PDA

View Full Version : The Whites



Miles Davis
07-03-2008, 11:20
I have a month or so free this summer, and am planning to section hike from Crawford Notch in NH to the MA/VT border.

I am a little concerned about the first 100 miles or so through the Whites, as it seems that most of these huts and campgrounds are run by the AMC. I don't especially want to stay in these huts as I will only be on the trail for a month or so and would like a non-pampered experience. How much of a monopoly does the AMC have on this stretch? How much luck am I going to have finding good, below tree line, campsites that don't involve paying a fee?

Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Gray Blazer
07-03-2008, 11:24
Miles Davis, John Coltrane here. Good to see you back. I don't know much about that there area, but, I'm sure there are a lot of people here able to help you. Don't miss that sidetrip up Mt Willey. It's named for some of my non-direct ancestors.

Undershaft
07-03-2008, 11:49
When I'm hiking in the Whites, I only use the Huts to refill my water. They are too expensive for me, though I wouldn't mind staying in a Hut just once for the experience. If you choose to stay in the Huts, I don't think you will be pampered. All you really get is a plywood bunk and a meal, for a cost of around $90.

The AMC does indeed have a monopoly on this section of the trail. All the pay sites on the AT in that section of the Whites are run by the AMC. There are much less expensive options. The AMC runs several campsites that have privies, good water sources, tent platforms and caretakers. These sites only cost $8 per night. Eight dollars is a reasonable fee for a campsite, in my opinion. All the AMC sites I have been too were clean, in good repair, and had very nice caretakers.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there are only three free shelters in the Whites south of Crawford Notch: Eliza Brook Shelter, Beaver Brook shelter, and Jeffers Brook shelter.

You can certainly find good, below treeline, free campsites in the Whites. Just don't count on it. You may have to search for a while to find a suitable campsite due to terrain and Flora. This isn't always fun at sunset after a long, hard day when you're cold and hungry. It gets frustrating very quickly. There are many established campsites that I have seen along the AT in the Whites, but most are illegal and not located near a water source.

Undershaft
07-03-2008, 12:14
Don't miss that sidetrip up Mt Willey. It's named for some of my non-direct ancestors.

The story of the Willey family is one of my favorite mountain yarns. Tragic, but fascinating. The trail up Mt. Willey is steep, but not too difficult. The summit is a small non-descrpt cairn next to the trail, but just before and just after the summit cairn are great viewpoints.

rafe
07-03-2008, 13:21
On the AT in the Whites, you're somewhat at the mercy of the AMC. There are huts, shelters and tent platforms, more or less interspersed. Once you're off the AT, things are a lot simpler and easier in terms of "free" (ie., unregulated or less-strictly-enforced) camping. There are hundreds of trails in the Whites. The AT is just one of them, but it's the Big Kahuna.

peakbagger
07-03-2008, 13:40
There used to be an unofficial write up of "stealth sites" along the AT in the whites at the hostel in Glencliff, but its been many years since I have seen a version. There are typically "tentsites" along the AT in the whites, unfortunately they tend to be a 1/2 mile and a 1000' down off the trail in areas where the trail is above treeline. Typically these sites are just below treeline, and are basically just a trampled spot out in the woods that will fit a solo tent. They are best suited for a late to bed early rise situation.

Unfortunately the vegetation type until you drop down about 1500 to 2000 feet off the ridge is dense softwood. If there is a space big enough to pitch a tent, its either next to the roots of a blowdown or in a low spot that fills with water everytime it sprinkles.

If you skip the AT and run down in the valleys, its a lot different. A lot of open mature hardwood and softwood stands along streams make for easy campsite selection (just make sure you dont camp in a restricted use area).

