is camping in a place where one technically knows one shouldn't be camping, hence, the use of the word "stealth" which implies something furtive or covert. The word goes back to the Middle Ages, and probably derives from the word "steal."

So yeah, stealth camping generally implies camping where you shouldn't.

Heh, I always thought it just meant to camp in a place and in a manner that would cause others to be oblivous to your presence. In other words, camping in close proximity to the trail but in a tent/tarp/hammock that is not visible from the trail.



Edit: Just found this link that supports my interpretation of the term...

http://www.bicycletouring101.com/StealthCamping.htm

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 19:39
Heh, I always thought it just meant to camp in a place and in a manner that would cause others to be oblivous to your presence. In other words, camping in close proximity to the trail but in a tent/tarp/hammock that is not visible from the trail.

I agree and I have done that type of camping myself. If we cannot use "stealth" to describe legal, out of sight camping, what word can we use? :-?

Kirby
10-10-2007, 19:41
non disruptive camping?

Kirby

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 19:41
Maybe other folks have heard it differently used, but my understanding over the years is that when one "stealth camps" one is camping in a place where one technically knows one shouldn't be camping, hence, the use of the word "stealth" which implies something furtive or covert. The word goes back to the Middle Ages, and probably derives from the word "steal."

So yeah, stealth camping generally implies camping where you shouldn't.

Jack, nice breakdown on the word derivation. Hopefully it's going to be a phrase that changes as it's meaning may. You know. Like 'bad' used to be BAD but now 'bad' can mean good. 'Cool' used to mean cold, you know.

2 million hits and WB's at the top? nice work ladies and gents.:) :)

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 19:43
If stealth is illegal, then being the first google hit might not be so cool. :eek:

If stealth is illegal, what does that say about our stealthy war birds and other military hardware? :-?

If stealth is illegal, why are beans legal? (oh, never mind). :o

Stealth isn't illegal in ever sense of the word, just camping.:)

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 19:45
non disruptive camping?

Kirby

Yes Kirby. Where you are not disturbing private residence or business or areas in nature that have been deemed 'protected.'

Lone Wolf
10-10-2007, 19:46
non disruptive camping?

Kirby

yeah like animals do

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 19:50
Yes Kirby. Where you are not disturbing private residence or business or areas in nature that have been deemed 'protected.'

LNT camping. Leave No Trace Camping should be practiced with Non Disruptive Camping. Now if only we could have convinced the youth group we ran into at Eliza Brook on Friday night to LNT and NDC then we would not have to scream S.T.F.U., or rather wish we had.

Jack Tarlin
10-10-2007, 19:51
Sounds like a freshman trip from Dartmouth College!! :D

Uncle Silly
10-10-2007, 19:53
Heh, I always thought it just meant to camp in a place and in a manner that would cause others to be oblivous to your presence.


... typically, because them becoming aware of your presence will lead, at best, to expulsion of you and your gear from your chosen campsite; or, at worst, to arrest and being charged with trespassing. Thus implying your campsite might be illegal. The illegality isn't necessary for it to be stealth camping, but probably accounts for most stealth camping done by normal people who aren't trying to be sneaky just because they can. Naturally, those sneaky b@st@rds stealth camp when they don't have to, and are right to call it that. But normal folks are probably stealthing because they know they're not supposed to be there.


(Sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative... but it sure is nice to type again after two months in the woods.)

rafe
10-10-2007, 19:55
if and when you get there you'll know how and where to camp without paying a dime

Yeah, like Lafayette summit, right LW? ;)

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 19:57
Work-for-stay is a good experience and you should consider it.

One night I even shelled out the $85 bucks because they had already overdone it on the work-for-stay and the weather was rotten. It might be worth it under certain circumstances, just don't count on availability.

If you are going to camp, don't expect to find a spot fifteen minutes before dark. Take a good one when it comes along, don't pass it up because you could still get in another mile or two. The terrain doesn't create an over-abundance of campsites unless you're in a hammock.

Some of the croo and especially some of the people who manage the platform sites can also give information on possible camping sites ahead.

Southbound thru-hikers also may have some info. Really one of the best sources of any info is people coming in the opposite direction, just don't believe anything anybody says about a distance or time! (Oh, it's only 0.4 to the shelter, We passed water 20 minutes ago, etc.)

Apparently there used to be a list a the hostel in Glencliff, but you can imagine what became of it! But it's still a good place to get info about the whites, from Phat Chap etc. and the southbounders.

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 19:58
Sounds like a freshman trip from Dartmouth College!! :D

Nope, worse. It was nine eighth grade kids from a private school in CT. The two 24-26 year old "adult" leaders were not much help. Our previous trip entailed being squeezed out of the Beaver Brook site by a dozen or so tenth grade kids from MA. Both times the leaders apologized, said their intent was not to invade and proceeded to invade at will. I am loving the Whites already. :rolleyes:

shelterbuilder
10-10-2007, 20:05
...the leaders apologized, said their intent was not to invade and proceeded to invade at will.... :rolleyes:

Ah, the apology makes ALL the difference, doesn't it! That's one of the things I love about our scout troops down here....

Lone Wolf
10-10-2007, 20:10
Work-for-stay is a good experience and you should consider it.



why? what's so good about it?

rafe
10-10-2007, 20:15
The AMC manages eight sites that charge $8 per camper and five more with no fee. The USFS manages three free sites and the Randolph Mountain Club two cabins and a shelter with a fee comparable to the AMC's.

How many of these AMC sites are in the Whites? I know of several AMC facilities well away from the Whites, eg: Upper Goose Pond (MA), Mohican Outdoor Center (NJ), Speck Pond (ME), and even Leroy Smith shelter in PA.

ISTM the "problematic" areas are the Franconia and Presidential ridges. No real problems on the AT south of Rte. 93 or north of Rte. 16.

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 20:19
why? what's so good about it?

The croo are pretty cool and you get to sleep in the attic and when I was a kid I wanted to work in a restaurant so it was fun working in the kitchen and they stuffed us full of food and then when I was at a tent site one of the croo I had met had was dating the guy running the site and so they gave us all of the leftovers from their candlelit dinner. The tourists are pretty funny, too, there were these twins with all these different matching outdoors outifts, middle-aged men. Plus they give you cookies to take with you in the morning.

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 20:29
why? what's so good about it?

Yeah I also dug the work for stay as much as I could. Sure I'd rather have tent camped and be out by 7 am but it is a good option in the White's all things considered. And the Croo at Lakes this year was awesome. Same Hutmaster (Becky?) from Madison last summer. And last summer Madison was the best.

Lone Wolf
10-10-2007, 20:34
any and all hikers that show up at a hut without a reservation should be treated the same wether they walked from georgia or 30 miles before the hut.

Kirby
10-10-2007, 21:01
I am of the opinion the AMC should add leanto's to all their huts, why has this not been done?

Kirby

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 21:04
I am of the opinion the AMC should add leanto's to all their huts, why has this not been done?

Kirby

Because they don't think it would be profitable.:D

Lone Wolf
10-10-2007, 21:04
I am of the opinion the AMC should add leanto's to all their huts, why has this not been done?

Kirby

no money in it

Frosty
10-10-2007, 21:06
Heh, I always thought it just meant to camp in a place and in a manner that would cause others to be oblivous to your presence. In other words, camping in close proximity to the trail but in a tent/tarp/hammock that is not visible from the trail.This is my definition of the word, also. It is a LNT camp. Stealth in that a) no one sees you, and b) a few minutes after you leave no one can tell anyone had ever camped there.

But there are a lot of defintions.

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 21:10
Oh, something else fun about work-for-stay is that the huts have really great libraries.

Kirby
10-10-2007, 21:11
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers.

Kirby

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 21:14
Oh, something else fun about work-for-stay is that the huts have really great libraries.

I read 'Not Without Peril' about the documented deaths in the Whites due to weather while staying at Madison last year (for two days - thunderstorms).
Great book and there were plenty more interesting ones to choose from. Never can go wrong with Roger Tory Petersons field guide to North American Birds.:)

rafe
10-10-2007, 21:17
Oh, something else fun about work-for-stay is that the huts have really great libraries.

And at least one or some of them keep registers from way, way back.

The AMC is anal about their registers. Leroy Smith shelter was a pit, but it had a brand new, gorgeous leather-bound register. :rolleyes:

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 21:18
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers.

Kirby

Hey Kirb, I'm right there with ya for your general feelings about this. But I've learned that when sending out your opinions, the delivery is equally important to the message. It starts with understanding that you're not necessarily preaching to the choir. And consider the phrase 'I'm of the opinion that. . .'
It presents an aloofness (at best) that is likely turn off a lot of folks who may have otherwise listened. Your hearts in the right place. But diplomacy is strength.

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 21:21
You also have to realize that somebody needs to manage all those people in the mountains in that area or it would be a total disaster. Limiting the number of places for people to stay is one way of limiting the number of people.

