View Full Version : setting the record straight on whitehouse landing camps
camp mom
04-27-2010, 18:57
posted on recent blogs.
Well, thanks for setting us straight. :)
......... very informative. Thanks!
Skidsteer
04-27-2010, 19:39
I'm glad that's all cleared up.
Cookerhiker
04-27-2010, 20:11
Appreciate the update.:sun
Skidsteer
04-27-2010, 20:30
Hey. Can you explain the Health Care bill when you get a minute?
Thanks in advance.
camp mom
04-27-2010, 20:34
Hey. Can you explain the Health Care bill when you get a minute?
Thanks in advance.
that one i can't:)
Captain Blue
04-27-2010, 20:39
Read the blog entry here: http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/blog.php?b=125
schnikel
04-27-2010, 20:54
Thanks for the post Captain Blue, it clears up the thread for sure.:)
(D.U.G. Rules!!!)
Schnikel
"so mr.weary when you stated that you think the companion and the other guide books should take out our camps,and you would like to see us go out of buisness because you think we cut an illegal trail .get your stories straight first."
Hmmm. I certainly remember being critical of your camps. Mostly because of the many reports by MATC maintainers and volunteers over many months about them taking down illegal signs and having those signs going back up almost immediately. The Maine Appalachian Trail Club, except for one parttime coordinator, is a totally volunteer organization. I've worked as a volunteer with them for well over three decades. I have seen no reason to doubt the truth of their reports.
However, I don't remember saying that the companion and other guide books should take out your camps. I don't believe in censorship of any kind. Did i really say a trail guide shouldn't report the fact that you exist? If I did, I was wrong. I might of said you cut an illegal trail, though I don't remember those precise words. I'm well aware that the road to the landing has been there for many decades. I think it is the reconstruction of the road that drew criticsm from volunteers seeking to enforce the rules governing federal AT lands against the intrusion of commercial enterprises.
Weary
White House Landing is one of my favorite memories from my 1999 thru-hike.
Camp Mom, if you get the chance, let PoopaJack know I'm thinking about him. He was one of my favorite characters from the trail.
http://whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/files/5/0/2/5/0296752-R2-E157.jpg (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showimage.php?i=20841&original=1&c=member&orderby=title&direction=ASC&imageuser=5025&cutoffdate=-1)
His steering me toward White House Landing added much to my thru-hike.
stumpknocker
04-27-2010, 22:21
Camp Mom?? I'm guessing Linda?? Say hello to Bill, Ben and Pooh Bear for me. :)
I happened on this post by chance. I haven't been on White Blaze too much lately, but I'm glad I did tonight. There have been other threads about White House Landing....and when I've seen them, I always had to post to them to say that White House Landing is my very favorite stop on ALL of the Appalachian Trail!!
It's an honor to call you and your family friends.
Thanks for everything you do for us hikers.
Oh yeah, I talked to Circuit Rider and Sherlock tonight before I logged on here. I know they would want me to say hello. :)
white_russian
04-27-2010, 22:29
my pound burger was bland
ARambler
04-27-2010, 23:36
I enjoyed White House Landing. Even if I didn't. MATC is wrong.
Rambler
wcgornto
04-28-2010, 00:34
As a SOBO thru hiker, White House Landing was the first trail service / lodging that I came to. I enjoyed my stay, and the hospitality shown me, very much.
As for rules, regulations, access, signage, side trail maintenance, etc., it seems that MATC construes and enforces the regulations far more strictly than some of the other maintaining clubs further south with respect to access for similar hiker services near the trail. That is MATC's perogative and I have no complaints, as access to White House Landing was clearly described in my Trail Guide.
camp mom
04-28-2010, 07:47
"so mr.weary when you stated that you think the companion and the other guide books should take out our camps,and you would like to see us go out of buisness because you think we cut an illegal trail .get your stories straight first."
Hmmm. I certainly remember being critical of your camps. Mostly because of the many reports by MATC maintainers and volunteers over many months about them taking down illegal signs and having those signs going back up almost immediately. The Maine Appalachian Trail Club, except for one parttime coordinator, is a totally volunteer organization. I've worked as a volunteer with them for well over three decades. I have seen no reason to doubt the truth of their reports.
However, I don't remember saying that the companion and other guide books should take out your camps. I don't believe in censorship of any kind. Did i really say a trail guide shouldn't report the fact that you exist? If I did, I was wrong. I might of said you cut an illegal trail, though I don't remember those precise words. I'm well aware that the road to the landing has been there for many decades. I think it is the reconstruction of the road that drew criticsm from volunteers seeking to enforce the rules governing federal AT lands against the intrusion of commercial enterprises.
Weary
Weary,i want you to come see us and i want you to show us the reconstruction of the road,if you call moving downed dead trees and limbs reconstruction so be it,i hear the amc is cutting a trail to their camps,why is that happening?
camp mom
04-28-2010, 07:53
White House Landing is one of my favorite memories from my 1999 thru-hike.
Camp Mom, if you get the chance, let PoopaJack know I'm thinking about him. He was one of my favorite characters from the trail.
http://whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/files/5/0/2/5/0296752-R2-E157.jpg (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showimage.php?i=20841&original=1&c=member&orderby=title&direction=ASC&imageuser=5025&cutoffdate=-1)
His steering me toward White House Landing added much to my thru-hike.
hi bear paw,we sure will ,great photo!! thanks for the support.
camp mom
04-28-2010, 08:09
Camp Mom?? I'm guessing Linda?? Say hello to Bill, Ben and Pooh Bear for me. :)
I happened on this post by chance. I haven't been on White Blaze too much lately, but I'm glad I did tonight. There have been other threads about White House Landing....and when I've seen them, I always had to post to them to say that White House Landing is my very favorite stop on ALL of the Appalachian Trail!!
It's an honor to call you and your family friends.
Thanks for everything you do for us hikers.
Oh yeah, I talked to Circuit Rider and Sherlock tonight before I logged on here. I know they would want me to say hello. :)
Hello Stumpy, we miss you!!!!! how are things going? we keep tabs on you from other hikers,i have been reading theses post for how long??!!! and i finally had enough it took 10yrs. to say something. you have been a great supporter of us,thank you,cr. and sherlock will be up our way earlier this year,Bill went to az. this spring to surprise his mom on her b.d. they were there also,was a nice visit. Bill got his capt.license and have been doing fishing charters here on the island,we will be here till may 20th if you are in fl. we have a spare rm. Bill will take you out fishing,the cobia and tarpon,and grouper are bitting .you are always welcome. we will be here next year too. have a great day, :sun
camp mom
04-28-2010, 08:13
thats a first!!
All as I know it was a great stop for me. Some prices may be a bit high, but I expected that in the middle of knowhere.
You have to remember these folks want to make a living.:)
berkshirebirder
04-28-2010, 09:28
The past few months at Whiteblaze, I've read a number of positive posts about Whitehouse Landing--nothing negative. I've never been to the Camp and don't know the details of this spat.
I'd be interested in hearing dialogue about keeping a large wilderness area a wilderness. What are the pros? What are the cons? Is it even possible?
Cookerhiker
04-28-2010, 09:52
I can only cite my own experience (http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?id=117259). I enjoyed WHL very much, Bill & Linda were nice hosts, and I don't recall seeing any signs in the Trail corridor for WHL at all. Echoing Wcgornto, the guideboook (Companion in my case) adequately described how to reach the dock.
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 10:08
"so mr.weary when you stated that you think the companion and the other guide books should take out our camps,and you would like to see us go out of buisness because you think we cut an illegal trail .get your stories straight first."
Hmmm. I certainly remember being critical of your camps. Mostly because of the many reports by MATC maintainers and volunteers over many months about them taking down illegal signs and having those signs going back up almost immediately. The Maine Appalachian Trail Club, except for one parttime coordinator, is a totally volunteer organization. I've worked as a volunteer with them for well over three decades. I have seen no reason to doubt the truth of their reports.
However, I don't remember saying that the companion and other guide books should take out your camps. I don't believe in censorship of any kind. Did i really say a trail guide shouldn't report the fact that you exist? If I did, I was wrong. I might of said you cut an illegal trail, though I don't remember those precise words. I'm well aware that the road to the landing has been there for many decades. I think it is the reconstruction of the road that drew criticsm from volunteers seeking to enforce the rules governing federal AT lands against the intrusion of commercial enterprises.
Weary
If it truly is "illegal" for them to have a sign then it is a bull**** law and deserves to be disobeyed. Just a bunch of bureaucratic BS. There are signs all along the trail, no reason not to have the tote road marked in some manner. My guess is the real reason is the Govt wants the land WHL is on and they are trying to drive them out. And some clueless folks wonder why there is so much resentment against the government. This is just a tiny example why.
I enjoyed White House Landing. Even if I didn't. MATC is wrong.
Rambler
The wisdom of the rules as promulgated by Congress when it rescued the Appalachian Trail from pending oblivion 40 years ago may be a matter of opinion. But MATC is not wrong in trying to enforce the rules as the club promised to do when it accepted the intrusion of the federal government.
More than any other maintaining club, MATC resisted the federal take over of the trail -- at least the Maine portion of the trail, which for years had existed though the good will of the private forestland owners.
We negotiated with the private companies for more than a decade before finally calling on the National Park Service for help. Except for a few state preserves -- Baxter Park, Mahoosucs, Bigelow, and a few smaller parcels, all of which, except Baxter, some believe I was instrumental in creating -- the trail corridor in Maine is all owned by the National Park Service.
We are a tiny club dedicated entirely to maintenance of the trail. Our 600 members pay $15 a year for the privilege of working on the trail. A total of $9,000. Our total annual budget runs around $250,000, about a quarter of which comes directly or indirectly from the national park service appropriations. (The balance mostly from other government agencies, individual, business, and corporate donations, and from the sales of our volunteer produced trail guides and maps.)
Like the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, we struggle to lessen our dependency on the federal government. Donations from those that dislike federal regulations are always welcome. White House Landing, ARambler, and others need only open www.matc.org. We make it easy to contribute towards the critical needs of the trail.
Weary
....My guess is the real reason is the Govt wants the land WHL is on and they are trying to drive them out. .....
Your guess is wrong.
The Old Fhart
04-28-2010, 10:48
bulldog49-"If it truly is "illegal" for them to have a sign then it is a bull**** law and deserves to be disobeyed. Just a bunch of bureaucratic BS. There are signs all along the trail, no reason not to have the tote road marked in some manner. My guess is the real reason is the Govt wants the land WHL is on and they are trying to drive them out. And some clueless folks wonder why there is so much resentment against the government. This is just a tiny example why."Why is it that whenever there are dedicated people trying to protect the trail from commercialization the anti-social 'big-brother is out to get me' crowd forgets to take their anti-psychotic meds and post some pointless conspiracy theory that has nothing to do with the point at hand? :-?
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 10:51
"The wisdom of the rules as promulgated by Congress"
Nice oxymoron.
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 10:53
Why is it that whenever there are dedicated people trying to protect the trail from commercialization the anti-social 'big-brother is out to get me' crowd forgets to take their anti-psychotic meds and post some pointless conspiracy theory that has nothing to do with the point at hand? :-?
Right, that never happens.
TJ aka Teej
04-28-2010, 11:23
i hear the amc is cutting a trail to their camps,why is that happening?
The AMC and the MATC have a financial interest in promoting the AMC's three high priced B&Bs that used to be real woods camps like White House Landing still is. Therefore the freshcut AT intersecting trails and promotional signage to the AMC camps are just peachy keen with the MATC. By trying to force you out of business by killing your trade and not allowing competition, the MATC is doing the AMC's dirty work for them.
There should be laws against that.
TJ aka Teej
04-28-2010, 11:25
trying to protect the trail from commercialization
Only part of the time, evidently.
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 11:49
The AMC and the MATC have a financial interest in promoting the AMC's three high priced B&Bs that used to be real woods camps like White House Landing still is. Therefore the freshcut AT intersecting trails and promotional signage to the AMC camps are just peachy keen with the MATC. By trying to force you out of business by killing your trade and not allowing competition, the MATC is doing the AMC's dirty work for them.
There should be laws against that.
Laws that private businesses and individuals have to live by seem to never apply to Govt agencies or their employees.
"The wisdom of the rules as promulgated by Congress"
Nice oxymoron.
Okay. We know you don't like rules enacted by elected representatives? What system would you prefer?
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 12:39
Okay. We know you don't like rules enacted by elected representatives? What system would you prefer?
What I'm critical of is the law itself, not our system of govt.
But let me see if I can follow your logic. Because they were elected I should just accept their decision and shut-up, even though I had the chance to vote for only three of the 400 or so Representatives and Senators who voted on the legislation? Do I have that right Weary? If the Maine legislature decided to sell Baxter State Park to a paper company you would be fine that with that because it was done by elected officials.