The AMC huts and tentsites are where they are as they are the places where everyone would go if they had the chance and unfortunately would get overused and trashed as a result. Its the lesser of two evils.

jersey joe
07-03-2008, 14:31
Three options...pay the fee, stealth camp or do a work for stay at one of the huts/campsites. Though, I believe the work for stay option is only available to "thru-hikers"?!? A month on the trail sounds like it could be a thru hike attempt cut short to me :)

DavidNH
07-03-2008, 15:21
Don't worry about the whites. Since you are starting at Crawford Notch and heading South you will not be doing the big above timber line section of the Presis. You will zip past Zealand hut early in the day, Greenleaf is off the trail down the otherside of Lafayette. That leaves then only Galehead and Lonesome Lakes. Those huts can easily be avoided, unless you want the experience in which case plan to arrive late afternoon and get a work for stay (you do a half hour +- of chores, then get to eat free and stay by rolling sleeping bag on out on the tables. You'll get less sleep and may have to stay later in morning.

Also, terrain wise, the terrain is tough. Especially since you are section hiking (meaning just starting out without several months hiking behind you) I would suggest planning to do no more than 10 miles a day through The whites--ie as far as Glen Cliff, then increase milagage after that. The Kinsman Ridge is particularly rough, as is the descent of South Twin. Oh, and you also get to climb Moosilauke via the Beaver Brook Trail (the AT follows this trail) which is about as rough as it gets outside of the Carter Range!

Now assuming you avoid the huts altogether, you will need to plan to stay at campsites. Stealth camping is not sanctioned. you might get away with it you might not. The sites in the whites all have caretakers and you will be charge 8 $ a night (2006 prices). In return for the money you get a nice place to camp and the caretakers are almost always real friendly folk who also serve to keep a lid on any roudiness. You also will have a reliable water source and good outhouse.

There are also a couple pay sites in VT (most notably Little Rock Pond and Stratton Pond). these are easily avoided if you are too cheap, but in my oppinion just plain too nice to pass up. I would strongly suggest camping at Little Rock Pond.. it is quite simply one of the nicest spots on the trail (in my oppinion) and it offers fabulous swimming!! There is a caretaker fee there.

Hanover would be a great place to do a zero day if only you can find a cheap place to stay. Is there a hostel there? If you balk at AMC hut prices you sure has heck wont want to stay at the Hanover Inn, a place which gives expensive a new name!

You should have a wonderful time. This is a great section. The only above tree line spots to be concerend with (as weather can get harsh) are Mt Lafayette and Lincoln and Mount Moosilauke. These are highlights in great weather, probably hellish places in bad weather. I have never been in bad weather.

Hope this helps!

DavidNH

DavidNH
07-03-2008, 15:25
I should have said that most of the camp sites in the whites have caretakers and fees. There are one or two that don't (just south of the Kinsmans).

The AMC pretty much has the White Mountain National Forest lock stock and barrel. However, they do a wonderful job maintaining the trails, even if at times the trail seems to go straight up!

Remember.. at every hut you can fill up your water bottles for free (and you would be crazy not to!) and possibly pick up some vittels for a buck or two!

David

Jack Tarlin
07-03-2008, 15:28
David's right, you'll find plenty of places to camp, and the post about being at the "mercy" of the AMC is absurd. Even north of Crawford Notch, there are plenty of places to camp.

From Crawford South, you'll be fine. Between there and Zealand Falls Hut, there are all sorts of places to camp, likewise south of there. Once you get to Moosilauke, it gets much easier; the hostel in Glencliff is a great place to stay.

No problem whatsoever camping between Glencliff and Hanover.

In Hanover, you can camp just north of the soccer field right before you get to town.

In Vermont, no problem. There are some "pay" sites that cost a few doalars; if you don't want to deal with this, camp just south or north of them.

In short, you'll have no problem with your campsites, and the "paying to stay" problem is greatly exaggerated, you're not at anyone's "mercy."

Have a great trip.

Darwin again
07-03-2008, 15:40
When I went through there, I simply paid the eight bucks for a tent platform at the AMC sites that fit into my walking schedule. That got me through those areas fine without the muss and fuss of jumping through the theatrical bonhomie hoops and laboring at the huts when I'd really rather be doing other things. The platforms are good.