Plus, if they didn't worry about money, how would they have bought half of Maine?

Warraghiyagey is right, especially about trail conditions, even when they're not so hot. The maintainers all work hard, for free. Some sections of trail are difficult to maintain. We should thank them even when we really wish they had done a better job. Beggars can't be choosers.

Some places, like Maine, the maintainers probably don't even live near the trail, either.

rickb
10-10-2007, 21:23
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay.

I am blaming Lone W. for that one!

:eek:

Tin Man
10-10-2007, 21:25
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers.

Kirby

Actually, they cost more than you would think. I forget the numbers but they were much higher than I would have guessed. For starters, the materials are choppered in and that is costly. I am speculating, but the AMC probably has their hands full already.

shelterbuilder
10-10-2007, 21:26
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers.

Kirby

There MAY be land management issues at work here. A hut/shelter/lean-to is a management tool that draws people into a central location. That location gets "abused" but the surrounding areas do not. One of the "abuses" that the site has to endure is waste management. Mountain soils are thin and can't handle sewerage overloading like valley soils can. I suspect that, income notwithstanding, putting a lean-to next to a hut might be seen as further overloading an already over-taxed waste treatment system.

Or it might be just about money....

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 21:32
The maintainers all work hard, for free. Some sections of trail are difficult to maintain. We should thank them even when we really wish they had done a better job. Beggars can't be choosers.

Some places, like Maine, the maintainers probably don't even live near the trail, either.

After seeing enough of the trail and meeting enough of the folk that make it so enjoyable, You may come to view a fallen tree in the middle of the trail as a reminder, not of a local maintainer that missed something, but as a reson why he or she will be out there again. And they are the easiest people to thank you'll ever meet.

Appalachian Tater
10-10-2007, 21:44
A You may come to view a fallen tree in the middle of the trail as a reminder, not of a local maintainer that missed something, but as a reason why he or she will be out there again.

That is great! There should be an endangered-maintainer campaign and that can be the slogan. The Weasel will be be glad to be your spokesperson.

warraghiyagey
10-10-2007, 22:18
That is great! There should be an endangered-maintainer campaign and that can be the slogan. The Weasel will be be glad to be your spokesperson.

One of the great aspects of the trail is the way it affects ones personal bluster, changing it more to a grace. My own gusts are still dying down, in a way.

Peaks
10-11-2007, 09:30
I am of the opinion the AMC should add leanto's to all their huts, why has this not been done?

Kirby

Most of the huts are on USFS land, and operate on a permit basis. And it's a big deal to modify the permit in order to build something additional.

AMC reconfigured the inside of Lakes of the Clouds mainly because it could not expand the footprint or size of the hut to accomodate the composting toilets a couple of years ago.

Peaks
10-11-2007, 09:33
For you thru-hike veterans. What are the alternatives for hikers who don`t want to shell out $85 average to sleep in AMC huts in the Whites?

Just beyond the "restricted use sign" around each hut there is usually a bootleg campsite. If you can't find it, ask the hut crew.

The Old Fhart
10-11-2007, 10:42
Kirbyinanutshell232-"You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers."At best that is an uninformed opinion.

First, the AMC doesn't own the land the huts are on (with the exception of 1 acre at Madison), it belongs to the Federal or State (Lonesome Lake) government and there are laws and regulations that say what can or can't be built on public land.

Second, the areas most thru hikers complain about are above tree line and no open shelter can be built there for many obvious good reasons.

Third, you say if they "provide the supplies" you will build. How do you think the supplies magically get there? Check the photo gallery and you will see several photo of choppers delivering supplies to Lakes. Nothing comes cheap except talk.:rolleyes:

Fourth, can you show me the financial report from the AMC that backs up your baseless claim that they have "endless amounts of money". I thought so.:D

As a point of interest the rebuilding costs for Galehead hut in 2000 were under $500,000 with about $50,000 going to meet the ADA requirements because this is public land. From the AMC site, here were some of the design considerations:
Galehead's Unique Situation

Due to the hut's location at just under 4,000 feet and nearly five miles from the nearest trailhead, some unique engineering solutions were required. The difficulty of transporting materials to the remote site demanded the use of lightweight materials, which still had to produce a sturdy and aesthetically pleasing structure. Another unique design feature was the fastening of the foundation to the granite by drilling and grouting rebar. The structure was designed to withstand winds of 125 mph and ground snow loading of 100 pounds per square foot.

Just a Hiker
10-11-2007, 11:05
I think people stress too much about getting through the Whites where the Huts are. First of all, it's not like one has to stay at all of them. You can get through the Whites and only have to stay at one or two of them.....or not at all. I am not a fan of work for stay, but I try and do it with as much humility as being bossed around by a 20 y/o kid will allow me. But I do appreciate the Huts for one thing.......GOOD BREAD!! Take care!

Just Jim

warraghiyagey
10-11-2007, 12:58
I think people stress too much about getting through the Whites where the Huts are. First of all, it's not like one has to stay at all of them. You can get through the Whites and only have to stay at one or two of them.....or not at all. I am not a fan of work for stay, but I try and do it with as much humility as being bossed around by a 20 y/o kid will allow me. But I do appreciate the Huts for one thing.......GOOD BREAD!! Take care!

Just Jim

Unless you're at the head of the NOBO or SOBO pack, the trail grapevine generally informs as to which are the friendly huts on any given year. Thru hikers are pretty good at gaugeing such things. It is quite possible to make it through the Whites without a Hut stay. You'll just have to manage without a campfire which the majority of thrus do anyway.

Just a Hiker
10-11-2007, 13:13
Unless you're at the head of the NOBO or SOBO pack, the trail grapevine generally informs as to which are the friendly huts on any given year. Thru hikers are pretty good at gaugeing such things. It is quite possible to make it through the Whites without a Hut stay. You'll just have to manage without a campfire which the majority of thrus do anyway.

I certainly agree that Huts differ each year as far as being "Hiker Friendly".

Jim

shelterbuilder
10-11-2007, 13:37
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers.

Kirby

Kirby, I would have to agree with The Old Fhart about the design and construction problems. I've been in charge of the design and construction of 2 shelters down here in Pa., and both projects have been, ah,...challenging! We don't have the altitude or snow-loading considerations, but we still have to meet certain state and federal specifications (ADA was not even in the picture with the last project, but it makes things even tougher now). The 2 biggest problems that we've faced are materials importation and human waste treatment. The price tag for getting all of that "stuff" up there is staggering, and the waste treatment issues never go away as long as people keep showing up at the front door.

But I'll tell you what (and this is NOT meant to be nasty): when you get to the Huts - any of them - do 2 things that I think will give you a better understanding of how things are. First, offer to make a supply run for one of the Hutmasters: hike down, strap on a fully loaded backpack, and hike back up again with a load of supplies. Then, offer to lend a hand with the waste treatment system for a day. Either experience, I think, may be an eye-opener for you.

warraghiyagey
10-11-2007, 13:50
Kirby, I would have to agree with The Old Fhart about the design and construction problems. I've been in charge of the design and construction of 2 shelters down here in Pa., and both projects have been, ah,...challenging! We don't have the altitude or snow-loading considerations, but we still have to meet certain state and federal specifications (ADA was not even in the picture with the last project, but it makes things even tougher now). The 2 biggest problems that we've faced are materials importation and human waste treatment. The price tag for getting all of that "stuff" up there is staggering, and the waste treatment issues never go away as long as people keep showing up at the front door.

But I'll tell you what (and this is NOT meant to be nasty): when you get to the Huts - any of them - do 2 things that I think will give you a better understanding of how things are. First, offer to make a supply run for one of the Hutmasters: hike down, strap on a fully loaded backpack, and hike back up again with a load of supplies. Then, offer to lend a hand with the waste treatment system for a day. Either experience, I think, may be an eye-opener for you.

SB, excellent point. You are correct in everyway and certainly if Kirby went this route he would have a better understanding of how it 'works.' So much life to live and learn from. Don't we all have the same.:) :)

celt
10-12-2007, 20:58
How many of these AMC sites are in the Whites? I know of several AMC facilities well away from the Whites, eg: Upper Goose Pond (MA), Mohican Outdoor Center (NJ), Speck Pond (ME), and even Leroy Smith shelter in PA. Five of them are immediately north of the White Mountain National Forest in the Mahoosucs (all AMC, four free, one fee [Speck!]), . The remainder are in in the WMNF between Kinsman Notch and the Androscoggin River.


I am of the opinion the AMC should add leanto's to all their huts, why has this not been done?

Kirby I think adding more structures alongside the Huts would constitute over development. Although one could debate the Huts alone break that boundary in the context of a back country experience.

Also I feel that a shelter alongside a hut would provide a consistently below average overnight experience when compared to the shelters and tent sites. The current combination of the Mizpah Springs Hut and Nauman tentsite is good evidence of this, they are next to each other. Even on a quiet night at Nauman the sounds of the Hut filter down to the tent pads. Huts are just louder, more social places what with more people, more families and the various croo skits (the famous BFDs!).