Only part of the time, evidently.
There are rules for signage and for the construction of new side trails. Those that follow the regulations are approved. Those that don't are rejected. Those that are built without going through the process are reported as violations. It has nothing to do with favoritism or commercialization.
Weary
Only part of the time, evidently.
There are rules for signage and for the construction of new side trails. Those that follow the regulations are approved. Those that don't are rejected. Those that are built without going through the process are reported as violations. It has nothing to do with favoritism or commercialization.
BTW, you also need to "Support ALDHA's Endangered Services Campaign!" Both AMC and MATC provide multiple trail services.
Weary
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 12:46
By the way, after reading what TJ posted I believe my guess is not so wrong. I notice you haven't responded to him.
Where is that dead horse emoticon when everyone ought to have better things to do with their time? I know I do.
Love to see a good debate on Whiteblaze. It's been awhile.
Unfortunately, we have this so-called debate every year. Surely there must be something worth discussing we haven't before?
Love to see a good debate on Whiteblaze. It's been awhile.
I was just thinking,.... "This thread has legs..."
Yeah, maybe it will go away!
white_russian
04-28-2010, 13:30
Unfortunately, we have this so-called debate every year. Surely there must be something worth discussing we haven't before?
Yeah, how about discussing the proper way to season a one pound burger so that people who still have discerning taste in the 100 mile wilderness don't have to smother their burger in mayo to get it down.
Yeah, how about discussing the proper way to season a one pound burger so that people who still have discerning taste in the 100 mile wilderness don't have to smother their burger in mayo to get it down.
When I got my burger Linda sent Bill out to pick a fresh Tomato. When I got pizza she sent him after fresh green pepper.
berkshirebirder
04-28-2010, 14:08
...the AMC's three high priced B&Bs --TJDead horses keep chatrooms alive, so here's a question for TJ:
Have the "three high-priced B&Bs" you mention put signs along the Appalachian Trail? If any business can post a sign, how long before it's no longer a "National SCENIC Trail?"
Is this another "bash a business" thread, or is there a real issue involved?
white_russian
04-28-2010, 14:11
When I got my burger Linda sent Bill out to pick a fresh Tomato. When I got pizza she sent him after fresh green pepper.
I think they just picked my hamburger meat out of the freezer and threw it on the grill. I mean hell put some lowrey's seasoning salt on the thing or something. Fresh toppings can't resurrect a bland burger.
The past few months at Whiteblaze, I've read a number of positive posts about Whitehouse Landing--nothing negative. I've never been to the Camp and don't know the details of this spat.
I'd be interested in hearing dialogue about keeping a large wilderness area a wilderness. What are the pros? What are the cons? Is it even possible?
I'm a firm believer in keeping large wilderness areas as wild as possible. It is why I've been a firm supporter of AMC initiatives in the so called 100-mile wilderness, and why I believe the rules against commercialization of the trail should be enforced.
Not all maintaining clubs are as diligent or as consistent in avoiding commercial uses as MATC has been, especially in the so called 100-mile wilderness. By most definitions the area isn't a true wilderness. Except for the mostly 1000-foot wide trail corridor, the 100 miles is now a mixture of commercial forest, development lands, and conservation lands.
When the paper companies sold most of the land that had been commercial forest, conservation groups, recognizing the uniqueness of the 100 miles, purchased large areas near the trail. As a result large areas are now owned by conservation organizations. The Nature Conservancy operates it's 50,000 acres as a quasi wilderness. AMC maintains some of its 66,000 acres as wilderness, other areas as commercial forest, and has improved two rundown sporting camps and operates them as places that hikers, fisherfolks, and family groups can stay. A third camp is being rehabilitated as we debate.
The state of Maine, has also acquired around 50,000 acres, which it manages as a multiuse forest for wood harvesting, and remote recreation.
Though TeeJ and others like to criticize, the area strikes me as being a pretty fair compromise. At least it is far better protected than I would have predicted based on the situation 15 or 20 years ago.
If you ponder the protections that have been achieved in the 100-miles, Baxter Park, state "public reserved lands," and the Allagash Wilderness Waterway north to the Canadian border, I can't think of a wilder 250-mile corridor east of the Rocky Mountains. Where else can one walk and paddle for days on end without ever crossing a paved publc road?
Weary
warraghiyagey
04-28-2010, 14:20
The AMC and the MATC have a financial interest in promoting the AMC's three high priced B&Bs that used to be real woods camps like White House Landing still is. Therefore the freshcut AT intersecting trails and promotional signage to the AMC camps are just peachy keen with the MATC. By trying to force you out of business by killing your trade and not allowing competition, the MATC is doing the AMC's dirty work for them.
There should be laws against that.
Well said Teej! . . . . :):):)
What the AMC 'says' they are up to in the 100 mile and what they are 'actually' up too are entirely opposite ends of the spectrum. . . . they're end game is much more transparent than they seem to think it is. . . . the AMC is poison in Maine and they should not be here and I would like to see them gone ASAP. . . .
The Old Fhart
04-28-2010, 14:26
weary-"I'm a firm believer in keeping large wilderness areas as wild as possible. It is why I've been a firm supporter of AMC initiatives in the so called 100-mile wilderness, and why I believe the rules against commercialization of the trail should be enforced.
Not all maintaining clubs are as diligent or as consistent in avoiding commercial uses as MATC has been, especially in the so called 100-mile wilderness. By most definitions the area isn't a true wilderness. Except for the mostly 1000-foot wide trail corridor, the 100 miles is now a mixture of commercial forest, development lands, and conservation lands.
...............
...............
Though TeeJ and others like to criticize, the area strikes me as being a pretty fair compromise. At least it is far better protected than I would have predicted based on the situation 15 or 20 years ago.
If you ponder the protections that have been achieved in the 100-miles, Baxter Park, state "public reserved lands," and the Allagash Wilderness Waterway north to the Canadian border, I can't think of a wilder 250-mile corridor east of the Rocky Mountains. Where else can one walk and paddle for days on end without ever crossing a paved publc road? "I don't always agree with Weary but he is absolutely correct with this post.
berkshirebirder
04-28-2010, 14:40
Something for us all to think about, Weary.
But the question about commercial signs has not been answered. If AMC and MATC allow signs for AMC-related lodging, can they rightly argue against signs posted by other businesses?
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 14:52
Where is that dead horse emoticon when everyone ought to have better things to do with their time? I know I do.
Apparently you had nothing better to do than respond to this thread.
....What the AMC 'says' they are up to in the 100 mile and what they are 'actually' up too are entirely opposite ends of the spectrum. . . . they're end game is much more transparent than they seem to think it is. . . . the AMC is poison in Maine and they should not be here and I would like to see them gone ASAP. . . .
Well, they have been here quite a few years now. Perhaps it would be wise to compare Teej's early predictions, with what has actually happened on the land. Rather than more speculations, most of which have proven wrong, lets discuss facts.
I'm not privy to AMC's plans. However, nothing has happened as yet in the 100 miles that strikes me as irresponsible. And if the future reflects the past, I can see nothing on the horizon, that particularly worries me.
Keep in mind that when land comes on the market, only those with deep pockets get to buy. Developers will be out in force as soon as the current land depression gets over with. I personally greatly prefer AMC to condominium and luxury camp developers.
Weary
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 15:05
Keep in mind that when land comes on the market, only those with deep pockets get to buy. Developers will be out in force as soon as the current land depression gets over with. I personally greatly prefer AMC to condominium and luxury camp developers.
Weary
I stand by my opinion this involves a land grab.
I think they just picked my hamburger meat out of the freezer and threw it on the grill. I mean hell put some lowrey's seasoning salt on the thing or something. Fresh toppings can't resurrect a bland burger.
Did you ask to have salt and unknown chemical spice type substances put on your burger? No, like so many elitist burger connoisseurs you expect the burger cooker uppers to read your mind and think you are the only one that knows how to make a burger. You could have had a fresh slice of delicious Maine grown tomato with your burger if you had had the good sense to ask for it.
camp mom
04-28-2010, 16:39
we season our burgers with worchestershire sauce and seasoned salt,and have been told thousands of times it's one the best burgers on the trail. you are the first person to complain,also many condiments on the table to jazz it up. sorry you didn't like it.
Apparently you had nothing better to do than respond to this thread.
No, I just bit on the topic so many times before, invested enough of my time in it and thought we might discuss something useful. I haven't figured out what you have contributed thus far.
I noticed you found time to delve into my contributions. It's a shame you still can't come up with anything other than trolling.
I stand by my opinion this involves a land grab.
Opinions that lack a shred of factual evidence to support them aren't worth much.
CrumbSnatcher
04-28-2010, 18:06
i have been to WHL 3 times, every time was a good stop. great place and great people! i have only ever passed by one time without stopping! if you don't like the place being there? skip it! you'll be happy, and you won't ruin everyone elses time!
Skidsteer
04-28-2010, 19:58
Unfortunately, we have this so-called debate every year. Surely there must be something worth discussing we haven't before?
Hush. We haven't settled this one yet.
bulldog49
04-28-2010, 20:02
No, I just bit on the topic so many times before, invested enough of my time in it and thought we might discuss something useful. I haven't figured out what you have contributed thus far.
I noticed you found time to delve into my contributions. It's a shame you still can't come up with anything other than trolling.
I wasn't the one complaining this discussion wasn't worth the time, you did. I guess the irony of you continuing to comment on this has wooshed over your pointed effete head.
I'm not trolling, I've discussed this without getting personal, at least until this post You on the other hand have not added anything except to ridicule, that in my book is the definition of trolling.
Your continuing to respond in this manner only makes my point.
Where is that dead horse emoticon when everyone ought to have better things to do with their time? I know I do.
emerald: I tend to agree. But the fact remains. The importance of the trail remains an issue. There are those, though they won't disclose the fact easily, who believe all public land is suspicious. All public regulation of public land is suspicious.
I take a different view. I believe that public land, lawfully acquired, is as sacred as any land. And I believe that attacks on public regulation of public land in accordance with the laws of the nation, should be opposed.
Weary
emerald: I tend to agree. But the fact remains. The importance of the trail remains an issue. There are those, though they won't disclose the fact easily, who believe all public land is suspicious. All public regulation of public land is suspicious.
I take a different view. I believe that public land, lawfully acquired, is as sacred as any land. And I believe that attacks on public regulation of public land in accordance with the laws of the nation, should be opposed.
Weary
Though people don't always agree with you, Weary, I recognize that without the efforts of people like you, there would be very little public land for recreation.
Thank you for all you do.
berkshirebirder
04-28-2010, 20:47
I believe that public land, lawfully acquired, is as sacred as any land. And I believe that attacks on public regulation of public land in accordance with the laws of the nation, should be opposed. --Weary
It's worth repeating.
Skidsteer
04-28-2010, 21:19
Seems to me the attacks are on the consistency of Public regulation of Public lands, not whether they should be regulated.
The Old Fhart
04-28-2010, 21:35
Skidsteer-"Seems to me the attacks are on the consistency of Public regulation of Public lands, not whether they should be regulated. "Not so. You can't ignore this quote.
If it truly is "illegal" for them to have a sign then it is a bull**** law and deserves to be disobeyed. Just a bunch of bureaucratic BS. There are signs all along the trail, no reason not to have the tote road marked in some manner. My guess is the real reason is the Govt wants the land WHL is on and they are trying to drive them out. And some clueless folks wonder why there is so much resentment against the government. This is just a tiny example why.
It's worth repeating.
Many thanks, and to you Roland. And all the others over the years who have taken what I consider a commonsense view of such matters.
I've been around a long time on this and other forums -- most of which predate the internet.
Over the decades I've been on the right and on the left. I've opposed public ownership at all costs, and I've recognized that private ownership is not a solution to all problems.
Frankly, my greatest effort these days is to simply ignore political divisions and do what I can to get kids outdoors and away from their internet games. Why? Because childhood is important. If one is not hooked on wildness by age 13, the odds are great that one never will be. And we need all the champions we can get. I was lucky. My parents made me walk my first mountain at age 4, and insisted that I continue to climb mountains for a decade or more thereafter.
At least, that's the message I will deliver next Tuesday, when Bates College, a little known Ivy league College in Lewiston, Maine, gives me an award for an alleged lifetime of environmental achievement.
They say I'll have two minutes, to summarize my achievements. Wish me luck this weekend as I attempt to summarize 70 years in 120 seconds. Ah, challenges. What would life be like without them.
Weary
Lone Wolf
04-28-2010, 21:44
is it just me or does the MATC seem like a bunch of elitist bullies? my donations will be going elsewhere. who really needs double privies with a cribbage board. :rolleyes:
Skidsteer
04-28-2010, 21:48
Not so. You can't ignore this quote.
Isn't that the point?
There are signs all along the trail, no reason not to have the tote road marked in some manner.