Stealthing the Whites would be a not-so-good thing from an environmental perspective. I did it once and it wasn't so pleasant. Garfield shelter is more like a "regular" shelter, except that you've got to pay to stay in it. (That was eight bucks in '05, I think. I stayed in the 12-person shelter for two nights waiting out the remnants of hurricane katrina. The wind made that thing shake...)

In Vermont, you'll have the Green Mountain Club collecting fees at some "high use" campsites along the AT, but I found it fairly easy to bypass them and do my own thing by continuing on to "low use" areas that I selected. Hiking the Whites and Vermont is really not as complicated as I thought it could be. It's a gorgeous area. Enjoy!

Digger'02
07-03-2008, 16:14
Personally, I think that it is a huge misconception that the AMC has a monopoloy on the AT in the Whites. First of all this is a national forest (except for the acre around Madison), so there are rules, but they are NOT the AMC's.

You can camp ANYWHERE that is:
1) Below treeline (the most debilitating but necessary rule)
2) within 200 feet of water or the trail
3) 1/4 mile away from a hut.

These rules are much, much less strict than the Smokies for example, and while the treeline rule keeps you off of a fair bit of land, it in my oponion is an important rule.

There are a few great sites scattered through out the low passes. This is more difficult in the Northern Whites, but not impossible to deal with.

Enjoy!

fiddlehead
07-03-2008, 16:33
If you want to stealth it, Saco river and Pinkham are key stealth locations.
Don't know how legal they are but practically a must if you don't want to pay for a hut stay or work it off.
Also, either think about a huge day over Mt. Washington from Crawford to Pinkham or stealth at Edmunds col.
I don't believe they let you use the dungeon anymore.

rafe
07-03-2008, 16:41
You can camp ANYWHERE that is:
1) Below treeline (the most debilitating but necessary rule)
2) within 200 feet of water or the trail
3) 1/4 mile away from a hut.

These three rules are tough to get around. That said, the really tough places to camp are 1) on the ridges, and b) on the steeps. The problem with the ascents/descents is not just the steepness, but the density of the growth. It's hard to find a piece of flat ground big enough for even a solo tent. As for the ridges: illegal, and dangerous.

These problems are far less pronounced (or non-existent) on the blue blazes. In practice, on the AT, the "problem" areas will be from Rte. 93 to Lafayette summit, and again on the Presidential ridge between Mizpah Hut and somewhere below Mt. Madison (heading back from Madison summit to Pinkham.) Once you're on the far side of Rte. 16 (east of Pinkham) life is easy again.

PS: I believe you have rule #2 backwards... ;)

Roland
07-03-2008, 17:15
Miles,

Peakbagger and David covered this well. I will only confirm that the rate for AMC campsites remains at $8, again this year. The sites are spaced so that the average hiker can hop from one to the next, in one day. There is no need to stay at the huts, if you choose not to.

I assume you realize that by hiking southbound from Crawford Notch, you will be missing the Presidential Range. Many consider it to be the crown jewel of the Whites.

Slo-go'en
07-03-2008, 17:56
One other thing to consider is this is a very popular streach of trial. Tent platforms can fill up quickly even in mid week and by noon on Saturday. This is the only section of the AT I haven't done at least once because of this. I have considered doing it with a hammock, as this opens up many more stealth camping options than a tent does, given the rugged terrain and fragile enviorment you are often in. The other option is to do it after Labor day, when all the tourests have gone home and the only problem might be on a Saturday night if the weather is nice. Good Luck!

rafe
07-03-2008, 18:03
There is no need to stay at the huts, if you choose not to.

That's true; there are shelters and tent platforms, but these are all below treeline.


I assume you realize that by hiking southbound from Crawford Notch, you will be missing the Presidential Range. Many consider it to be the crown jewel of the Whites.

Franconia Ridge isn't too shabby. ;) I'm not sure if it's less crowded than the Presidential Range, but in any case there's neither a road nor a cog railway to the summit.

Jack Tarlin
07-03-2008, 18:15
Of course Franconia Ridge is none too shabby, and on many occasions, offers better hiking and much better views than the much vaunted "Presidentials."