I'm also not sure why it would be necessary with all the existing shelters and tent sites along the trail in the Whites. The pattern is almost always shelter-hut-shelter-hut and where the pattern is broken and off trail camping is prohibited (The Presidential Range) you have the Mizpah/Nauman, Lakes/Dungeon combos and just off the trail the USFS tent sites Valley Way and Osgood plus the RMC's Perch shelter and Gray Knob and Crag Camp cabins.

weary
10-12-2007, 21:45
why? what's so good about it?
Well, in 1993 I had paid for a bunk and meal at Lake of the Clouds hut. A September storm kept me there a second night. Others with me managed work for stay. They spend a lot of time in a steaming hot kitchen, while I shiffered in the cold dining room.

Weary

weary
10-12-2007, 21:54
You know, I am sick of the AMC being all about their stupid money. How much does it cost to build a lean to? Hell, provide the supplies and I will build the damn things myself if it means overnignt hikers having a place to stay. They have endless amounts of momey, building some leantos will not hurt them that much, if anything, they will recieve praise from many hikers. Kirby
Interesting opinions. I know of no evidence that they are based on facts. AMC survives by begging for money from rich people. The last director was fired because he didn't get the money needed to keep the group solvent. The new director -- well kind of new, he's been around for a couple of decades now -- is doing better.

But recently, membership has declined -- as with most conservation and outdoor groups. The budget as near as I can tell is tight.

Weary

Tin Man
10-12-2007, 22:06
We might consider lightening up on Kirby. He is a little on the young side, both in years and experience apparently.

hopefulhiker
10-12-2007, 22:14
I enjoyed my time at the huts.. even with the work for stay, although when I got to the Madison hut I had to scrub the bathroom top to bottom. It was no fun.. But I understand that they have to helicopter that propane in and haul in on those wooden pack racks all the supplies.. There is a lot of work involved in maintaining those huts..

warraghiyagey
10-12-2007, 22:23
We might consider lightening up on Kirby. He is a little on the young side, both in years and experience apparently.

Thanks for noting that. I thought most everyone was aware how fresh his legs and eyes are in this life. We can teach him without the negative energy. We should all have been so fortunate as to hike the trail as early in life as he is going to.:)

Appalachian Tater
10-12-2007, 22:25
Interestingly, when you're a n00b and you're actually out on the trail, people are unbelievably helpful. The internet makes people evil.

Hikers eat their young (online)!

rafe
10-12-2007, 22:31
The AMC does a good job stewarding the AT through some of its most beautiful and heavily-traveled mountains. The AMC huts predate the AT by several decades. I'm glad for the huts even though I'll do all I can not to stay at them.

Those big enclosed AMC huts clearly don't jibe with the particular "needs" of thru-hikers or self-sufficient, experienced backpackers. From a practical point of view, that's probably as it should be. "Yuppie" weekenders from the big city need the huts (and are willing to pay $$) in far greater numbers than thru-hikers. I'm glad that the AMC provides access to the AT for yuppie weekenders and people other than thru-hikers and experienced backpackers.

I guess I'm glad I never had to deal with the Whites as a thru-hiker. :)

Pirate
10-12-2007, 23:22
Take the bus around the huts. Or hitch hike arond the AMC (all my cash) huts. It's not worth paying all that money just to support the AMC jerks. Stealth camp if you have to but do not pay the high prices to camp in the Presidential ranges.

Cosmic Crusader
10-13-2007, 11:37
http://www.outdoors.org/pdf/upload/06-ann-report.pdf

I think that the system they have put in place is overall pretty good. I do think they could do somethings different, and maybe be a little less of a police force for the Trail and its watersources. Having spent a good bit of time in the whites and dealing with the huts and support staff I can say they do make it pretty hard to pass by without needing to stop at one or more of their places of business. I think NFP organizations are great and all but it makes it hard when they demand donations or fees for what should in (some cases be public use). I know you dont have to stay at the huts and you dont have to stay at the tent pads and for some fair use rules you should not camp too close to summits and on frail plants and such - but when they have grown to have full control of almost all (good) spots they make it damn hard and in some cases dangerous to hikers that try to avoid the costs by hiking too early or too late in rough areas. The stealth camping options just compound the problems by damage to the area and fueling the view of Thru Hikers and other packers as lawless or uncaring. I know the areas around the trail are full of folks that love the mountains and the freedom of the hills and what it can provide as a business for them but what do you think is the real reason such a natural area of such high use has not gotten listed as a National Park --- humm I would guess it has something to do with local politics and little to do with Federal control, cause Im pretty sure the some of the folks that lost their lands and timber rights in SNP were fairly unhappy back in the day, but now the Nation can enjoy a very high use and federal controlled area - not an area given over to special use permit control. Not to say its perfect but at least it has to be able to be used by anyone of any income, and its shelters are free.

Different ideas I guess
But to have your headquarters in Boston - or Harpers Ferry... humm Think the AMC headquarters should be in Hanover or someplace like that.

between the Heli ferry of items spring and fall and the train these special uses should be more named special abuse permits.
You want huts try all solar, wind and human powered items in place of gas and such, then make the visitors opt to pay by hiking items in and or out. This is a wilderness experience right.

PS sorry about my ramble ... guess i dont really support the AMCs or White Mountain National Forest vision and how everyone should be able to spoil our wilderness with such ease. But too many people on the planet to stop now, so rent a room hop on the train and enjoy looking at the dirty hikers as they stop on their way thru.;)

warraghiyagey
10-13-2007, 14:53
Take the bus around the huts. Or hitch hike arond the AMC (all my cash) huts. It's not worth paying all that money just to support the AMC jerks. Stealth camp if you have to but do not pay the high prices to camp in the Presidential ranges.

Getting through the Whites can be a point of concern for any first time thru for sure as it very much was for me. But I made it through twice without paying to stay in a hut and at least hundreds of others have too.
It's easily doable.
With that said, the AMC could make it a little easier for thru's as it is part of the AT which you sometimes feel is forgotten by the AMC as you hike through. IT's a slippery slope and a quite polarizing topic here. Generally when you talk to other hikers as you approach the Whites, they will know which are the friendlier huts in any particular season and you can adjust accordingly.

Appalachian Tater
10-13-2007, 15:09
Definitely there is more anxiety about the Whites and the hut system for a first-timer than is warranted.

warraghiyagey
10-13-2007, 15:13
Definitely there is more anxiety about the Whites and the hut system for a first-timer than is warranted.

Yes, the catch is that first timers don't know that.

Appalachian Tater
10-13-2007, 15:42
Yes, the catch is that first timers don't know that.

Well, people tell you that, but you don't believe them.

One way of thinking about it is to realize that there are camping restrictions, like there are in some other places, and to look at the huts as an additional resource for food--leftovers at breakfast, soup at lunch, and if you stay in huts, dinner. You can make your main meal lunch at some of the huts with really good soup if you have the right things to go with it. I even had some really nice crew whip up some superfast soup just because I don't like split pea soup and that's all they had.

So you could just think of the Whites as an AYCE soup buffet! :D

weary
10-13-2007, 16:26
http://www.outdoors.org/pdf/upload/06-ann-report.pdf

....But to have your headquarters in Boston - or Harpers Ferry... humm Think the AMC headquarters should be in Hanover or someplace like that.

between the Heli ferry of items spring and fall and the train these special uses should be more named special abuse permits.
You want huts try all solar, wind and human powered items in place of gas and such, then make the visitors opt to pay by hiking items in and or out. This is a wilderness experience right.

PS sorry about my ramble ... guess i dont really support the AMCs or White Mountain National Forest vision and how everyone should be able to spoil our wilderness with such ease. But too many people on the planet to stop now, so rent a room hop on the train and enjoy looking at the dirty hikers as they stop on their way thru.;)
AMC predates the National Forest, as do most of the huts. And without the agitation of AMC 90 years ago, the protected forest probably wouldn't exist. Nor would designating the Whites as a National Park help. Most National Parks are far more under the control of private vendors with special use permits than are the Whites. A case in point is Shenendoah, where the summit ridge is traversed by a highway, and the countryside is clogged with auto campgrounds, stores, restaurants, and lodges, mostly run as private businesses.

Weary

rickb
10-13-2007, 16:31
Bottom line, the AMC attracts thousands of people to the Mountains.

That really does Suck.

Except for the people that come to the mountains, of course.

Now that the AMC is protecting land in ME we can expect more people up there, too.

Which also sucks.

Except fo the people who go to Maine, of course.

warraghiyagey
10-13-2007, 16:37
Well, people tell you that, but you don't believe them.


I believe them, because that was me 2 years ago. But I've enjoyed alot of soup and dessert through there since then.