The AMC and the MATC have a financial interest in promoting the AMC's three high priced B&Bs that used to be real woods camps like White House Landing still is. Therefore the freshcut AT intersecting trails and promotional signage to the AMC camps are just peachy keen with the MATC. By trying to force you out of business by killing your trade and not allowing competition, the MATC is doing the AMC's dirty work for them.
There should be laws against that.
it's worth repeating...
hey linda! i loved your place! it was like being home, only 1200 miles away. i hope y'all are doing great! give pooh bear some love for me.
The Old Fhart
04-28-2010, 21:57
Lone Wolf-"is it just me or does the MATC seem like a bunch of elitist bullies?"Believe me, it's just you.
Skidsteer-"Isn't that the point?
There are signs all along the trail, no reason not to have the tote road marked in some manner.
Pay careful attention to the wording. The tote road may be marked, i.e., identified as a road, but you can't have a billboard advertising a private business on the road. No different than having road signs but banning billboards on the interstate. I hope that wasn't too subtle.:cool:
Lone Wolf
04-28-2010, 21:59
Believe me, it's just you.
wrong scooter. buncha picayune BS for sure. MOST will agree
Skidsteer
04-28-2010, 22:02
Pay careful attention to the wording. The tote road may be marked, i.e., identified as a road, but you can't have a billboard advertising a private business on the road. No different than having road signs but banning billboards on the interstate. I hope that wasn't too subtle.:cool:
So name it "White House Landing Tote Rd." and move on.
What the heck does all this have to do with cooking burgers?
Alligator
04-28-2010, 22:05
So name it "White House Landing Tote Rd." and move on.
What the heck does all this have to do with cooking burgers?I think there's a move to change the Chunky Gal Trail to the Wendy's Trail.
Lone Wolf
04-28-2010, 22:08
What the heck does all this have to do with cooking burgers?
the MATC tries to market the "100 mile wilderness" as just that even though it's no where near a wilderness so a little sign pointing towards food and lodging ruins their fantasy
Camp Mom/ Linda:
Thanks for your hospitality during my Hundred Mile Wilderness hike in Sept. 2008. I'm one of the two that your old rotten birch almost fell on during the passing of a tropical depression.
It was nice to have a big burger, though I had enough food for the rest of the trip, and, since I'm a snorer, it was nice of you also to reduce the rate for one of your private cabins so I could let others rest peacefully.
Regardless of whether you have a sign or not, I'm sure that all of the "non-official" "thru hikers guides" will list your place as one not to miss.
Also: Thanks for letting me use your canoe to paddle out into the lake for some quiet spiritual time.
My stay there will be a fond memory as long as I have memories :D. :)
is it just me or does the MATC seem like a bunch of elitist bullies? my donations will be going elsewhere. who really needs double privies with a cribbage board. :rolleyes:
Well we have out idiosyncracies, but most of us go out weekend after weekend, year in and year out to cut trailside brush, remove blowdowns, raise money for caretakers, build bog bridges, and do the thousand other things a trail needs.
I'll let you decide whether we are elitists. I do know that the overseer of the 55 plus trail miles in the area of White House Landing works as a union laborer in a Maine paper mill, punching a time clock daily. He and his wife don't just supervise. They take care of several miles of trail by themselves. By my definition, he is a very rare human being. Does that make him an elitist in your book, Lone Wolf?
MATC has only a single parttime employee. Whatever gets done in Maine, gets done by a couple of hundred volunteers. A couple are college professors. Many, I suspect, from years of observation, have never seen the inside of a college.
I think if there are elitists in this debate, it is folks like you, Lone Wolf, who, as I recall, once confessed to living mostly on the proceeds from your oil company stocks.
Weary
I think it would be a major disservice for the MATC NOT to indicate that emergency help could be had by traveling down the road and sounding the horn at the boat dock.
I met a LOT of unprepared hikers in the Hundred Mile "Wilderness" who might have had emergency situations if they got caught in bad weather.
If it is true that the AMC is signing side trails to their properties and services near the trail without the condemnation of the MATC, this particular situation smacks of elitism and hypocrisy, (and possibly monopoly?).
Alligator
04-28-2010, 22:54
They've got a video (http://www.outdoors.org/lodging/mainelodges/maine-lodges-video.cfm).
So name it "White House Landing Tote Rd." and move on.
Had anyone requested a trail sign saying "White House Landing Tote Road," I suspect MATC would have had our sign volunteer make one.
Instead multiple blaze orange signs kept appearing without notice, were removed by MATC volunteers as the national park and ATC regulations require, only to mysteriously reappear, again and again. I don't doubt for a minute the reports from many hikers, praising White House Landing.
I do suspect that the businesses squabbles with MATC are the result of Bill's own doing, or rather, his failure to do the ordinary things most businesses need to do in a complex society, like talk to your neighbors.
Weary
They've got a video (http://www.outdoors.org/lodging/mainelodges/maine-lodges-video.cfm).
That's a bit different than advertising via signs along a "wilderness" trail.
Does the AMC have signs directing hikers to their "camps" (resorts, if they'r typical AMC lodgings) along the AT in the "Wilderness". If so, the MATC should be all over them for it.
That's the question I'm asking.
A video on a website is fine by me (but so is a sign on the AT announcing the White House Landing camp).
I'm looking for inconsistencies in logic here.
Had anyone requested a trail sign saying "White House Landing Tote Road," I suspect MATC would have had our sign volunteer make one.
Instead multiple blaze orange signs kept appearing without notice, were removed by MATC volunteers as the national park and ATC regulations require, only to mysteriously reappear, again and again. I don't doubt for a minute the reports from many hikers, praising White House Landing.
I do suspect that the businesses squabbles with MATC are the result of Bill's own doing, or rather, his failure to do the ordinary things most businesses need to do in a complex society, like talk to your neighbors.
Weary
wait just a minute. society? neighbors? i thought we were talking about the "wilderness" that needs protecting from people?
Skidsteer
04-28-2010, 23:04
They've got a video (http://www.outdoors.org/lodging/mainelodges/maine-lodges-video.cfm).
Quite an advertising budget.
Funny, my wife just plopped an envelope in front of me from the MATC. They're looking for funding to staff certain sites where they use caretakers.
Interesting.................
Alligator
04-28-2010, 23:05
That's a bit different than advertising via signs along a "wilderness" trail.
Does the AMC have signs directing hikers to their "camps" (resorts, if they'r typical AMC lodgings) along the AT in the "Wilderness". If so, the MATC should be all over them for it.
That's the question I'm asking.
A video on a website is fine by me (but so is a sign on the AT announcing the White House Landing camp).
I'm looking for inconsistencies in logic here.I only added the video link so that folks could see what is being discussed and quit arguing for 3:31;).
It would be great if someone could add some more factual information such as some current photos:D.
wait just a minute. society? neighbors? i thought we were talking about the "wilderness" that needs protecting from people?
Sorry, I thought you knew. Wilderness is a rare thing these days. It requires constant vigilence to exist.
I only added the video link so that folks could see what is being discussed and quit arguing for 3:31;).
It would be great if someone could add some more factual information such as some current photos:D.
Thank you. Discussion is fine, argument is not so fine.
Funny, my wife just plopped an envelope in front of me from the MATC. They're looking for funding to staff certain sites where they use caretakers.
Interesting.................
Yep. As I recall we used to have 5 caretakers to protect fragile parts of the trail. This year we have cut back to three because of budget problems.
Alligator
04-28-2010, 23:14
I'm not taking sides here but if the AMC cared about it being wilderness they would have bought the land and let the camps rot. Wilderness is special, camps like those wouldn't exist in a federally designated wilderness. Just saying.
it's not there weary. it's just called the 100 mile wilderness. it's not really a wilderness. there's great dirt roads going through there and the at crosses them every time you sneeze. there are people at the crossings all the time. day hikers, people cutting through on their way home seeing if hikers need a ride, church groups at the "campsites", vans, beer cans. are you getting this?
I'm not taking sides here but if the AMC cared about it being wilderness they would have bought the land and let the camps rot. Wilderness is special, camps like those wouldn't exist in a federally designated wilderness. Just saying.
Herein lies the contradiction - Wilderness needs people to love and protect it. The AMC introduces people (usually fairly well off folks with money to invest) to the wilderness from the comfort of substantial living quarters (in the Whites, it's the "Huts"). The living quarters themselves are far from natural but localize the environmental impact of many hikers. If good numbers of citified wealthy folks find enjoyment in the outdoors, there's a good chance that they will support the AMC monitarily, who then, if all things work properly, will provide the financial support to ensure the legal protection of designated wilderness (wild and remote or not).
It's a catch-22 situation.
I think it would be a major disservice for the MATC NOT to indicate that emergency help could be had by traveling down the road and sounding the horn at the boat dock.
I met a LOT of unprepared hikers in the Hundred Mile "Wilderness" who might have had emergency situations if they got caught in bad weather.
If it is true that the AMC is signing side trails to their properties and services near the trail without the condemnation of the MATC, this particular situation smacks of elitism and hypocrisy, (and possibly monopoly?).
AS a member of the MATC board of directors, I know that AMC has requested approval of a side trail to Little Lyford Pond Camps. As I recall, the request was granted and a sign approved.
I can't speak officially for MATC. For a few years I was an overseer in the area. Now I just put out the MATC's five-times a year newsletter, the MAINEtainer.
But I have been around for a long time and I know that some of us think of the 100 miles as being as close to wilderness as exists in this area of the trail.
Anyway, when one ventures into an alleged "wilderness" one should be prepared to take care of oneself when caught in "emergency situations in bad weather."
That's the challenge that makes wilderness so desirable to a few of us, and why we fight to preserve as much remaining wildness as possible. Strange as it may seem to some, it's the preservation of wildness that makes me resist blaze orange signs along the trail, pointing the way to one pound worcestershire flavored hamburgers, tasty as they may be.
Weary
Alligator
04-28-2010, 23:36
Herein lies the contradiction - Wilderness needs people to love and protect it. The AMC introduces people (usually fairly well off folks with money to invest) to the wilderness from the comfort of substantial living quarters (in the Whites, it's the "Huts"). The living quarters themselves are far from natural but localize the environmental impact of many hikers. If good numbers of citified wealthy folks find enjoyment in the outdoors, there's a good chance that they will support the AMC monitarily, who then, if all things work properly, will provide the financial support to ensure the legal protection of designated wilderness (wild and remote or not).
It's a catch-22 situation.You missed the "it being wilderness" part. It=100 mile wilderness. As long as the camps are there, it will never be wilderness (in the federal sense).
I get that we need multiple varieties of outdoor experience to broaden the base of outdoors minded people. I'm not sure what the best mix is nor am I judging AMC. I haven't seen these camps and maybe they were a good choice given the alternatives.
How about small signs saying "emergency help - miles"? Is that against wilderness ethics? This is something I've never seen and wonder why (other than the obvious - wanting to "feel" as though one was in the middle of a vast wilderness. Far too few people venture into the woods with an emergency plan or even knowledge of nearby facilities which can render emergency services.
I thoroughly enjoyed my stay at WHL in 2008 and expect to be back again this year.
I think we could probably rustle up the donations and support to have White House Landing added to a new sign for the Mahar Tote road but I get the impression that the MATC would not allow that to happen.
Would a new sign with a simple direction arrow and mileage solve the debate or would that be "commercialization"?
Why doesn't NLC a days hike north, a similar distance from the trail, offering similar services, and with a heavily maintained gravel road leading right up to their front door get a share of the venom that gets directed at WHL? Is it deeper pockets, or richer clientele?
Yes, That is how it works and it could be working with the White House also What I think everyone is critical of is the blatant hitting of WHL and the pass to AMC It just does not make anyone happy to see good providers like the WHL being bullied into strict enforcement and the big boys given a pass. That is not defendable.All along the trail providers are asked to change something that is not right but the way the club has tried to push this situation has not been right since the very beginning.
You missed the "it being wilderness" part. It=100 mile wilderness. As long as the camps are there, it will never be wilderness (in the federal sense).
In the federal sense, it will never be wilderness as long as the logging roads are maintained, or permanent human structures still exist, or especially if logging continues in the region (which it does). None of these are allowed in a federally designated wilderness.
The "100-Mile Wilderness" is a neat place, but it's just a name, not an actual wilderness, with any actual legal designation. Claiming signage regulations exist to preserve "wilderness" is a falsehood.
AS a member of the MATC board of directors, I know that AMC has requested approval of a side trail to Little Lyford Pond Camps. As I recall, the request was granted and a sign approved.
I can't speak officially for MATC. For a few years I was an overseer in the area. Now I just put out the MATC's five-times a year newsletter, the MAINEtainer.
But I have been around for a long time and I know that some of us think of the 100 miles as being as close to wilderness as exists in this area of the trail.