The alleged "crown jewel" of the Whites, i.e the Presidentials, more often than not, offers bad weather, sketchy views, and around nine thousand more people than you want to be with.

Franconia Ridge, on a nice day, is about as good it gets on the A.T.

Have a great trip.

rickb
07-03-2008, 18:34
I don't especially want to stay in these huts as I will only be on the trail for a month or so and would like a non-pampered experience. How much of a monopoly does the AMC have on this stretch? How much luck am I going to have finding good, below tree line, campsites that don't involve paying a fee?

Going south from Crawford Notch the huts really don't come into play at all. Just ignore them. The pay campsites make things easier because they will have water and a flat place to pitch a tent, but even they come into play just for the first couple nights.

The AMC Shapliegh bunkhouse in Crawford Notch might be worth considering before you hit the Trail if the alternative is a motel room.

If you don't like crowds start hiking at 5AM and you will have the mountains all to yourself for hours.

Appalachian Tater
07-03-2008, 18:36
The huts make a good place to take a break and have lunch. They serve homemade soup as well as any leftover baked goods from breakfast and they have hot beverages as well. They have libraries and the other hikers and croo are full of information if you ask and can even give good tips on where to camp.

Miles Davis
07-03-2008, 19:06
Thanks to everyone for the advice. this has been insanely helpful. i hiked the katahdin>crawford notch stretch back in 05 and can't wait to get back in the woods again.

Roland
07-03-2008, 19:10
Thanks to everyone for the advice. this has been insanely helpful. i hiked the katahdin>crawford notch stretch back in 05 and can't wait to get back in the woods again.

Have a great hike, Miles!

rafe
07-03-2008, 19:24
The huts make a good place to take a break and have lunch. They serve homemade soup as well as any leftover baked goods from breakfast and they have hot beverages as well. They have libraries and the other hikers and croo are full of information if you ask and can even give good tips on where to camp.

I know for sure Galehead Hut has registers from way, way back. I stayed there once sort of "by accident." Whiled away the evening reading the register from the year of my attempted thru, and recognized several of the names.

Roland
07-03-2008, 19:36
I know for sure Galehead Hut has registers from way, way back. ~

Yeah, that's kinda cool, isn't it?

I don't stay at the huts, but I've visited them many times. Stumbling onto log entries of my hikes in the early 70s brings back wonderful memories.

celt
07-03-2008, 20:24
This is a little off topic but I wanted to say that it wasn't too many years ago that when a question about camping in the Whites was posted most of the answers would consist of AMC bashing and misinformation. This thread was great: informative, accurate and to the point. I hope it turns up in user searches for many years to come.

Celt

AMC caretaker
2006 Mahoosuc Rover
2005 Garfiel Ridge
2004 East Rotator

1999 GA to ME

celt
07-03-2008, 20:25
missed a "d" in Garield

Alligator
07-03-2008, 21:32
missed a "d" in GarieldWe're experiencing letter shortages this week, it's a long story:D.

weary
07-03-2008, 21:39
Yeah, that's kinda cool, isn't it?

I don't stay at the huts, but I've visited them many times. Stumbling onto log entries of my hikes in the early 70s brings back wonderful memories.
Me too. Especially my winter hikes -- and of course 1993. I've only been in a full service hut during the season they were open a half dozen times. And most of those visits were on some AMC function -- and AMC paid.

For most of 30 years I stayed at Carter Notch once or twice a year when it was on winter caretakert status. It was always an wonderful experience that I heartedly recommend.

I did stay at the huts during my NOBO attempt in 1993. They are not my favorite places. But neither are they the villains some make out them to be. The AMC crew (croo) were friendly, helpful and nice. Some of my fellow "campers" had no realistic idea of what a thru hike entails. But most were both friendly and helpful.

If you can afford it, I heartedly recommend at least one night in a hut. It's a truly different mountain experience. Since we are likely to only live once, ignore the naysayers and give the huts a try.

Weary