Pootz
10-17-2007, 11:22
I say you should not worry about the whites on your thru hike, they are 1500 miles from springer. You have lots of work to do before you need to think about the whites. The trail tends to take care of you, all I worried about on my thru hike was where is my next resupply. Hike from resupply to resupply. All you have to consider is what is in between. I loved the whites and the huts. Stopped at all the ones close to the trail. What is better than $2.00 all you can eat soup. They also sell left over desert from the night before. You can do work for stay and get Dinner and breakfast. The people I hiked with had no problem getting work for stay. The most important thing for work for stay to work is that all hikers have to be polite and honest when dealing with the hut staff. If someone before you is not you may not get the reception you are looking for. If you have the money pay to stay at the huts. Many have spaces during thru hiker season. You can check for availability on line. Pay to stay has many advantages, nice place to stay, dinner and breakfast. Lets you carry less food thru the whites. $80.00 is not bad for a place to stay and 2 meals, in the middle of nowhere.

Remember a thru hike is supposed to be fun and relaxing. Do not worry about things you can not change on the trail. The AT and all of the places off the trail will take care of you. Have fun and enjoy your hike, it will be the greatest experience of your life if you let it.

Appalachian Tater
10-17-2007, 11:28
I say you should not worry about the whites on your thru hike, they are 1500 miles from springer. You have lots of work to do before you need to think about the whites. The trail tends to take care of you, all I worried about on my thru hike was where is my next resupply. Hike from resupply to resupply. All you have to consider is what is in between. I loved the whites and the huts. Stopped at all the ones close to the trail. What is better than $2.00 all you can eat soup. They also sell left over desert from the night before. You can do work for stay and get Dinner and breakfast. The people I hiked with had no problem getting work for stay. The most important thing for work for stay to work is that all hikers have to be polite and honest when dealing with the hut staff. If someone before you is not you may not get the reception you are looking for. If you have the money pay to stay at the huts. Many have spaces during thru hiker season. You can check for availability on line. Pay to stay has many advantages, nice place to stay, dinner and breakfast. Lets you carry less food thru the whites. $80.00 is not bad for a place to stay and 2 meals, in the middle of nowhere.

Remember a thru hike is supposed to be fun and relaxing. Do not worry about things you can not change on the trail. The AT and all of the places off the trail will take care of you. Have fun and enjoy your hike, it will be the greatest experience of your life if you let it.

$80 wouldn't seem so bad if you could take a shower. Also, those pillowcases don't get changed between guests. You're supposed to have your own.

wincheck
10-17-2007, 13:57
I really enjoy the huts. It's fun to head up for the weekend if you don't want to worry about your own food - you can just pack a sleeping bag liner and head up there with 10-15lbs tops. I first went there when I was 10 and it was one of my first introductions to real hiking and helped me get on a path towards being a more serious backpacker (although I've never thru-hiked for extensive periods of time).

If you join the AMC, you get a discount - if you stay for three nights in a row (not including Saturday) you get more of a discount. It seems like the prices are climbing rather steeply from year to year and that's a bummer, but I'm not sure how much of that is motivated by greed.

There are a lot of yahoos in the Whites but there's a lot of yahoos everywhere these days, huts or no huts. I just got back from the Devil's Path in the Catskills last week and from Thurs-Saturday morning saw 1 person on the trail. From Saturday around noon until leaving it was as crowded as 5th Avenue in Manhattan.

I stayed at Liberty Springs campsite 2 years ago and the condition was awful. Guyot is a very attractive tentsite, though.

Tin Man
10-17-2007, 14:09
I stayed at Liberty Springs campsite 2 years ago and the condition was awful.

Can you describe the awful conditions at Liberty Spring? We are planning to stay there on our next section. Thanks.

warraghiyagey
10-17-2007, 15:49
Can you describe the awful conditions at Liberty Spring? We are planning to stay there on our next section. Thanks.

Nothing wrong with Liberty Spring this year. Enjoy.:)

weary
10-17-2007, 16:39
Bottom line, the AMC attracts thousands of people to the Mountains.

That really does Suck.

Except for the people that come to the mountains, of course.

Now that the AMC is protecting land in ME we can expect more people up there, too.

Which also sucks.

Except fo the people who go to Maine, of course.
Not really true, Rick. Knowledge leads to understanding and appreciation. Wild areas will only be protected to the extent that people know and learn to love these areas.

Many years ago (early 70s) I began writing about Bigelow. Some people complained that I was bringing the masses to a wild mountain that would destroy it.

But when a few years later developers eyed the mountain as potentially being the "Aspen of the east" and the development went before the public in referendum, development was blocked by a scant 12,000 votes out of 200,000 or so cast.

I think it very likely that had I not written those stories the previously unknown Bigelow would now be cluttered with $500,000 condos and the slopes bulldozed into roads and ski trails. Even with my praise of the mountain, we only won by a narrow margin. Anyway Bigelow is now part of 45,000 acres of publicly-owned preserved lands, and I take comfort in the thought that I may have played a small role in it becoming so.

It's not as wild as it would have been had I not written about it again and again. Now MATC has to employ two caretakers each summer to protect the landscape and to teach visitors proper wilderness practices.

But it remains a beautiful mountain, enjoyed by thousands every year; a far better fate than if the developers had had their way.

The same is true of the lands AMC has purchased. The choice was not between leaving the land in a wild state or selling it to AMC. The land was on the market. If AMC had not stepped in, the developers would have, I suspect.

AMC's 37,000 acres may not be as wild as some would like it, but it is far wilder than it would have been under any other buyer.

Our Maine Appalachian Trail Land Trust is a similar case in point. Abraham will never again be quite as remote as it was before the publicity needed to gather the funds required to make the purchase. But it will always remain wilder than it would be had we not struggled for a year to raise those funds.

We now are eyeing the other summits and viewsheds in the high peaks region surrounding Saddleback and Abraham. Success depends on others recognizing the value of this rare and largely unknown area -- and being willing to help in its protection.

Weary www.matlt.org

wincheck
10-17-2007, 17:34
Can you describe the awful conditions at Liberty Spring? We are planning to stay there on our next section. Thanks.

Two years ago, in the early summer it was flooded, crowded and overused. That was some time ago.

rickb
10-17-2007, 19:17
How is it possible for Liberty Springs to flood?

rickb
10-17-2007, 19:30
Can you describe the awful conditions at Liberty Spring? We are planning to stay there on our next section. Thanks.To my way of thinking, the only real pain in the butt about the AMC Campsites is that the tent platforms can fill to capacity well before the time most long distance hikers end their day.

When that happens you are at the mercy of an AMC caretaker who will either point you to an overflow area, or simply ask that you move on down the Trail.

In a place like Liberty Spring Tentsite, walking 1/4 mile UP the Trail will not take you to any obvious places to pitch a tent. Flat open areas can be at a real premium in the WHites, and that area has few. Then you are above treeline.

It could be disapointing to arrive at Liberty Springs and find it full. Most of the time things work out, but you improve the odds if you end your hiking day at an AMC Caretaker campsite early in the day on a summer weekend.

Then again if you have a hamock....

Rick B

celt
10-17-2007, 20:25
$80 wouldn't seem so bad if you could take a shower.

The cost of designing, building and maintaining a septic system for the typical hut environment, one that could handle all those showers, would most certainly increase the cost of staying in the huts significantly. How does $80 a shower sound?



...the only real pain in the butt about the AMC Campsites is that the tent platforms can fill to capacity well before the time most long distance hikers end their day. When that happens you are at the mercy of an AMC caretaker who will either point you to an overflow area, or simply ask that you move on down the Trail..

I'm a former AMC caretaker: Speck, Imp, Nauman, Garfield and Mahoosuc Rover. My experience with the overflows is they're used mostly in July and August, on weekends and then only occasionally. At Garfield I used it once in 100+ nights of caretaking and on a night with nearly 60 campers(rare). Guyot and Nauman have the most regular use of overflow in July and August. A new 10'x16' platform was built in '07 at Nauman to help relieve overflow use and Guyot has the misfortune of being very popular and being undersized. The site is on a steep slope that is hard to build new platforms on. The USFS is also very reluctant to grant permission to expand any campsite. I don't dispute rickb's claim that overflow is used or that some caretaker, somewhere turned a camper out, I just wished to provide some info from my experience. I never turned anyone away, even at Garfield which usually competes with Guyot for the highest overnight use in the Whites (and maybe on the A.T.). We we're encouraged to accomadate everyone who wanted to camp. To concentrate use at the site and because it seemed unreasonable to turn anyone away from an isolated backcountry campsite near the end of daylight hours. Something that did happen more than a few times every year with thru hikers exclusively, was: thru hiker arrives to a very full site and is turned off by all the noise and commotion, he or she is reluctant to stay and after some talking the thru hiker seems intent on pushing on with just a little daylight left so I'd pass on the location of a decent legal stealth site and after a subltle LNT plug (sometimes) they'd hike off.

Tin Man
10-17-2007, 20:27
Thanks Rickb. We have planned relatively short days through the Whites, partially in anticipation of the need to stake a claim at the campsite early. And we are aware that some of those "short" days must start very early in order to get into a tent site early.