Anyway, when one ventures into an alleged "wilderness" one should be prepared to take care of oneself when caught in "emergency situations in bad weather."
That's the challenge that makes wilderness so desirable to a few of us, and why we fight to preserve as much remaining wildness as possible. Strange as it may seem to some, it's the preservation of wildness that makes me resist blaze orange signs along the trail, pointing the way to one pound worcestershire flavored hamburgers, tasty as they may be.
Weary
Hey! Don't blame the poor ol' hamburger :D. (I'm trying to keep this as light-hearted as possible).
I'm seeing that a lot of folks perceive this as a David (WHL) vs. Goliath (AMC, MATC) issue and just want the rules of engagement, so to speak, to be the same for both parties.
I'm not taking sides here but if the AMC cared about it being wilderness they would have bought the land and let the camps rot. Wilderness is special, camps like those wouldn't exist in a federally designated wilderness. Just saying.
You're assuming that AMC has enormous amounts of money it can spend as it wishes. I know of no evidence that that is so. AMC has never been rich. When I first came involved in the 1970s the club was facing bankruptcy. It's recovered nicely in recent decades thanks to sound management.
But from what I'm told the AMC's investment in the 100-mile-wilderness is supposed to be self supporting. Much of the capital costs are being paid out of capital fundraising, including quite a bit from the state and federal governments.
But the facility costs, the bunk houses, the meals, and such are to be paid out of the income generated by such services, which is as it should be.
The investment in the 100 mile wilderness in Maine stemmed, as I understand it, in a desire by the club to get out from under the yoke of the US Forest Service.
AMC seemed to think it could do a better job without always having to answer to government bureaucrats in the Forest Service, which owns most of the property where the club operates in the White Mountains.
I sat in on some of the early Maine planning. The goals have changed significantly since then. Rather than a lot of new construction, the club has basically rehabilitated old sporting camps.
The result is not more wilderness, but less wilderness. But it strikes me as a fair compromise, given that the land was on the market, and repairing old buildings is far better than more summer homes and brand new resort facilities that purely commercial developers would have built.
Weary
Alligator
04-29-2010, 00:23
The only assumption I made there is that if the AMC did not want the land to revert to wilderness. That's true. They rehabilitated the camps. I wasn't making any money assumptions but I will say they had more money than they needed, they got the land and then fixed up the camps too. They could have saved some on rehabing the camps. It's clear the intent is not to let it revert to wilderness.
What's more germane to the argument though is what regulations exist in regard to signage and commercializaton of the trail. The sign issue here is not a wilderness issue, the legal designation is not wilderness.
Hey! Don't blame the poor ol' hamburger :D. (I'm trying to keep this as light-hearted as possible).
I'm seeing that a lot of folks perceive this as a David (WHL) vs. Goliath (AMC, MATC) issue and just want the rules of engagement, so to speak, to be the same for both parties.
Well, Teej seems to be the only knowledgeable person who thinks that AMC is a competitor in this matter. AMC Maine living facilities in the area are many miles away from the trail. As near as I can tell, AMC does not seek the AT hiker dollar. Rather it seeks fishermen and family groups, and hikers willing to spend a weekend or a week, not an overnight, which seems to be WHL's prime business as near as I can tell.
As far as David vs. Goliath goes, neither qualifies. MATC is mostly a workingman's club. It's volunteers strike me as the hardest working volunteers I've ever seen, certainly not the richest.
Weary
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 00:29
i still don't know why anyone needs a sign to find whl...when you get to a break in the trees and are standing in the biggest puddle in maine, head toward the lake :)
I'm not taking sides here but if the AMC cared about it being wilderness they would have bought the land and let the camps rot.
Agree. Or lit a match.
AMC is probably the lesser of the available evils.
white_russian
04-29-2010, 06:27
That's the challenge that makes wilderness so desirable to a few of us, and why we fight to preserve as much remaining wildness as possible. Strange as it may seem to some, it's the preservation of wildness that makes me resist blaze orange signs along the trail, pointing the way to one pound worcestershire flavored hamburgers, tasty as they may be.
See this just proves you don't know what you are talking about. My pound burger was neither tasty or worcestershire flavored.
The result is not more wilderness, but less wilderness. But it strikes me as a fair compromise, given that the land was on the market, and repairing old buildings is far better than more summer homes and brand new resort facilities that purely commercial developers would have built.Weary
I am thinking that there are two seperate but interelated issues.
The first is preserving the spirit of wildness in the back country for the benefit of those who value such a thing. Books have been written on this idea, but suffice it to say that for some people, less intrusion (signs, phones, disrupted view sheds, unnatural sounds) holds a great value in and of itself.
The other issue is in preserving wilderness for grander purposes. Chief among these purposes would have to be protecting ecosystems for the plants and animals that live within. I think its been shown that large mostly uniterupted tracts of land matter a great deal in that regard.
To my way of thinking both are worth the effort, and less is more when it comes to signage and such along the Trail. At the same time, I sincerely believe that the efforts of the AMC help promote and create preservation on the grtander scale, even if it comes at a small cost.
camp mom
04-29-2010, 07:31
thank you ....miss you, you were fun to have. i got a great picture of you need to e-mail it to you. hugs
camp mom
04-29-2010, 07:33
ohhhhh we remember that puddle... was awful huh.lets hope for a dry spring...
stumpknocker
04-29-2010, 07:41
A similar situation was handled in a timely manor at Greasy Creek Gap in TN. It took just a few years for TEHC to put an acceptable sign stating a hiker was at Greasy Creek Gap.
Getting a sign stating you are at Marhar Tote Rd is all that would be needed in Maine.
The first time I walked through The 100 Mile Wilderness, I got misplaced when I tried finding WHL.
That wouldn't happen if MATC, which has known for more than 10 years now that there is a problem there, would simply place a sign at the junction of Marhar Tote Rd.
I have stopped at WHL eight different times in seven different years. I've had to show other hikers where to turn to get to WHL because there is not a sign stating you are at Marhar Tote Rd. I have seen the picture of the orange sign, but that was gone before my time. There has never been a sign any of the years I walked through there, so that can no longer be the argument.
I know there are hard working volunteers with MATC and TEHC, but I wouldn't lift a finger to help a club that has proven itself to be a bureaucratic bully. I have less respect for MATC each year it allows this to go on unresolved. I have multiple other reasons for saying this about MATC, but this thread is about WHL and "setting the record straight".
I fully support TEHC and have done volunteer Trail work with them.
This should NOT have gone on for over ten years.
.....http://www.albertlea.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/popcorn.gif.....
camp mom
04-29-2010, 09:33
Had anyone requested a trail sign saying "White House Landing Tote Road," I suspect MATC would have had our sign volunteer make one.
Instead multiple blaze orange signs kept appearing without notice, were removed by MATC volunteers as the national park and ATC regulations require, only to mysteriously reappear, again and again. I don't doubt for a minute the reports from many hikers, praising White House Landing.
I do suspect that the businesses squabbles with MATC are the result of Bill's own doing, or rather, his failure to do the ordinary things most businesses need to do in a complex society, like talk to your neighbors.
Weary
didnt you read my blog weary.we never put up 'multiple' signs,only one and we took it down the minute we realized it wasnt trail freindly.the year we opened mark simpson who happened to be the president of the matc told us he would highly recommend to the board that a sign be made for us.that never happened.a year later a hiker who was at that meeting said when mark brought it up the **** hit the proverbail fan.so hearing that we realised it wasnt going to happen and we made our own trail freindly sign.we did what we had to do to survive.finally we gave up on the signs and just put a card on the tree.the point is this all could have been avoided by a simple approved sign saying nothing but 'hiker services' and an arrow.that to me doesnt seem like an intrusion on the illussion of wilderness.that way hikers that want to come in can without confusion and there is alot of that believe me,and the ones who want to pass us by can. all we want to do is cater to our hikers without this silly friction.its hard enough working 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 5 months without a day off!
camp mom
04-29-2010, 11:51
Camp Mom/ Linda:
Thanks for your hospitality during my Hundred Mile Wilderness hike in Sept. 2008. I'm one of the two that your old rotten birch almost fell on during the passing of a tropical depression.
It was nice to have a big burger, though I had enough food for the rest of the trip, and, since I'm a snorer, it was nice of you also to reduce the rate for one of your private cabins so I could let others rest peacefully.
Regardless of whether you have a sign or not, I'm sure that all of the "non-official" "thru hikers guides" will list your place as one not to miss.
Also: Thanks for letting me use your canoe to paddle out into the lake for some quiet spiritual time.
My stay there will be a fond memory as long as I have memories :D. :)
thanks tinker,so happy you didn't get bonked on the head, i remember that.look forward to seeing you again someday.
camp mom
04-29-2010, 11:59
it's not there weary. it's just called the 100 mile wilderness. it's not really a wilderness. there's great dirt roads going through there and the at crosses them every time you sneeze. there are people at the crossings all the time. day hikers, people cutting through on their way home seeing if hikers need a ride, church groups at the "campsites", vans, beer cans. are you getting this?
way to go girl:sun
neighbor dave
04-29-2010, 11:59
.....http://www.albertlea.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/popcorn.gif.....
ha ha ha ha ha
p.s. went there once, passed it by once.
envirodiver
04-29-2010, 12:42
we season our burgers with worchestershire sauce and seasoned salt,and have been told thousands of times it's one the best burgers on the trail. you are the first person to complain,also many condiments on the table to jazz it up. sorry you didn't like it.
I thought it was a great burger and very much enjoyed the afternoon and night that I stayed there.
envirodiver
04-29-2010, 12:54
emerald: I tend to agree. But the fact remains. The importance of the trail remains an issue. There are those, though they won't disclose the fact easily, who believe all public land is suspicious. All public regulation of public land is suspicious.
I take a different view. I believe that public land, lawfully acquired, is as sacred as any land. And I believe that attacks on public regulation of public land in accordance with the laws of the nation, should be opposed.
Weary
I don't know the facts of this siuation other than having stayed at WHL and enjoying it. But, I am curious to find out the facts.
Do I understand that the AMC has several lodges with a third to open in 2011, that are located in the 100 mile wilderness?
Is it true that there is signage on the AT that direct people to the lodges?
If the 2 statements above are true I don't understand why WHL is not allowed to put up signage also. I would prefer all signage on the trail to be made of wood like trail mileage and directional signs.
By not allowing WHL to put up signage, is the AMC trying to eliminate any competition for customers? When I hiked down the road to WHL last year I didn't feel like a trail had been "cut" into the wilderness.
camp mom
04-29-2010, 12:57
Well, Teej seems to be the only knowledgeable person who thinks that AMC is a competitor in this matter. AMC Maine living facilities in the area are many miles away from the trail. As near as I can tell, AMC does not seek the AT hiker dollar. Rather it seeks fishermen and family groups, and hikers willing to spend a weekend or a week, not an overnight, which seems to be WHL's prime business as near as I can tell.
As far as David vs. Goliath goes, neither qualifies. MATC is mostly a workingman's club. It's volunteers strike me as the hardest working volunteers I've ever seen, certainly not the richest.
Weary
we also have family vacationers, fisherman.and a.t. hikers,so whats the point here??
camp mom
04-29-2010, 13:01
we also have family vacationers, fisherman.and a.t. hikers,so whats the point here??
if the amc are not after the a.t hikers dollar why are the blazing or cutting a trail and signing to there camps!!!
I hope to visit WHL next year. I'd like to stay a few days and go fishing before finishing my thru. I've heard lots of good things about the place and proprietors. Just as long as you don't blow the horn more ethan once!
envirodiver
04-29-2010, 13:19
i still don't know why anyone needs a sign to find whl...when you get to a break in the trees and are standing in the biggest puddle in maine, head toward the lake :)
I thought all of Maine was a puddle.
Alligator
04-29-2010, 13:20
There's a reference to this discussion on page 2 here (http://www.matc.org/Maintainer/2008/VolXXXI-No2-Spring%202008.pdf), the newsletter. I don't know if the club minutes are public:confused:.
Weary mentions a sign above, post #91.
Last time I saw this discussion, I hadn't heard about the sign for AMC. They got a trail too. Those are interesting developments.
envirodiver
04-29-2010, 13:46
There's a reference to this discussion on page 2 here (http://www.matc.org/Maintainer/2008/VolXXXI-No2-Spring%202008.pdf), the newsletter. I don't know if the club minutes are public:confused:.
Weary mentions a sign above, post #91.
Last time I saw this discussion, I hadn't heard about the sign for AMC. They got a trail too. Those are interesting developments.
Interesting that the discussions of the 2 issues are adjacent on the page.
"Other issues with which the club has dealt in the
past year include: a new trail constructed by AMC to
connect Little Lyford Pond Camps to the AT in the
Katahdin Iron Works area; the conflict with camp owners
who had placed illegal advertising and a blue blazed side
trail directing hikers to their business; and the rerouting"
This just seems so very partison on the part of MATC and AMC. I don't see how anyone can defend it other than one party asked permission and the other asked forgiveness.
Alligator
04-29-2010, 14:12
Interesting that the discussions of the 2 issues are adjacent on the page.
"Other issues with which the club has dealt in the
past year include: a new trail constructed by AMC to
connect Little Lyford Pond Camps to the AT in the
Katahdin Iron Works area; the conflict with camp owners
who had placed illegal advertising and a blue blazed side
trail directing hikers to their business; and the rerouting"
This just seems so very partison on the part of MATC and AMC. I don't see how anyone can defend it other than one party asked permission and the other asked forgiveness.
It was a yearly summary though, so take that however you like. The issues could have been discussed on separate occasions during the year, the decisions could have been close but opposite, there might be additional considerations, etc. It's hard to tell. I'd want to read the minutes, they could provide better insight.
envirodiver
04-29-2010, 14:49
It was a yearly summary though, so take that however you like. The issues could have been discussed on separate occasions during the year, the decisions could have been close but opposite, there might be additional considerations, etc. It's hard to tell. I'd want to read the minutes, they could provide better insight.
Very well could have been at completely different times. It just seems ironic when you read the 2 entries together.
if the amc are not after the a.t hikers dollar why are the blazing or cutting a trail and signing to there camps!!!
The only new AMC trail and sign that I can think of connects Little Lyford Pond Camps with Gulf Hagas, which I'm sure many of their guests like to visit.
I'm a member of the MATC board of directors, and editor of the club's newsletter, The Mainetainer, so I attend most board meetings. However, I've missed some because of various "old age" illnesses, so I may have missed another sidetrail request at some point.
But gaining permission for a new side trail is a bit of an elaborate process. The club basically is not the deciding agency. We make a recommendation to the National Park Service, which is the ultimate decider. Though I don't recall the park service ever rejecting a recommendation by MATC. We don't get many requests for an official side trail. I think of lot of squabbling could have been avoided had Whitehouse Landing enquired about the proper procedures when it opened a decade or more ago, and followed them, rather than just clearing an old road and posting a sign.
Frankly, I hear two different stories about this situation, Yours and the numerous reports over the years to the MATC board by the overseer of the trail section that runs from the Jo Mary campground road to the summit of Katahdin.
The overseer, Rick Ste. Croix, is not a bureaucratic type. He's just an unusually dedicated and conscientious trail volunteer doing a tough job with the help of his wife.
Weary
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 16:30
There's a reference to this discussion on page 2 here (http://www.matc.org/Maintainer/2008/VolXXXI-No2-Spring%202008.pdf), the newsletter. I don't know if the club minutes are public:confused:.
Weary mentions a sign above, post #91.
Last time I saw this discussion, I hadn't heard about the sign for AMC. They got a trail too. Those are interesting developments.
]The only new AMC trail and sign that I can think of connects Little Lyford Pond Camps with Gulf Hagas[/B], which I'm sure many of their guests like to visit.
I'm a member of the MATC board of directors, and editor of the club's newsletter, The Mainetainer, so I attend most board meetings. However, I've missed some because of various "old age" illnesses, so I may have missed another sidetrail request at some point.
But gaining permission for a new side trail is a bit of an elaborate process. The club basically is not the deciding agency. We make a recommendation to the National Park Service, which is the ultimate decider. Though I don't recall the park service ever rejecting a recommendation by MATC. We don't get many requests for an official side trail. I think of lot of squabbling could have been avoided had Whitehouse Landing enquired about the proper procedures when it opened a decade or more ago, and followed them, rather than just clearing an old road and posting a sign.
Frankly, I hear two different stories about this situation, Yours and the numerous reports over the years to the MATC board by the overseer of the trail section that runs from the Jo Mary campground road to the summit of Katahdin.
The overseer, Rick Ste. Croix, is not a bureaucratic type. He's just an unusually dedicated and conscientious trail volunteer doing a tough job with the help of his wife.
Weary
what about the new trail that goes up to the AT between 3rd and 4th mountain???...that's new, and i believe it's theirs
WalkinHome
04-29-2010, 16:48
is it just me or does the MATC seem like a bunch of elitist bullies? my donations will be going elsewhere. who really needs double privies with a cribbage board. :rolleyes:
It's just you
WalkinHome
04-29-2010, 17:01
the MATC tries to market the "100 mile wilderness" as just that even though it's no where near a wilderness so a little sign pointing towards food and lodging ruins their fantasy
MATC markets t-shirts, patches, pins, trail guides, the occasional hat. We are not a "marketing" club, we are a "maintaining" club. The term "100 mile wilderness" is always referred to tongue in cheek as we all recognize it is not a true wilderness. Don't believe it check Weary's past posts as he almost always puts in a disclaimer or adds the words "so-called". I would welcome anyone posting any evidence of the MATC promoting the so called "wilderness".
camp mom
04-29-2010, 18:02
The only new AMC trail and sign that I can think of connects Little Lyford Pond Camps with Gulf Hagas, which I'm sure many of their guests like to visit.
I'm a member of the MATC board of directors, and editor of the club's newsletter, The Mainetainer, so I attend most board meetings. However, I've missed some because of various "old age" illnesses, so I may have missed another sidetrail request at some point.
But gaining permission for a new side trail is a bit of an elaborate process. The club basically is not the deciding agency. We make a recommendation to the National Park Service, which is the ultimate decider. Though I don't recall the park service ever rejecting a recommendation by MATC. We don't get many requests for an official side trail. I think of lot of squabbling could have been avoided had Whitehouse Landing enquired about the proper procedures when it opened a decade or more ago, and followed them, rather than just clearing an old road and posting a sign.
Frankly, I hear two different stories about this situation, Yours and the numerous reports over the years to the MATC board by the overseer of the trail section that runs from the Jo Mary campground road to the summit of Katahdin.
The overseer, Rick Ste. Croix, is not a bureaucratic type. He's just an unusually dedicated and conscientious trail volunteer doing a tough job with the help of his wife.
Weary
we didnt think we needed permission for a new side trail because the old tote road was already there and was on the maps as leading to a recognised campsite on nahmakanta stream.our trail to the dock branches off that old road.so its nothing new.as noted before we just wanted hikers to know they were at the right place. as far as the park service making the ultimate call,when we asked the guy from nps why there are signs all along the a.t.if the law states none are allowed,then why are we being singled out? he said its up to each individual club to decide whats best for their trail.so apparently the amc fits and we dont.
TJ aka Teej
04-29-2010, 18:32
I sat in on some of the early Maine planning. The goals have changed significantly since then. Rather than a lot of new construction,
Weary, you're changing your story again...
Years back the AMC had a meeting in Greenville trumpeting its plans for construction projects in the 100 Mile. The meeting was well attended, and was reported on in it least three different newspapers, one from as far away as Bangor. Weary has claimed for years it never happened. He even claimed I made the whole thing up.
"Stick to the Truth, it's the easiest tale to remember." - my great Aunt Cynthia, a life long resident of Greenville, Maine.
TJ aka Teej
04-29-2010, 18:50
he said its up to each individual club to decide whats best for their trail.so apparently the amc fits and we dont.
The trouble comes when the Trail Maintaining club is inconsistent.
At Harrison's there's a sign advertising their lemonade nailed to a mid-AT tree. In Monson, there are always posters and cards and signs. The AMC is allowed to cut trails that intersect the AT and signs pointing to their hotels are placed on the AT. But on the Marhar Tote Road, signs placed down forest roads outside the AT corridor are stolen.
Pick a position, M(AMC)TC, and stick to it.
since this thread is about setting the record straight about whitehouse landing camps, let's set the record straight once and for all. in this world, no matter what else happens, you get out of life what you put into it. bill and linda are hardworking everyday people who love what they do. and what they do is provide unparalleled hospitality to not only hikers, but kayakers, fishermen, vacationers, outdoorsmen, and those that just need a little solace. being that far out is not an easy life, but they are there because they love it. their camp was not only spotless, but pristine. there was not one single speck of trash in site. i work in watershed and environmental conservation and there wasn't one single thing i would change about their camp! for you, weary, and you, white russian, to get on here and bitch about a friggin sign and a burger that somebody else made for your lazy ass, is absolutely the most pitiful, pathetic thing i have seen in some time and i work for the government! you have outdone yourselves in pettiness. i walked through that so-called wilderness and in more than a few places, i saw unbelievable amounts of trash and pretty much laziness on the parts of the people that visit them. there was none of that at whl. you bitch about bill not being neighborly? stop being an absolute elitist ass and put up a sign for whl that conforms to your "wilderness" specs! be a good neighbor yourself! good deeds aren't just shat from the sky. if you want neighborliness, the practice what you preach. from what i have personally seen of the matc, you're a bunch of petty people that are stuck inside 6 months of the year and are so sick of yourselves at the end of it, that you have to spread the nastiness or explode. be neighborly for once in your life and put up a damn sign. what is so friggin hard about that?
white_russian
04-29-2010, 19:10
since this thread is about setting the record straight about whitehouse landing camps, let's set the record straight once and for all. in this world, no matter what else happens, you get out of life what you put into it. bill and linda are hardworking everyday people who love what they do. and what they do is provide unparalleled hospitality to not only hikers, but kayakers, fishermen, vacationers, outdoorsmen, and those that just need a little solace. being that far out is not an easy life, but they are there because they love it. their camp was not only spotless, but pristine. there was not one single speck of trash in site. i work in watershed and environmental conservation and there wasn't one single thing i would change about their camp! for you, weary, and you, white russian, to get on here and bitch about a friggin sign and a burger that somebody else made for your lazy ass, is absolutely the most pitiful, pathetic thing i have seen in some time and i work for the government! you have outdone yourselves in pettiness. i walked through that so-called wilderness and in more than a few places, i saw unbelievable amounts of trash and pretty much laziness on the parts of the people that visit them. there was none of that at whl. you bitch about bill not being neighborly? stop being an absolute elitist ass and put up a sign for whl that conforms to your "wilderness" specs! be a good neighbor yourself! good deeds aren't just shat from the sky. if you want neighborliness, the practice what you preach. from what i have personally seen of the matc, you're a bunch of petty people that are stuck inside 6 months of the year and are so sick of yourselves at the end of it, that you have to spread the nastiness or explode. be neighborly for once in your life and put up a damn sign. what is so friggin hard about that?
go ***** yourself
go ***** yourself
ooh! good idea! brb.
stumpknocker
04-29-2010, 19:14
since this thread is about setting the record straight about whitehouse landing camps, let's set the record straight once and for all. in this world, no matter what else happens, you get out of life what you put into it. bill and linda are hardworking everyday people who love what they do. and what they do is provide unparalleled hospitality to not only hikers, but kayakers, fishermen, vacationers, outdoorsmen, and those that just need a little solace. being that far out is not an easy life, but they are there because they love it. their camp was not only spotless, but pristine. there was not one single speck of trash in site. i work in watershed and environmental conservation and there wasn't one single thing i would change about their camp! for you, weary, and you, white russian, to get on here and bitch about a friggin sign and a burger that somebody else made for your lazy ass, is absolutely the most pitiful, pathetic thing i have seen in some time and i work for the government! you have outdone yourselves in pettiness. i walked through that so-called wilderness and in more than a few places, i saw unbelievable amounts of trash and pretty much laziness on the parts of the people that visit them. there was none of that at whl. you bitch about bill not being neighborly? stop being an absolute elitist ass and put up a sign for whl that conforms to your "wilderness" specs! be a good neighbor yourself! good deeds aren't just shat from the sky. if you want neighborliness, the practice what you preach. from what i have personally seen of the matc, you're a bunch of petty people that are stuck inside 6 months of the year and are so sick of yourselves at the end of it, that you have to spread the nastiness or explode. be neighborly for once in your life and put up a damn sign. what is so friggin hard about that?
Kanga....I don't believe I know you, but I can tell I would like you.
Thanks for your post!! :)
oh, btw, **** only has 4 letters.
The Old Fhart
04-29-2010, 19:27
Ah, I see Weary just got Kanga rude ;), her typical knee-jerk response to people she can't discuss issues with logically. Too bad she doesn't understand the simple concept that the land is public land administrated by NPS and they are the ones who have said no commercialization, like signs to private businesses-it has nothing to do with Weary. Despite all the bluster and pointless rhetoric from Kanga, Weary can't put a sign there any more than Kanga or WHL can, it's illegal, plain and simple.
If Kanga truly works for the Government then she should know enough to go through the proper channels to try to get a sign that meets her specifications placed on Mahar Tote Road rather than continuing her personal attacks in these forums. The rest of her diatribe isn't worth commenting on, other than to say a whole lot of TP is needed to clean it up.;).
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 19:28
Kanga....I don't believe I know you, but I can tell I would like you.