Can someone share some thoughts on the best time of year to walk the Whites in terms of crowd control and still have reasonable chances with the weather. More specifically, if you would pick a time between mid-August to late September, what would be the best bet for crowds? Our plan starts at Crawford Notch and heading north.

rafe
10-17-2007, 20:34
Something that did happen more than a few times every year with thru hikers exclusively, was: thru hiker arrives to a very full site and is turned off by all the noise and commotion, he or she is reluctant to stay and after some talking the thru hiker seems intent on pushing on with just a little daylight left so I'd pass on the location of a decent legal stealth site and after a subltle LNT plug (sometimes) they'd hike off.

Nice policy. I got the same treatment from Jeanne, the caretaker at the top of Stratton. I arrived there at sunset, knowing quite well that camping was verboten at the summit. I probably shouldn't be telling this story for fear of encouraging others to do the same. But I've been waiting for a chance to express my gratitude to Jeanne for that favor.

rafe
10-17-2007, 20:38
Can someone share some thoughts on the best time of year to walk the Whites in terms of crowd control and still have reasonable chances with the weather. More specifically, if you would pick a time between mid-August to late September, what would be the best bet for crowds? Our plan starts at Crawford Notch and heading north.

Hard to say, but for sure, your problems will be mostly on weekends, and far less so mid-week. Much depends on the weather. Labor day weekend with good weather is a zoo. Things get quieter after Labor day. The worst crowds will be centered on Mt. Lafayette, Washington, and Madison.

Tin Man
10-17-2007, 20:49
Hard to say, but for sure, your problems will be mostly on weekends, and far less so mid-week. Much depends on the weather. Labor day weekend with good weather is a zoo. Things get quieter after Labor day. The worst crowds will be centered on Mt. Lafayette, Washington, and Madison.

On Columbus day, as we toured Franconia Notch by car after our section hike, the parking lots and grass fields at Lafayette Campground and across I-93 were jammed with cars and trucks. We will definitely be avoiding any holiday weekends in the Whites.

And I goofed in my previous message. We are starting our section next year at Franconia Notch, picking up where we left off this year.

rickb
10-17-2007, 20:54
Thanks, Celt.

I should probably offer a correction to my post. On every occasion that I have seen others encouraged to move down the Trail, or have been asked to do so myself (Ethan Pond and Guyot), the caretakers were helpful and sincere about pointing out legal camping options down the Trail. I should not have said that anyone simply encourages you to get going!

You guys have a tough job, and do it well. Still a good idea to get to the campsites early on a weekend, IMO.

rickb
10-17-2007, 21:06
And I goofed in my previous message. We are starting our section next year at Franconia Notch, picking up where we left off this year.
If you start your day from Liberty Springs on Labor Day weekend, with perfect weather, on a Saturday, you may not see another soul over the entire Franconia Ridge.

Only catch is you will have to start your hike at 5:00AM.

celt
10-17-2007, 21:14
Can someone share some thoughts on the best time of year to walk the Whites in terms of crowd control and still have reasonable chances with the weather. More specifically, if you would pick a time between mid-August to late September, what would be the best bet for crowds? Our plan starts at Crawford Notch and heading north.

I would chose late September: truely a great time in the Whites. The heat and humidity of summer is gone replaced by cool, dry air and the changing colors of autumn.

Mid to late August lots of N.E. Colleges use the Whites for freshman backpacking outings, they're discouraged from using AMC sites on weekends so there is increased pressure on weekdays. My tip for this time of year: get the inside look at group use in the Whites with this chart at the AMC group outreach site: http://www.outdoors.org/pdf/upload/lodg-backcountry-shelters-avail-update1.pdf.

Avoid the holidays: labor day and Columbus day, they'll be busy. I will echo a recent post: if the weather is good, Columbus Day weekend can be the busiest hiking weekend of the summer.

I'm not sure how far north you plan to hike but after the Presidentals, each section should get steadily quieter. Also, AMC facilities begin closing (huts), starting caretaker seasons (other huts) or ending caretaker season (shelters & tentsites) on a rolling schedule in early September. Lakes Of The Clouds and Madison close after Labor day and by the last day of September all shelter & tentsite caretakers have move out. A handful will use caretakers on Columbus day weekend and the last weekend in September.

Jim Bowie
10-19-2007, 14:46
We might consider lightening up on Kirby. He is a little on the young side, both in years and experience apparently.

Not to single you out Tin Man, but it is a real shame that Kirby's age was ever made known on this site. Now, every other post is about:
Excusing the merits of his opinions because he is young
Attempts to "learn him right" because he is young
Informing him of the day that he'll know better, you know, once he is olderThe truth of the matter is that he may, in fact, lack experience, but there are far more ignorant/misinformed/misguided posts on this site than Kirby's.

I realize that many of us mean well, but I also realize that the last thing a younger person wants is to be preached at from the elder chair.

Offering advice and sharing ideas and information is what this site is all about; however, with Kirby, there's always an age qualifier attached to it.

warraghiyagey
10-19-2007, 14:49
Not to single you out Tin Man, but it is a real shame that Kirby's age was ever made known on this site. Now, every other post is about:

Excusing the merits of his opinions because he is young
Attempts to "learn him right" because he is young
Informing him of the day that he'll know better, you know, once he is olderThe truth of the matter is that he may, in fact, lack experience, but there are far more ignorant/misinformed/misguided posts on this site than Kirby's.

I realize that many of us mean well, but I also realize that the last thing a younger person wants is to be preached at from the elder chair.

Offering advice and sharing ideas and information is what this site is all about; however, with Kirby, there's always an age qualifier attached to it.

I think some of the folks were making aware Kirby's age as some others were saying some pretty mean things to him and the good folks were trying to show a softer side. A good thing for all, I think.

Jim Bowie
10-19-2007, 14:59
Yeah, I do realize there are those who are dismissive of him, and others who attempt to give him solid advice. However, I just think that were his age never public, it wouldn't be a central part of every discussion he's involved in.

Tin Man
10-19-2007, 15:46
I would suggest "lightening up" would be a good practice for every poster regardless of age or experience of the recipient of our "advice". Viewed another way, people do not talk to one another in person the way they do online, so pretend you are talking to them in person and recognize that they may not be talking to you as if you were there in person. This is not to say we cannot have our differences, because we can and still be civil about it.

Appalachian Tater
10-19-2007, 18:55
Nobody would have guessed his age because of his maturity. He also has more experience than a lot of thru-hikers.

One of the things I liked about being on the trail was being around people of all ages and age seemed less important on the trail than it usually is in terms of people interacting.

I am really excited for him and wish that I had thru-hiked the A.T. when I was his age. Anyone who treats him poorly because of his age would have found some other reason to treat him poorly. That is a reflection on them, not him.

Kirby
10-19-2007, 22:27
I have indeed encountered issues because of my age, and yes, I do get preached too a lot about how I am too young to know what is right from wrong, but I consider myself to be informed about hiking, specifically the AT in Maine since it is my backyard. No, I have not walked 2,000 miles yet, that is coming. I expect to recieve a lot of comments about my age next year when I start, it is just a fact. When I tell people I am hiking the entire AT at 16, they give me the "your nuts look", and then say I am too young. I purposefully do not chime in when people pose milage questions because I am 16 and can run up and down mountains, it just comes with my age. I do regret making my age known on this site, I have removed it for that reason, too little too late I suppose. If you don't think I should post because I am 16, fine, that is your opinion, I even think there is a option that allows you to ingore a specific posters posts, if you really have a disgust for my posts, and I regret that you do.

Kevin

Pirate
10-19-2007, 22:31
For you thru-hike veterans. What are the alternatives for hikers who don`t want to shell out $85 average to sleep in AMC huts in the Whites?

Bastard Blaze them. Hitch around the whites or stealth camp, but don't get caught. If the SOB's catch you stealth camping you get a nice ticket.

nitewalker
10-19-2007, 22:56
if you dont want to stay in the huts you could always do it this way: nite 1 eliza brook shelter/kinsman pond campsite, nite two liberty spring tent site, nite 3 garfield shelter, nite 4 guyout campsite/cowboy camp or zealand falls hut. if your really good you can hike to ethan pond and for a real kicker you may as well go to crawford notch and avoid the 4th nite..
depending where you end up at this stage you can for the 5th nite stay at nauman tentsite/mitzpah area, 6th nite is where it could get tricky. i myself would setup the day befor after leaving crawford. [take just enough food for the evening/breakfast at nauman and the last nite/morning on the trail at osgood tentsite] get to wshington and chow down at the cafeteria buy some food for supper at the end of the day at the perch shelter for your 6th nit. 7th nite would be osgood tentsite and on the following day you will be out at pinkham notch.take a deep breath and rest up you deserve it.
now gather your thoughts because you need to head up wildcat, uggh. repeat the same process with this next section. i really like the wildcat ridge, its views are amazing...good luck however you choose to approach the whites. i belive that you can get thru the whites without the huts. the other way would be to slack pack them........peace out, nitewalker

Appalachian Tater
10-19-2007, 23:35
I have indeed encountered issues because of my age, and yes, I do get preached too a lot about how I am too young to know what is right from wrong, but I consider myself to be informed about hiking, specifically the AT in Maine since it is my backyard. No, I have not walked 2,000 miles yet, that is coming. I expect to recieve a lot of comments about my age next year when I start, it is just a fact. When I tell people I am hiking the entire AT at 16, they give me the "your nuts look", and then say I am too young. I purposefully do not chime in when people pose milage questions because I am 16 and can run up and down mountains, it just comes with my age. I do regret making my age known on this site, I have removed it for that reason, too little too late I suppose. If you don't think I should post because I am 16, fine, that is your opinion, I even think there is a option that allows you to ingore a specific posters posts, if you really have a disgust for my posts, and I regret that you do.

Kevin

When you're hiking this spring tell everybody you're 14 if they ask and if they wonder why you're not in school tell them that you decided to take time off to thru-hike between college and graduate school because you had enough credits to graduate after the first semester of your senior year and you didn't want to waste time taking electives when you could be out in the field doing entomological research. Pick good schools and some obscure insect to make it more convincing. Refuse to discuss your research because you're trying to beat the Chinese and the Brazilians to first publication.

Jester2000
10-20-2007, 00:54
Yeah, I do realize there are those who are dismissive of him, and others who attempt to give him solid advice. However, I just think that were his age never public, it wouldn't be a central part of every discussion he's involved in.

I would like to point out that Jim is 29.

weary
10-20-2007, 09:45
I can relate to Kirby's dilemma. I'm on the opposite end of the age scale, but I sure wish I had never posted my age. Jack would have had to dream up more original insults.

Weary

Appalachian Tater
10-20-2007, 10:48
I can relate to Kirby's dilemma. I'm on the opposite end of the age scale, but I sure wish I had never posted my age. Jack would have had to dream up more original insults.

Weary

First-hand knowledge of WWII would have given you away anyhow.

Roland
10-20-2007, 11:07
I can relate to Kirby's dilemma. I'm on the opposite end of the age scale, but I sure wish I had never posted my age. Jack would have had to dream up more original insults.

Weary

Jack, and the rest of us, will be at your end of the scale someday, if we're lucky enough to make it that far.

Your lifelong dedication to preserving the wilds, will be your legacy. Thanks for fighting the fight.

rickb
10-20-2007, 14:51
Jack would have had to dream up more original insults. He probably knew better than to try.

After all, what could possibly be new to someone who has been around since the Missouri Compromise?

Jim Bowie
10-22-2007, 10:03
I would like to point out that Jim is 29.

:p Ageism!!!

Jack Tarlin
10-22-2007, 18:28
Geez, I haven't even been on this thread for something like two weeks, but Weary and Rick still have nothing better to talk about than me.

Boys, do me and everyone else a favor and find yourselves a new hobby!

weary
10-22-2007, 18:43
Geez, I haven't even been on this thread for something like two weeks, but Weary and Rick still have nothing better to talk about than me.

Boys, do me and everyone else a favor and find yourselves a new hobby!
Hey, Jack. Even us old people have memories that extend beyond two weeks. Have you had a check up lately?

Weary

Jack Tarlin
10-22-2007, 18:45
I don't need a checkup, Weary.

But you really DO ned a new hobby.

Go pester someone else today, I'm bored.

nitewalker
10-22-2007, 18:53
i once read somwhere in one of the AT guides that if all shelters and campsites are full and you are looking for a campsite it is by rule that if you can see the shelter it is legal to camp in that spot, as long as the shelter is visible. now does this theory apply to the huts being in sight to make it a legal spot if so that would open up alot of camping areas[ridge tops and summits]....nitewalker

full moon this thursday evening. it should be a great night for hiking late under bright moonlight...im heading out wednesday but im still not sure where..i suppose i will figure it out between now and then.

Appalachian Tater
10-22-2007, 18:59
i once read somwhere in one of the AT guides that if all shelters and campsites are full and you are looking for a campsite it is by rule that if you can see the shelter it is legal to camp in that spot, as long as the shelter is visible. now does this theory apply to the huts being in sight to make it a legal spot if so that would open up alot of camping areas[ridge tops and summits]....nitewalker.

No, no, no, you have it backwards. No camping withing 1/4 mile of most huts, etc. Here are the rules:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain/recreation/camping/backcountry_rules_2006-07.pdf

Maybe you are thinking about having to camp near the shelter in the Shenandoah National Park.

sloopjonboswell
10-23-2007, 17:51
they suck they suck they suck

weary
10-23-2007, 18:43
they suck they suck they suck
To you perhaps, but they have an occupancy rate of around 90 percent, which is why a lot of thru hikers bitch. They can't get reservations.

Jack Tarlin
10-23-2007, 19:17
Earth to Weary:

The vast majority of thru-hikers don't WANT to stay at the Huts, so therefore, they don't NEED reservations. For you to say that they have trouble getting them is absurd.

Appalachian Tater
10-23-2007, 19:21
The vast majority of thru-hikers don't WANT to stay at the Huts

They do, they just don't want to pay.

weary
10-23-2007, 19:36
As an impartial observer Jack, I've decided that Appalachian Tater won this exchange.

Weary

Jack Tarlin
10-23-2007, 19:44
1. You're not remotely impartial, Weary, so don't pretend otherwise.

2. And the fact that hikers would prefer to stay places where there is no
charge is not exactly earth-shattering news, Weary.

3. So Tater's comment that hikers would like to stay at the Huts for free
doesn't really mean anything. Hikers arriving in Hanover would like to
stay for free at the Hanover Inn instead of paying $235.00 a night; they'd
like a free steak dinner and an open bar tab at 5-Olde as well. But what
they want and what they get are two different things.

4. So as to who "won" the exchange, Weary, I'm not sure there WAS an
exchange. Tater said that hikers like to get stuff for free. I'm sure that
you find this statement startling and noteworthy, but I assure you that
to the rest of us, Tater's comment was not exactly an eye-opener.

rickb
10-23-2007, 20:59
A few thru hikers prefer to say in wilder surrounds during the warm weather months.

Fewer every year though, I think.

Lone Wolf
10-23-2007, 21:05
the huts suck worse than hostels and shelters

Appalachian Tater
10-23-2007, 21:08
A few thru hikers prefer to say in wilder surrounds during the warm weather months.

Fewer every year though, I think.

When I stayed at Madison the storm was so bad that it was more of a safety issue than a comfort issue.

Even after the worse part of the storm on the next day the croo did not really know if it was safe for them to go down to get supplies and tried to discourage us from heading out north.

weary
10-23-2007, 21:11
1. You're not remotely impartial, Weary, so don't pretend otherwise.

2. And the fact that hikers would prefer to stay places where there is no
charge is not exactly earth-shattering news, Weary.

3. So Tater's comment that hikers would like to stay at the Huts for free
doesn't really mean anything. Hikers arriving in Hanover would like to
stay for free at the Hanover Inn instead of paying $235.00 a night; they'd
like a free steak dinner and an open bar tab at 5-Olde as well. But what
they want and what they get are two different things.

4. So as to who "won" the exchange, Weary, I'm not sure there WAS an
exchange. Tater said that hikers like to get stuff for free. I'm sure that
you find this statement startling and noteworthy, but I assure you that
to the rest of us, Tater's comment was not exactly an eye-opener.
Wow, Jack. You are so wise. How could us ordinary folks possibly compete. But let me offer a cautionary bit of advice.

Protection of the trail is a popular concern, creating a lot of dissent and question. And occasionally, unbelieveable as it seems now, someone from time to time will trump your usually sage advice.

Weary

rickb
10-23-2007, 21:12
the huts suck worse than hostels and ... At least you can drink in the huts.

rafe
10-23-2007, 21:13
the huts suck worse than hostels and shelters

Before there were AMC huts, there were carriage roads and grand hotels at the tops of some of those same summits. The huts serve a purpose. It just doesn't happen to be your purpose.

Appalachian Tater
10-23-2007, 21:13
the huts suck worse than hostels and shelters

Once again your personal insights astound and inspire.

Lone Wolf
10-23-2007, 21:16
Once again your personal insights astound and inspire.

once again worthless s**t flows from you piehole sweets. :)

mrc237
10-23-2007, 21:26
the huts suck worse than hostels and shelters

What they should realy do in the area is tear down that obnoxious Mount Washington Hotel what a POS. :D

Jack Tarlin
10-23-2007, 21:32
I gotta go with Wolf on this one.

Here's a typical night at the Huts:

If the weather is good, one spends the late afternoon hours hanging around outside the Hut, along with twenty or so older retired rich folks and a handful of yuppies, all of whom are accompanied by loud, spoiled, and thoroughly obnxious spoiled children.