Thanks for your post!! :)
dang i think you missed her by like 2 days up at shaws last summer...and, you would
oh, btw, **** only has 4 letters.
5 lasts longer :banana
camp mom
04-29-2010, 19:40
since this thread is about setting the record straight about whitehouse landing camps, let's set the record straight once and for all. in this world, no matter what else happens, you get out of life what you put into it. bill and linda are hardworking everyday people who love what they do. and what they do is provide unparalleled hospitality to not only hikers, but kayakers, fishermen, vacationers, outdoorsmen, and those that just need a little solace. being that far out is not an easy life, but they are there because they love it. their camp was not only spotless, but pristine. there was not one single speck of trash in site. i work in watershed and environmental conservation and there wasn't one single thing i would change about their camp! for you, weary, and you, white russian, to get on here and bitch about a friggin sign and a burger that somebody else made for your lazy ass, is absolutely the most pitiful, pathetic thing i have seen in some time and i work for the government! you have outdone yourselves in pettiness. i walked through that so-called wilderness and in more than a few places, i saw unbelievable amounts of trash and pretty much laziness on the parts of the people that visit them. there was none of that at whl. you bitch about bill not being neighborly? stop being an absolute elitist ass and put up a sign for whl that conforms to your "wilderness" specs! be a good neighbor yourself! good deeds aren't just shat from the sky. if you want neighborliness, the practice what you preach. from what i have personally seen of the matc, you're a bunch of petty people that are stuck inside 6 months of the year and are so sick of yourselves at the end of it, that you have to spread the nastiness or explode. be neighborly for once in your life and put up a damn sign. what is so friggin hard about that?
hey kanga, camp dad here.i think i love you.that was the most no nonsense reply,telling it like it is response ive witnessed in all the time looking at all the threads about us.
Ah, I see Weary just got Kanga rude ;), her typical knee-jerk response to people she can't discuss issues with logically. Too bad she doesn't understand the simple concept that the land is public land administrated by NPS and they are the ones who have said no commercialization, like signs to private businesses-it has nothing to do with Weary. Despite all the bluster and pointless rhetoric from Kanga, Weary can't put a sign there any more than Kanga or WHL can, it's illegal, plain and simple.
If Kanga truly works for the Government then she should know enough to go through the proper channels to try to get a sign that meets her specifications placed on Mahar Tote Road rather than continuing her personal attacks in these forums. The rest of her diatribe isn't worth commenting on, other than to say a whole lot of TP is needed to clean it up.;).
what is not logical is the fact that this country now caters to the whining little pansies that bitch about everything that is not going their way, instead of standing on the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon.
Desert Reprobate
04-29-2010, 19:47
Like Ron says, "When Kanga aint happy, noone is happy"
camp mom
04-29-2010, 19:58
Ah, I see Weary just got Kanga rude ;), her typical knee-jerk response to people she can't discuss issues with logically. Too bad she doesn't understand the simple concept that the land is public land administrated by NPS and they are the ones who have said no commercialization, like signs to private businesses-it has nothing to do with Weary. Despite all the bluster and pointless rhetoric from Kanga, Weary can't put a sign there any more than Kanga or WHL can, it's illegal, plain and simple.
If Kanga truly works for the Government then she should know enough to go through the proper channels to try to get a sign that meets her specifications placed on Mahar Tote Road rather than continuing her personal attacks in these forums. The rest of her diatribe isn't worth commenting on, other than to say a whole lot of TP is needed to clean it up.;).let me tell you something... has anybody noticed that mr. weary has not responded once TO ME in any of these!!! case in point!!! weary speak to me . you do all the other people.SPEAK TO ME!!!! can you see what we are up against no one will, i want to know why. why will you respond to everyone elses remark. all i can tell you right now is we have work to do, we have hikers ,and the rest of our customers that are more important to us then you,i am all done wasting our time.my hopefully last remark to you is if you decide to come in to meet us,when you get to the boat dock .ONE SHORT BLAST. (OR YOU WILL GET DOCK TIME).
TJ aka Teej
04-29-2010, 19:58
...public land administrated by NPS and they are the ones who have said no commercialization, like signs to private businesses-it has nothing to do with Weary.
The vendetta against little WHL, when compared to the lip lock with the giant AMC's multi-plex of outdoor recreation facilities, shows extreme bias. To some it shows a concerted and coordinated effort to stifle free trade.
And "nothing to do with Weary", well... The AMC's Award Winning Weary has championed the AMC's push while the MATC's self appointed e-spokesman and publications editor has continually attacked WHL for years over a sign he's never seen, and side trail he's never been on to a place he's never been. If this has nothing to do with Weary, he should stop making it all about him.
The Old Fhart
04-29-2010, 19:59
Kanga-"what is not logical is the fact that this country now caters to the whining little pansies that bitch about everything that is not going their way, instead of standing on the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon."Exactly, only you're the whining little pansy bitching because you can't get your way and you really know it's illegal to put a sign there. If you want to stand up for the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon, quit bitching and do something positive about it instead of besmirching the forum posts.
Two Speed
04-29-2010, 20:06
. . . instead of besmirching the forum posts.Yeah, what he said. Everyone knows these forums are virginal! :cool:
Exactly, only you're the whining little pansy bitching because you can't get your way and you really know it's illegal to put a sign there. If you want to stand up for the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon, quit bitching and do something positive about it instead of besmirching the forum posts.
do you actually stop and think before you post this stuff? i mean, do you read it before you hit send or do you just get so excited you can't help yourself?
Hang on while I make another batch of popcorn .....
I wonder how many folks following this thread realize that this signage nonsense at Mahar Tote Rd. has gone on for over a decade. The people in charge would rather hikers miss a resupply spot and a camp that is hailed by many as one of the best stops on the entire AT than find a compromise that would allow for a tasteful wooden sign. Boring discussion for some of us after more than ten years.
The new controversy in regards to the burger issue is way more serious. I suspect it may be an underhanded tactic to attack WHL from a different direction. It looks like a malicious and dastardly tactic, and I suspect the pizza will come under attack next.
Weary, you're changing your story again...
Years back the AMC had a meeting in Greenville trumpeting its plans for construction projects in the 100 Mile. The meeting was well attended, and was reported on in it least three different newspapers, one from as far away as Bangor. Weary has claimed for years it never happened. He even claimed I made the whole thing up.
"Stick to the Truth, it's the easiest tale to remember." - my great Aunt Cynthia, a life long resident of Greenville, Maine.
Teej, as you are prone to do, you do not listen very well -- or read very well for that matter.
AMC has held multiple meetings in the Greenville area, exploring ideas, and seeking opinions. I find it fascinating that when I first asked for the source of your outlandish speculations, you told us that the source was secret and could not be disclosed. Now you claim AMC told of these outlandish plans at a public meeting that I said never happened. Some secret TJ.
Believe me if it was not a matter of important truths, I wouldn't be defending AMC. But facts are facts. I've always been a bit of an AMC skeptic. I've never been a wholehearded fan of AMC. I'm even less of a fan these days. The chapter a week ago voted to oust the chair of it's Conservation Committee, because he had the audasity to support a Maine Woods National Park, something Joy Street has yet to take a stand on -- after a decade and a half.
In a week or so I may resign as newsletter chair. They chapter will be debating whether the newsletter should have even published the views of its conservation chair.
TJ, all I'm suggesting is that real matters should get your attention, not fantasy dreams.
And please don't respond by claiming AMC is not God. Weary said so. I never thought it was, even when it made me a lifetime member 40 years ago. Like all of us we are humans or assortments of humans, sometimes wise, sometimes silly. And even sometimes wrong, a concept you should ponder, JeeJ.
Weary
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 20:15
Hang on while I make another batch of popcorn .....
popcorn?? i'm gonna need another 6
Skidsteer
04-29-2010, 20:17
The vendetta against little WHL, when compared to the lip lock with the giant AMC's multi-plex of outdoor recreation facilities, shows extreme bias. To some it shows a concerted and coordinated effort to stifle free trade.
Merits repeating.
And this is the issue that is continually ignored by the folks with opposing viewpoints. If it is about law and order, then fine. Apply the law and order in a consistent way. It's the American way.
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 20:18
I wonder how many folks following this thread realize that this signage nonsense at Mahar Tote Rd. has gone on for over a decade. The people in charge would rather hikers miss a resupply spot and a camp that is hailed by many as one of the best stops on the entire AT than find a compromise that would allow for a tasteful wooden sign. Boring discussion for some of us after more than ten years.
The new controversy in regards to the burger issue is way more serious. I suspect it may be an underhanded tactic to attack WHL from a different direction. It looks like a malicious and dastardly tactic, and I suspect the pizza will come under attack next.
NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!:eek:
Lone Wolf
04-29-2010, 20:35
It's just you
MATC markets t-shirts, patches, pins, trail guides, the occasional hat. We are not a "marketing" club, we are a "maintaining" club. The term "100 mile wilderness" is always referred to tongue in cheek as we all recognize it is not a true wilderness. Don't believe it check Weary's past posts as he almost always puts in a disclaimer or adds the words "so-called". I would welcome anyone posting any evidence of the MATC promoting the so called "wilderness".
it ain't just me. WHL is being targeted by elitists
Lone Wolf
04-29-2010, 20:41
The vendetta against little WHL, when compared to the lip lock with the giant AMC's multi-plex of outdoor recreation facilities, shows extreme bias. To some it shows a concerted and coordinated effort to stifle free trade.
oh yeah. big friggin' time. pseudo-mainers against real mainers
Lone Wolf
04-29-2010, 20:43
Exactly, only you're the whining little pansy bitching because you can't get your way and you really know it's illegal to put a sign there. If you want to stand up for the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon, quit bitching and do something positive about it instead of besmirching the forum posts.
it ain't about a sign. and you know it. or most likely you don't
camp mom
04-29-2010, 20:53
do you actually stop and think before you post this stuff? i mean, do you read it before you hit send or do you just get so excited you can't help yourself?
keep talking girl.youre it in our book
The Old Fhart
04-29-2010, 21:24
Kanga-"do you actually stop and think before you post this stuff? i mean, do you read it before you hit send or do you just get so excited you can't help yourself?"I obviously I put a lot more thought into what I post while you have a history of lashing out at others and sidestepping issues. And you can’t imagine how much getting a love-letter from you in these forums excites me!:eek: So for once instead of trying to obscurate the issue, answer the simple question: who legally has the authority to place a sign at Mahar Tote road-WHL? , Weary?, You?, or NPS and their designated representatives? Try to think about this answer before you post your usual attack or non-responsive answer.
And please keep in mind I have absolutely nothing against WHL other than the signage issue which apparently has been corrected even though it is still being discussed. Around last August there was a thread on WHL and the 100-mile “wilderness” where I was correcting Weary’s mis-interpretation of the history of the area and others who claimed that WHL shouldn’t exist because its existence destroyed their wilderness experience. I said:
“If you are trying to convince anyone that you have a valid argument then start giving us some facts to support your claim. Every time you (or Weary) make a statement about the character and history of the 100-mile wilderness (glad to see you finally corrected that glaring error) that is absolutely wrong, you just weaken your argument and make yourself look less and less believable.
Your last post lends nothing to support your position. Point #1 is a wild statement with no facts to back it up. Please tell us how WHL "being there" is in any way legally wrong and don't come back and say, once again, that its existence somehow offends your sensitivity.
I said I planned to visit WHL on my next trip thru the 100-mile "wilderness" (my 7th) and I still plan to. Nothing here has indicated it would be less than I'd expect.
Well, so much for law and order. There are those of us who think the Appalachian Trail should be maintained as wild as possible within the laws that govern such things.
Then there are those who think support of wildness and following regulations are only things that panzies do. Especially when the alternative is the chance to pay $8 for a one pound spiced up hamburger bun.
Weary
camp mom
04-29-2010, 21:37
it ain't about a sign. and you know it. or most likely you don't
its not about a sign,we all know that too,thats ok we are not going anywhere,just wanted to get the real truth out there.good night its time for hiker dreams.
I obviously I put a lot more thought into what I post while you have a history of lashing out at others and sidestepping issues. And you can’t imagine how much getting a love-letter from you in these forums excites me!:eek: So for once instead of trying to obscurate the issue, answer the simple question: who legally has the authority to place a sign at Mahar Tote road-WHL? , Weary?, You?, or NPS and their designated representatives? Try to think about this answer before you post your usual attack or non-responsive answer.
And please keep in mind I have absolutely nothing against WHL other than the signage issue which apparently has been corrected even though it is still being discussed. Around last August there was a thread on WHL and the 100-mile “wilderness” where I was correcting Weary’s mis-interpretation of the history of the area and others who claimed that WHL shouldn’t exist because its existence destroyed their wilderness experience. I said:
I said I planned to visit WHL on my next trip thru the 100-mile "wilderness" (my 7th) and I still plan to. Nothing here has indicated it would be less than I'd expect.
i'm not lashing out. i'm telling the truth. it's your problem if you can't deal with it. i don't have time to babysit.