Then you go into dinner, where you are invariably seated "family style" right next to the most objectionable family present.

Dinner is OK, not great. And there isn't enough of it. It starts with something scary, like lentil soup. Then, if you're really unlucky, you arrive on a "meatless" night and get something like veggie lasagna or some eggplant dish made with cottage cheese instead of ricotta. Accompanying vegetables are boiled to the point of death. Salad is OK but there's not enough of it. Best thing about dinner is the bread and there isn't enough of that, either. Desert is some kind of dried-up apple cake.

After dinner you go outside for awhile, but end up going for a walk so you don't have to overhear the other guests talking about their jobs, investments, etc., plus you need to get away from their kids for awhile.

You go back in around eight and sit in the "common room", where once again, you have to overhear 44 intimate conversations that you want nothing to do with. Plus, it's evident that the parents of the Exorcist children left the thorazine for the kids back in Brookline, and the kids are getting frisky, to say the least.

You finally go into the bunkroom an hour later, and it's pure bedlam. The older and fatter people are snoring already, and the fourteen kids are playing flashlight tag and taking an hour or two to settle down. You discover some yupster scum has stolen one of your blankets. You finally sink into fitless slumber, woken up every hour or so by someone stepping on your face as they clamber down to go the can. Plus, the bunkroom is a snore-dungeon, so getting BACK to sleep takes half an hour.

Morning comes, and you arise, after one of the worst nights of your life. there's a fifteen minute wait to get into the bathroom, which is smelly and unpleasant, with no hot water.

Breakfast is lumpy oatmeal that looks like it just fell out of a goat; runny scrambled eggs that appear to be powdered, and two burned strips of bacon. The only saving grace is thecoffee, which they quickly run out of.

At the close of the meal, you have to endure a ten minute skit by the Hut staff, which is divided into three parts: How to Fold a Blanket; Pack Out Your Trash; and Don't Forget to Leave a Fat Tip!

You go back to the bunkroom to pack up and discover that one of your bandannas is missing, along with your headlamp.

At nine or so you finally get out of there, resolving never to set foot in an AMC Hut again, unless it's part of a Federal Prison Sentence and you have no choice in the matter.

And THAT, my friends, is a fairly typical Hut experience.

Just why there are folks here on Whiteblaze who are so up on these facilities never ceases to amaze me. I can think of around ten thousand better ways to spend eighty bucks. The Huts are incredibly over-romanticized by a lot of people, especially folks who haven't actually stayed in one for awhile. And their defenders ALWAYS say something like "It's just about the money!" Um, no, it isn't. Even if thru-hikers WERE well to do and didn't mind pissing away eighty bucks on a Hut stay, most of them wouldn't stay in one, unless they were hurt or the weather was awful. It's just not worth it. A thirty-two dollar a night flea-pit motel in Gatlinburg is a better deal than a Hut stay.......the people who are so gaga about the Huts probably haven't stayed in one in 20 years, or they'd be telling a different story. Or maybe they enjoy sleeping in a room filled with 32 citified jerks and their horrifying offspring. In any case, they're welcome to the Huts.

Most thru hikers don't need 'em, and if they knew what they were really like, they wouldn't want 'em, either.

Lone Wolf
10-23-2007, 21:34
like i said, they suck worse than any hostel or shelter :)

Hikerhead
10-23-2007, 21:46
Yeah, that pretty much describes it. The two nights I stayed in huts were OK. No kids and the people were pretty nice and the dinner was good. We were lucky.
But the night at Lake of the Clouds with 45 people in one room reminded me of that scene in Blazing Saddles were they were sitting around the fire eating beans, yeah you remember.

mrc237
10-23-2007, 21:49
You're right Jack all that time around all those republicans and I'd shoot myself!

rickb
10-23-2007, 21:51
Sometimes you find what you are looking for.

While that was a funny read, the people you meet at the huts are hardly the caricatures that Jack paints them to be.

And don't worry mrc237, you will find plenty of Democrats at the Huts!

rafe
10-23-2007, 21:58
Most thru hikers don't need 'em, and if they knew what they were really like, they wouldn't want 'em, either.

The huts weren't built for thru-hikers, Jack. But you already knew that. Most of the huts predate the AT itself, and Earl's first hike by several decades.

I for one believe that the mountains ought to be accessible to all, including obnoxious yuppies and their "Exorcist children."

rickb
10-23-2007, 22:00
The huts weren't built for thru-hikers, Jack. But you already knew that. Most of the huts predate the AT itself, and Earl's first hike by several decades.

I for one believe that the mountains ought to be accessible to all, including obnoxious yuppies and their "Exorcist children."

Not sure how many times Jack stayed in a hut, but from his post above my guess is that it was just once.

Had he stayed more times, he would have had a chance to meet a wide range of good and intersting people.

Tin Man
10-23-2007, 22:04
We ate lunch outside Lonesome Lake Hut on Columbus Day weekend. There were a mix of people, some obnoxious, some normal, all appeared to be well-to-do folks. I had no problem with that other than the fact that we were in the woods to get away from crowds of people and the trappings of civilization - impossible in the Whites. I don't have any desire to stay in a Hut any more than I do a Shelter.

Lone Wolf
10-23-2007, 22:09
Why is that? (seriously) Bunk room accomodations at hotel prices? Food? Rules? What?

way too crowded and noisy. ear plugs don't work.

mrc237
10-23-2007, 22:12
Sometimes you find what you are looking for.

While that was a funny read, the people you meet at the huts are hardly the caricatures that Jack paints them to be.

And don't worry mrc237, you will find plenty of Democrats at the Huts!

What me worry?

rafe
10-23-2007, 22:12
Had he stayed more times, he would have had a chance to meet a wide range of good and intersting people.

Anyone that chooses to hike to a mountaintop (as opposed to, say, driving their SUV to a flea-pit motel in Gatlinburg) can't be all bad.

Appalachian Tater
10-23-2007, 22:14
Wow. I'm amazed at the poor experiences people some people have had. Maybe it has to do with the attitude with which you approach the experience.

The one night I paid to stay in a hut, because of the cold wind and driving rain, I arrived in the mid-afternoon and was greeted by the very welcoming croo with hot soup, some sort of delicious baked goods (admittedly not warm from the oven), and hot tea and coffee. It was so nice to be warm and dry for a change.

I read a couple of books from the well-stocked library and looked over some of the old registers to see who had stayed there when my grandparents were young. There was also pleasant conversation with the other guests as well as some other thru-hikers who were doing work-for-stay. It was nice to have a chance to spread my stuff out to dry.

Dinner was delicious, well-prepared, all-you-could-eat; the people seated at our table enoyed light conversation; and the two young girls were very well-behaved, even though I admit I don't much care for children, in general. The family at my table did seem to be either upper-middle or lower-upper class, and although I can see how that might be offensive to those truly wealthy people with right-wing political beliefs, it didn't bother me a bit as I was just an unemployed hiker.

After dinner, we thru-hikers passed a pleasant couple of hours playing scrabble before I enjoyed a very restful sleep in my private room (it was designed for four but I was more comfortable alone) and woke to a delicious, multi-course breakfast which was every bit as well-prepared as the dinner had been and served in the same friendly manner.

I must admit not having a hot shower available was disappointing, but many of the guests seemed to enjoy "roughing it" even though they could certainly have been at a resort hotel and spent their days in the spa, by the pool, or playing tennis. The skit was funny but I can imagine that someone who has seen endless variations of it dozens of times might be bored. I, too, was a bit offended by the plea for tips.

Tin Man
10-23-2007, 22:48
way too crowded and noisy. ear plugs don't work.

Yes, but do they have cute little furry creatures to invade your pack and poop on your face in the middle of the night? :D

Lone Wolf
10-23-2007, 22:49
Yes, but do they have cute little furry creatures to invade your pack and poop on your face in the middle of the night? :D

yeah. the hut crew broads

Tin Man
10-23-2007, 22:51
yeah. the hut crew broads

Now why did I know you were going to say that. :rolleyes:

We did see a cute hut crew broad though. :cool:

And what is with the split pea soup, seems to show up on all the menus?

Just a Hiker
10-23-2007, 23:01
Jack's rundown of a night in a Hut was pretty darn funny. His story sounds like Lakes of the Clouds or Lonesome Lake hut on any given night in August; however, I will say this, and Jack mentioned it.....they always have great bread!! That must be on the application for a position with the AMC Croo.

Hikerhead
10-23-2007, 23:04
I would have ate mouse poop soup if that's what they were serving, and I probably would have liked it too. We went thru there in sept and there wasn't a whole lot of Thru Hikers around. I don't know if that has anything to do with it. Garfield only had about 10 people staying there with two being thru hikers. The lunches that we had were wonderful. My experience was good. The soup that they had at Madison was probably the best I ever had no lie. I could have ate more than the two bowls I had but I had to go chase Kerosene.

The Old Fhart
10-23-2007, 23:05
Jack Tarlin"-"Here's a typical night at the Huts:" ....[LONG diatribe]........"And THAT, my friends, is a fairly typical Hut experience."Geez, all that because you're still P.O.ed that the AMC served you some cheap wine at a social you attended in Boston 25 years ago! Al Qaida doesn't hold a grudge that long. :D

weary
10-23-2007, 23:08
Not sure how many times Jack stayed in a hut, but from his post above my guess is that it was just once.

Had he stayed more times, he would have had a chance to meet a wide range of good and intersting people.
It's my guess, Jack has never paid to stay at a hut, but occasionally on a work for stay deal, he probably eavesdropped a bit. The huts and their patrons are not my favorite things, especially Lake of the Clouds with it's easy access. But the fact remains, they are full, or nearly full, most nights during the season, probably because there are few alternatives around. And besides where else can you get a bed and two meals several miles from the nearest road for just $80. The minimum at most Maine sporting camps is 20 bucks higher.

Weary

weary
10-23-2007, 23:13
...Jack mentioned it.....they always have great bread!! That must be on the application for a position with the AMC Croo.
Nah. Fresh bread is pretty easy to make, difficult to mess up -- and cheap.

rafe
10-24-2007, 00:25
I had no problem with that other than the fact that we were in the woods to get away from crowds of people and the trappings of civilization - impossible in the Whites. I don't have any desire to stay in a Hut any more than I do a Shelter.

Not "impossible in the Whites" -- but maybe impossible on the AT in the Whites. There are hundreds of miles of trails in the Whites besides the AT. If you want solitude in the Whites, you need to get off the AT.

Pedaling Fool
10-24-2007, 00:28
Not "impossible in the Whites" -- but maybe impossible on the AT in the Whites. There are hundreds of miles of trails in the Whites besides the AT. If you want solitude in the Whites, you need to get off the AT.
And they're better than the AT in the Whites. I did a few, all of which were great.

Tinker
10-24-2007, 00:49
In the Presidential range of the White Mountains, you can tent at Mizpah Springs tentsite (next to the hut) for a reasonable fee. You could then make a long day of it and hike to the Randolph Mountain Club's "Perch" shelter, though it's a little way off the AT, then next day hike over Mt. Madison and down to the Pinkham Notch AMC visitor's center, where you can shower up, resupply, and gawk at the nice clean day hikers.

Just a Hiker
10-24-2007, 00:54
In the Presidential range of the White Mountains, you can tent at Mizpah Springs tentsite (next to the hut) for a reasonable fee. You could then make a long day of it and hike to the Randolph Mountain Club's "Perch" shelter, though it's a little way off the AT, then next day hike over Mt. Madison and down to the Pinkham Notch AMC visitor's center, where you can shower up, resupply, and gawk at the nice clean day hikers.

I do the same exact thing, only usually just opposite when SOBO. I like Mizpah Hut, because if you do work for stay, there is a little bunk area upstairs for the work for stay folks.......:D

Tin Man
10-24-2007, 07:28
Not "impossible in the Whites" -- but maybe impossible on the AT in the Whites. There are hundreds of miles of trails in the Whites besides the AT. If you want solitude in the Whites, you need to get off the AT.

I realize that, but our goal is to section hike the AT and we do not have time to go exploring the Whites...maybe some day.

nitewalker
10-24-2007, 07:55
slack pack the presidential range in one day. it is not that far only about 28 miles or so.......

Peaks
10-24-2007, 08:21
I've volunteered enough at the huts to know that there are great crews, and not so great crews. Everyone on the crew has their day cooking, and sometimes things don't turn out the way they should.

What's you experience going to be like when you get there? It all depends on a lot of factors, but I'll tell you, if everything were as negative as Jack posted, the work for stays would not be nearly as popular among thru-hikers as they are.

rafe
10-24-2007, 08:31
I realize that, but our goal is to section hike the AT and we do not have time to go exploring the Whites...maybe some day.

I don't understand. Section hikers have more options than thru-hikers -- if they plan and schedule accordingly.

Tin Man
10-24-2007, 11:07
I don't understand. Section hikers have more options than thru-hikers -- if they plan and schedule accordingly.

Our focus is on doing AT miles. If we do non-AT miles, it will take us much longer to complete the white blazed trail and we do not want to be known as blue blazers. ;) Besides, the AT through the Whites is just a short distance and time frame before we hit Maine!

Jester2000
10-26-2007, 01:28
You go back to the bunkroom to pack up and discover that one of your bandannas is missing . . .

. . . But it turns out that it was your spankdanna, and you chuckle quietly to yourself.

Loved the huts. Loved them. Loved the croos. I was a total hut ****. The key? Pass through the Whites late, when there are fewer tourists and more work for stay (as they're closing down rooms, cleaning bathrooms, spreading compost chips, etc).

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:02
skip em all and do the high risk higher reward traverse. it will be more fullfilling...there are too many prep type folk that hang out in them places so i try not to stay in the huts.when i go out into the whites its to get away from all civilization if possible. i deal with major amounts of people from april thru october so when im out hiking im out hiking. i love to chat with the people on the trail at shelters even in the huts but i never stay in the huts. {too close} give me a shelter, platform or best of all a high mtn campsite. "legal of course"........peace out, nitewalker

rafe
10-26-2007, 08:05
skip em all and do the high risk higher reward traverse.

What would that be? :-?

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:08
What would that be? :-?

however you see fit.:eek: excluding staying in the huts which could put a person anywhere above treeline for an evening or 2. :cool:

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:11
hey mr bedford mass{terrapin}, how about our sox!!! yesss saaaa..too bad my sox have kept my current plans on hold. im supposed to be on the road rite now...errrrrrr

rafe
10-26-2007, 08:21
hey mr bedford mass{terrapin}, how about our sox!!!

See attached 'toon from this week's Phoenix. Kinda sums up where I stand on the matter.

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:24
i will leave that alone. no need to incite a riot....

rafe
10-26-2007, 08:27
however you see fit.:eek: excluding staying in the huts which could put a person anywhere above treeline for an evening or 2. :cool:

I don't bother with the AT in the Whites these days -- except for day hikes. I'm exploring the trails in MA and southern NH. The MA Mid-State trail was kinda amusing. It was a nice warmup/shakedown for this year's AT section. Just under 100 miles and had it all to myself.

Lone Wolf
10-26-2007, 08:30
How about RIs North - South Trail. 70 miles from Mass border to the ocean. I attempted one year going SOBO. got lost the first day

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:31
I don't bother with the AT in the Whites these days -- except for day hikes. I'm exploring the trails in MA and southern NH. The MA Mid-State trail was kinda amusing. It was a nice warmup/shakedown for this year's AT section. Just under 100 miles and had it all to myself.
i need about 4 miles on that trail. i am planing on a thruhike of the midstate in december. north to south, muddy pond will be my 1st nite.:banana

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 08:31
i need the section near whittier farm, go figure!!!!!

rafe
10-26-2007, 08:42
How about RIs North - South Trail. 70 miles from Mass border to the ocean. I attempted one year going SOBO. got lost the first day

Kinda like the AT -- sometimes overblazed, sometimes it's wherethefuggawee. I might try the RI trail next, or maybe that network of trails from the northern end up into Keane/Ossippee/Monadnock, etc.

Nitewalker -- that shelter site at Muddy Pond is beautiful. Been there twice, had it to myself both times. IIRC, there are only four shelters on the mid-state, and that's by far the nicest site of the lot.

rafe
10-26-2007, 08:44
Sorry, I meant "Keane/Sunappee/Monadnock" above...

nitewalker
10-26-2007, 09:28
How about RIs North - South Trail. 70 miles from Mass border to the ocean. I attempted one year going SOBO. got lost the first day
this trail goes within 1/2 mile of my house and campground we own[hide away cove campground east killingly, ct]. i do alot of winter hiking on this trail because it is the most local to me. the mid state is 2nd in line for most local trail. i am going to link them both together sometime. if any of you ever hike the north south trail of rhode island feel free to stop by at my place. 860-774-1128 is the number for my campground. we are closed for the season rite now but if you call and leave a detailed message i could shutle people back and fourth also bed and breakfasty for free. if in season a campsite will be offered for free to all thru hikers that decide to stay here. we are in the north south trail guide. just ask for mike aka nitewalker..

:confused: i have been pondering with an idea i have had for a few yrs now. im thinking of making a shelter down in the woods just off of our lake. im not sure if it would be a good idea or not because we have alot of chidren and teens that camp here and im sure they would turn it into a party lodge or something similar. its still just an idea but worth thinking about in my opinion. if id o this i will contact the north south trail leadership and see if they will put us into their guide....but any who im out and peace to all of you....maybe i will see some of you on the two trails mentioned but most liely not.......peace out , nitewalker:D

p.s. im not too good on the comp or i would show a web link. just type in hideawaycovecampground and i belive it will come up..