Well, so much for law and order. There are those of us who think the Appalachian Trail should be maintained as wild as possible within the laws that govern such things.
Then there are those who think support of wildness and following regulations are only things that panzies do. Especially when the alternative is the chance to pay $8 for a one pound spiced up hamburger bun.
Weary
once you twist the truth, it is no longer truth.
Then there are those who think support of wildness and following regulations are only things that panzies do. Especially when the alternative is the chance to pay $8 for a one pound spiced up hamburger bun.
As opposed to spending $474 for 6 nights at AMC sponsored resorts (http://www.outdoors.org/lodging/summer-guide-2010-maine.cfm) in the 100-Mile "Wilderness"?
Your hypocrisy is absolutely staggering...
Lone Wolf
04-29-2010, 22:00
Your hypocrisy is absolutely staggering...
truly............
Well, so much for law and order.
pay $8 for a one pound spiced up hamburger bun.
Weary
Badges, we don't need no stinking badges. And it isn't the hamburger bun that weighs a pound, it's the burger meat inside the bun that weighs a pound. $8.00 is a great price for a burger like that. They should charge more. It's deeeeeelicious.
bigmac_in
04-29-2010, 22:20
As opposed to spending $474 for 6 nights at AMC sponsored resorts (http://www.outdoors.org/lodging/summer-guide-2010-maine.cfm) in the 100-Mile "Wilderness"?
Your hypocrisy is absolutely staggering...
Ah, now THAT smells of truth . . .
bigmac_in
04-29-2010, 22:22
So - I heard this thread was about burgers. Who wants to put down ANY burgers in front of Big Mac??????
:D
Alligator
04-29-2010, 22:27
Debate the issues but if the personal attacks continue, folks will be removed from the debate. Thanks.
bigmac_in
04-29-2010, 22:33
I'm sorry, but attacking burgers can not be tolerated. . . .
Alligator
04-29-2010, 22:37
The only new AMC trail and sign that I can think of connects Little Lyford Pond Camps with Gulf Hagas, which I'm sure many of their guests like to visit.
I'm a member of the MATC board of directors, and editor of the club's newsletter, The Mainetainer, so I attend most board meetings. However, I've missed some because of various "old age" illnesses, so I may have missed another sidetrail request at some point.
...Your wrote the newsletter in 2008. It says the following
...
Other issues with which the club has dealt in the
past year include: a new trail constructed by AMC to
connect Little Lyford Pond Camps to the AT in the
Katahdin Iron Works area; the conflict with camp owners
who had placed illegal advertising and a blue blazed side
trail directing hikers to their business; and the rerouting of
the AT near Bigelow Preserve
...
Is there a sign at that junction? I haven't been to KIW in many years.
You also said there was a sign approved for the side trail Post #91.
How about MATC just buries the hatchet since they were willing to let AMC have one. You could sponsor it Weary. Then everyone can make nicey nicey and we can talk about Bigfoot.
So no MATC minutes:D?
So - I heard this thread was about burgers. Who wants to put down ANY burgers in front of Big Mac??????
:D
It's supposed to be about burgers, but as usual, has gotten off topic and been infused with politics and personal attacks. Now I risk getting removed from the discussion if I give my true opinion of the burger they named after you.
bigmac_in
04-29-2010, 22:47
It's supposed to be about burgers, but as usual, has gotten off topic and been infused with politics and personal attacks. Now I risk getting removed from the discussion if I give my true opinion of the burger they named after you.
No burger bashing on my watch buddy . . .
No bashing, unless bashing is like mashing and you have to do it to make it bashed or mashed enough to bite into. I had one of your burgers a few weeks ago. Could of used bigger onion bits and less goop, but otherwise it was satisfactory and the meat like substance in it tasted very similar to real meat.
vonfrick
04-29-2010, 22:55
No bashing, unless bashing is like mashing and you have to do it to make it bashed or mashed enough to bite into. I had one of your burgers a few weeks ago. Could of used bigger onion bits and less goop, but otherwise it was satisfactory and the meat like substance in it tasted very similar to real meat.
but real meat from what???
Alligator
04-29-2010, 23:00
but real meat from what???Whatever the Bigfoot dragged in.
Dead cow, buffalo, elk or deer.
Whatever the Bigfoot dragged in.
You can not make a burger from fish.
Alligator
04-29-2010, 23:03
You can not make a burger from fish.I can make one in a dish:-?.
bigmac_in
04-29-2010, 23:03
You can not make a burger from fish.
Apparently you can in some parts of the world . . .
http://www.joshjacobson.net/pics/fishburger.jpg
Merits repeating.
And this is the issue that is continually ignored by the folks with opposing viewpoints. If it is about law and order, then fine. Apply the law and order in a consistent way. It's the American way.
More than the American way, it's just plain honest, and imo, Godly.
No favorites, big or small, rich or poor, any color, any nationality - sounds good, doesn't it? Sure. Until someone with a chip on their shoulder doesn't get their way.:rolleyes:
More than the American way, it's just plain honest, and imo, Godly.
No favorites, big or small, rich or poor, any color, any nationality - sounds good, doesn't it? Sure. Until someone with a chip on their shoulder doesn't get their way.:rolleyes:
Do you have a link for that? I've always thought our country got started by a bunch of law breakers. :banana
Do you have a link for that? I've always thought our country got started by a bunch of law breakers. :banana
You live in Australia? ;)
Law makers, I've noticed over the years, seem to be some of the biggest law breakers, too, because they don't recognize the laws of others to be legit.
Ego is truly blinding, and even the humblest finds he isn't what he seeks to be.
My post said "even more than American" - I wasn't defending the moral integrity of our country - far from it. It's usually the biggest vehicles with the most "American" bumper stickers who cut me off on the highway on a regular basis :D.
I'm a little bit puzzled by all this stuff. My understanding is that the 100 mile wilderness is the remains of a large timber limit in northern Maine, possibly all of northern Maine at one time. The camps such as WHL are what remains of a network of fishing and hunting camps that used to service the guests of the timber companies and others. I am familiar with such camps, as we have a few of them up here in Canada. Now I guess the area is turning into a wilderness by someone's definition, or at least the AT corridor is. So, WHL is somehow grandfathered, and is still a legal enterprise with a right to exist. The debate seems to be about bad blood over some signage "vandalism", and some ongoing maintenance on an access road that is supposed to revert to wilderness. The WHL seems to survive in part by serving 100-mile wilderness thrus, and the said thrus are largely glad of the service, to the extent that the WHL has entered into the lore of the trail, including their greasy, overpriced, much devoured and desired burgers and pizzas. Have I got it right so far?
You know, this is the sort of dispute that often ends up in court enriching nobody but the lawyers, and often ends up bankrupting the lesser of the disputants. As someone has said, "Why can't we all just get along?" Why not just work out a compromise, such as a simple sign and permission to maintain the old trail? What's the big deal?
By the way, I don't want to give the impression that Canada is lily white in this sort of this. There are a number of national parks which have had to deal with such things, and one, Fourillon in Gaspe, ended up removing a whole village by eminent domain. Not a pretty record. That's why I am so keen that people just accept a small compromise. It wouldn't be unique, nor would it be an unsustainable blotch on the pristine character of the area. The were timber limits, for heaven's sake, and the access trail was a tote road! Good grief!
If I got it wrong, never mind, as Gilda used to say.
Speaking as a complete outsider who has never been around the area in question, why haven't we been directed to pictures of anything having to do with any of this? I guess I'll go look for some. I think it would put some perspective on this.
Alligator
04-30-2010, 00:44
If you google whitehouse landing they have a website and the camp is linked to a google map. You can see their dock but I didn't know where the actually pickup point is on the other side. I don't have the Maine maps to look at.
The AMC site has a map (http://www.outdoors.org/pdf/upload/kiw-summer-trails.pdf) of the Lyford Camp which shows it's position relative to the AT.
No photos yet though of the junctions.
I couldn't find one searching this photo database. You'd think there would be some photos if there were some sort of shenanigans going on.
Jester2000
04-30-2010, 01:04
On the PCT there's an official trail sign pointing out that McDonald's is .4 mi to the right when you hit El Cahon.
Perhaps when one is blessed with an abundance of wilderness one takes such things less seriously.
Still seems like much ado to me, though.
Shutterbug
04-30-2010, 01:10
Speaking as a complete outsider who has never been around the area in question, why haven't we been directed to pictures of anything having to do with any of this? I guess I'll go look for some. I think it would put some perspective on this.
When I passed Whitehouse Landing in 2004, the only sign was a business card posted to a tree with a thumb tack.
In 2005, this was the sign. I certainly wasn't offended by it. It certainly didn't interfere with my wilderness experience.
Lone Wolf
04-30-2010, 06:18
there's a sign for Kincora nailed to a tree right on the trail down in Tennessee. it's against ATC policy. but nobody does anything about it
envirodiver
04-30-2010, 07:15
Ah, I see Weary just got Kanga rude ;), her typical knee-jerk response to people she can't discuss issues with logically. Too bad she doesn't understand the simple concept that the land is public land administrated by NPS and they are the ones who have said no commercialization, like signs to private businesses-it has nothing to do with Weary. Despite all the bluster and pointless rhetoric from Kanga, Weary can't put a sign there any more than Kanga or WHL can, it's illegal, plain and simple.
If Kanga truly works for the Government then she should know enough to go through the proper channels to try to get a sign that meets her specifications placed on Mahar Tote Road rather than continuing her personal attacks in these forums. The rest of her diatribe isn't worth commenting on, other than to say a whole lot of TP is needed to clean it up.;).
So how do the signs to the AMC businesses fit into this?
camp mom
04-30-2010, 07:53
When I passed Whitehouse Landing in 2004, the only sign was a business card posted to a tree with a thumb tack.
In 2005, this was the sign. I certainly wasn't offended by it. It certainly didn't interfere with my wilderness experience.
that sign was posted at the end of the marhar tote rd.1/4 mi. was not seen from the a.t. it directed hikers to go right at that point,now there is only 1 sign there,got to remember to these rds use to be used for snowmobiles also, we served food and had cabins,and it is still used to this day. they are little orange sign with a snowmobile on it,all groomed trails have those signs.
white_russian
04-30-2010, 12:12
I want to go back to the very beginning. When WHL put their very first sign like ten years ago or whatever did they contact anyone such as the MATC, ATC, NPS, ect beforehand or did they just do it? Did they ever even try to grease the wheels to get their sign?
I know if it was me I would have started working with that sections maintainer and checking on Polywadjo Lean-to and what not. Maybe let that section's maintainer join you at the dinner table and stay at the camp for free or when they were working on the trail. Maybe join the MATC. Then talk about a sign.
Your wrote the newsletter in 2008. It says the following
Is there a sign at that junction? I haven't been to KIW in many years.
You also said there was a sign approved for the side trail Post #91.
How about MATC just buries the hatchet since they were willing to let AMC have one. You could sponsor it Weary. Then everyone can make nicey nicey and we can talk about Bigfoot.
So no MATC minutes:D?
[/LEFT]
I believe you and others have been quoting from the annual meeting minutes. They usually run in the first or second issue after the early April annual meetings.
There are also minutes of our five-times a year MATC board meetings, but I don't keep them on file.
As for me motioning for a sign, the overseer for that area handles such things. He saw what struck him as illegal signs, investigated, talked with the leasees of sporting camps under discussion, failed to reach what he thought was a reasonable solution, and so notified the National Park Service.
AS near as I can tell, most MATC board members seem quite happy with the status quo, which was achieved as the result of the park service visit, and, I suspect, would not welcome me bringing up the issue again. I doubt if my motion would get a second. I'm sure it wouldn't pass.
WHL has long since achieved its goal. All hikers who read the trail registers or talk to other hikers know that the business exists, that it has highly prized one pound hamburgers. And visiting there is both a break from the routine of the "wilderness," a friendly stay, and a chance to thumb their noses at mean old MATC and the park service.
And by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
Weary
I'm can see how signs on the AT could get out of control. How about just a flyer in the Shelter Journal prior to WHL? Seems like most of the Shelter Journals that I've seen have leaflets advertising upcoming trail attractions as well as emergency contact information.
Alligator
04-30-2010, 12:40
Can't seem to get a straight answer from you Weary.
1. Does AMC have a sign pointing to their Lyford Camp? AMC got approval for one from MATC, as you reported.
2. Do you support the approval of the AMC sign, whether or not it has been placed?
3. Do you support the reported new side trail that AMC has as reported by you? (I'm going by your report.)
4. Would you support a sign for WHL, regardless of who you have to talk to about it being placed?
When I passed Whitehouse Landing in 2004, the only sign was a business card posted to a tree with a thumb tack.
In 2005, this was the sign. I certainly wasn't offended by it. It certainly didn't interfere with my wilderness experience.
Many thanks for posting the photo. Offensive, or not, the array is a blatant violation of National Park regulations that MATC is charged with enforcing.
Weary
camp mom
04-30-2010, 13:20
I want to go back to the very beginning. When WHL put their very first sign like ten years ago or whatever did they contact anyone such as the MATC, ATC, NPS, ect beforehand or did they just do it? Did they ever even try to grease the wheels to get their sign?
I know if it was me I would have started working with that sections maintainer and checking on Polywadjo Lean-to and what not. Maybe let that section's maintainer join you at the dinner table and stay at the camp for free or when they were working on the trail. Maybe join the MATC. Then talk about a sign. when we first opened our doors to hikers in 99 we didnt have a clue about any of that stuff.we didnt even know the prior history whl had with the early days of the at.poopajack,suggested to bill to open up to hikers because we were in the 100 mile wilderness where its hard to get stuff.it made sense. so we did, not realizing what we were about to udertake and how it was going to change our lives.as stated in previous posts and the original blog,mark simpson president of the matc hiked in from monson to meet us and take down any signs we had put up.by the time he got to us he had changed his mind and allowed our signs to stay up until he could go in front of the board to suggest that they make us an approved sign.he said the positive feedback from the sobo's had changed his mind and what we were doing was a good thing.We never heard back from anybody .so, we just left the sign up.A year later we met a hiker who was at that meeting and that suggestion was blown out of the water with dynamite. then we realized we were on our own and the matc was not under any circumstances going to approve of a sign for a place that just took away their claim to fame of the longest stretch of the at without a place to get stuff.here it is 12 years later and no reasonable solution has been settled upon.this isnt rocket science.we fit the trail more than most places being one of the original 11 that were along the 100 mile wilderness in the early days of the at.All we did was reopen our doors 50 years later.
Can't seem to get a straight answer from you Weary.
1. Does AMC have a sign pointing to their Lyford Camp? AMC got approval for one from MATC, as you reported.
I haven't personally seen it, but I believe a sign that meets park service and MATC standards has been installed.
2. Do you support the approval of the AMC sign, whether or not it has been placed?
Yes
3. Do you support the reported new side trail that AMC has as reported by you? (I'm going by your report.)
Yes. the trail was actually built by MATC and AMC volunteers to MATC standards.
4. Would you support a sign for WHL, regardless of who you have to talk to about it being placed?
If WHL applies for a sign that meets MATC and Park Service standards for signs on the Appalachian Trail, I would vote to approve its placement. Such a sign would have to provide information needed by hikers, rather than simply the promotion of a commercial business, as I understand the rules.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 13:28
Many thanks for posting the photo. Offensive, or not, the array is a blatant violation of National Park regulations that MATC is charged with enforcing.
Weary
do you not understand,did you read my remark to that sign???? it was a 1/4 mile from the a.t. well over the 500ft.set back from the trail corridor. the reason that also was there is we did not want a hiker to walk the rest of the way to our boat dock to find out he or she missed dinner ,or would be after dark to sound the air horn. was a good thing to do,nothing worse than an upset hungry hiker.so understand this weary that sign was legal. nothing to do with the matc.i think its time for you to retire:)
camp mom
04-30-2010, 13:31
If WHL applies for a sign that meets MATC and Park Service standards for signs on the Appalachian Trail, I would vote to approve its placement. Such a sign would have to provide information needed by hikers, rather than simply the promotion of a commercial business, as I understand the rules.
yea, hiker services,doesn't that say it all???
Alligator
04-30-2010, 13:42
Camp mom, you might get a compromise of a sign showing the turn and distance, but a whole load of business details, I'd suggest making a compromise there.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 13:42
I believe you and others have been quoting from the annual meeting minutes. They usually run in the first or second issue after the early April annual meetings.
There are also minutes of our five-times a year MATC board meetings, but I don't keep them on file.
As for me motioning for a sign, the overseer for that area handles such things. He saw what struck him as illegal signs, investigated, talked with the leasees of sporting camps under discussion, failed to reach what he thought was a reasonable solution, and so notified the National Park Service.
AS near as I can tell, most MATC board members seem quite happy with the status quo, which was achieved as the result of the park service visit, and, I suspect, would not welcome me bringing up the issue again. I doubt if my motion would get a second. I'm sure it wouldn't pass.
WHL has long since achieved its goal. All hikers who read the trail registers or talk to other hikers know that the business exists, that it has highly prized one pound hamburgers. And visiting there is both a break from the routine of the "wilderness," a friendly stay, and a chance to thumb their noses at mean old MATC and the park service.
And by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
Weary
what do think we are STUPID!! no maintaineers has never been in to see us,no rick st .croix,so if he had said that he did,you better think again of him being a dedicated,law abiding maintainer,we are not promoting our business,we are trying to get thru to you and the ones that don't want us there,its not about the signs is it,well we will still have our doors open to all the a.t. hikers that want to stop,at least we don't make them feel like a second class citizen like the amc makes them feel like in the white,all are created equal.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 13:49
Camp mom, you might get a compromise of a sign showing the turn and distance, but a whole load of business details, I'd suggest making a compromise there.
as i said before, the only sign there now says hiker service,only 1 sign and its not even near the a.t.its like everyone telling me that i can't have any signs even at our camps,come on i am sure if shutterbug thought that this was going to cause such a problem he would not of posted it, but everyone wanted to see a sign and thats the only one anyone can come up with,not even the one the matc was complaining about. its 1/4 mile from the a.t..
camp mom
04-30-2010, 14:01
as i said before, the only sign there now says hiker service,only 1 sign and its not even near the a.t.its like everyone telling me that i can't have any signs even at our camps,come on i am sure if shutterbug thought that this was going to cause such a problem he would not of posted it, but everyone wanted to see a sign and thats the only one anyone can come up with,not even the one the matc was complaining about. its 1/4 mile from the a.t..
if you want to see the only sign that you will see it is on our web site,and that is the ONE that is 1/4 mile from the a.t. i tell the truth!!! as we said before,ITS NOT ABOUT THE SIGNS,and we all know that.
bulldog49
04-30-2010, 14:02
what is not logical is the fact that this country now caters to the whining little pansies that bitch about everything that is not going their way, instead of standing on the principles of hard work, honesty, and integrity that this country was founded upon.
amen!!!!!!!!
camp mom
04-30-2010, 14:10
I believe you and others have been quoting from the annual meeting minutes. They usually run in the first or second issue after the early April annual meetings.
There are also minutes of our five-times a year MATC board meetings, but I don't keep them on file.
As for me motioning for a sign, the overseer for that area handles such things. He saw what struck him as illegal signs, investigated, talked with the leasees of sporting camps under discussion, failed to reach what he thought was a reasonable solution, and so notified the National Park Service.
AS near as I can tell, most MATC board members seem quite happy with the status quo, which was achieved as the result of the park service visit, and, I suspect, would not welcome me bringing up the issue again. I doubt if my motion would get a second. I'm sure it wouldn't pass.
WHL has long since achieved its goal. All hikers who read the trail registers or talk to other hikers know that the business exists, that it has highly prized one pound hamburgers. And visiting there is both a break from the routine of the "wilderness," a friendly stay, and a chance to thumb their noses at mean old MATC and the park service.
And by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
Weary
if it makes there hike an enjoyable one,and give them support when they need to hear those encouraging words,and lighten there packs,and make them feel like they are home, then i feel good, nothing is going to change that.
bulldog49
04-30-2010, 14:11
I believe you and others have been quoting from the annual meeting minutes. They usually run in the first or second issue after the early April annual meetings.
There are also minutes of our five-times a year MATC board meetings, but I don't keep them on file.
As for me motioning for a sign, the overseer for that area handles such things. He saw what struck him as illegal signs, investigated, talked with the leasees of sporting camps under discussion, failed to reach what he thought was a reasonable solution, and so notified the National Park Service.
AS near as I can tell, most MATC board members seem quite happy with the status quo, which was achieved as the result of the park service visit, and, I suspect, would not welcome me bringing up the issue again. I doubt if my motion would get a second. I'm sure it wouldn't pass.
WHL has long since achieved its goal. All hikers who read the trail registers or talk to other hikers know that the business exists, that it has highly prized one pound hamburgers. And visiting there is both a break from the routine of the "wilderness," a friendly stay, and a chance to thumb their noses at mean old MATC and the park service.
And by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
Weary
The problem isn't learning of their existence, but finding wherethey exist. Simply putting a sign post that reads "Maher Tote Road" seems simple and reasonable. But reasonability is seldom found in any bureaucratric organization.
When I passed Whitehouse Landing in 2004, the only sign was a business card posted to a tree with a thumb tack.
In 2005, this was the sign. I certainly wasn't offended by it. It certainly didn't interfere with my wilderness experience.
Shutterbug. Where was the picture taken? Could the sign be seen from the AT footpath?
Weary
stumpknocker
04-30-2010, 14:22
AS near as I can tell, most MATC board members seem quite happy with the status quo, which was achieved as the result of the park service visit, and, I suspect, would not welcome me bringing up the issue again. I doubt if my motion would get a second. I'm sure it wouldn't pass.
Weary
F-I-N-A-L-L-Y.....almost the truth, and from an insider of MATC. If only you had left out the word "most" when talking about the MATC board members.
And by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
Weary
This is the first time Linda is "raising" the issue here.
The problem isn't learning of their existence, but finding wherethey exist. Simply putting a sign post that reads "Maher Tote Road" seems simple and reasonable. But reasonability is seldom found in any bureaucratric organization.
MATC is not a bureaucratic organization. It does take very seriously its stewardship of the Appalachian Trail corridor. Each year several hundred volunteers spend 20,000 hours removing brush and blowdowns, building and rebuilding bog bridges, constructing water bars .... And yes, occasionally, we are forced to squabble with commercial businesses when we think they have violated the rules we are pledged to enforce.
Weary
Alligator
04-30-2010, 14:30
as i said before, the only sign there now says hiker service,only 1 sign and its not even near the a.t.its like everyone telling me that i can't have any signs even at our camps,come on i am sure if shutterbug thought that this was going to cause such a problem he would not of posted it, but everyone wanted to see a sign and thats the only one anyone can come up with,not even the one the matc was complaining about. its 1/4 mile from the a.t..So would you be happy with a sign at the Mahar Tote Rd saying something similar to
Mahar Tote Road
Whitehouse Landing > X.X miles
berkshirebirder
04-30-2010, 14:58
If all this is NOT about the freakin' sign, unless somebody explains (with a few current facts) what it IS about, I'll have to agree that:
by raising the issue again as they open for the hiker season, WHL has helped make doubly sure that even new hikers will be well aware of its existence.
This is the first time Linda is "raising" the issue here.
I'd like to go on record indicating I don't care for using WhiteBlaze in this manner and hope it won't become more prevalent. This is a minor issue for NPS, MATC and a private landowner to resolve if there is an issue worthy of discussion at all.
It does not require the involvement of anyone else. Any day I expect to see on Google News we will now be trying cases in the local newspapers!
camp mom
04-30-2010, 15:31
F-I-N-A-L-L-Y.....almost the truth, and from an insider of MATC. If only you had left out the word "most" when talking about the MATC board members.
This is the first time Linda is "raising" the issue here.
thank you stumpy,it has taken little over 10 years to respond to all this, i have read all that was being said,so i am setting the record straight.first time doing a blog.....
camp mom
04-30-2010, 15:37
So would you be happy with a sign at the Mahar Tote Rd saying something similar to
Mahar Tote Road
Whitehouse Landing > X.X miles
that would be nice,and left up or even just saying hiker service,so they know thats where to turn. what ever happens doesnt matter.just want to be left alone,hopefully this will be the end and they can pick on someone else.rumors and lies i don't like.
stumpknocker
04-30-2010, 15:39
I'd like to go on record indicating I don't care for using WhiteBlaze in this manner and hope it won't become more prevalent. This is a minor issue for NPS, MATC and a private landowner to resolve if there is an issue worthy of discussion at all.
It does not require the involvement of anyone else. Any day I expect to see on Google News we will now be trying cases in the local newspapers!
Okay....I guess you are "on record".
My turn. I care that WhiteBlaze is used to get information to people who walk the Trail. I've learned a lot from this thread.
There are a very large number of threads on WhiteBlaze that I choose not to read, so I skip over them without making comments just to be "on record".
stumpknocker
04-30-2010, 15:47
thank you stumpy,it has taken little over 10 years to respond to all this, i have read all that was being said,so i am setting the record straight.first time doing a blog.....
You did great for a first time blog!! :)
I think we all learned a lot from this thread.
Sorry to say that I won't be able to walk in to see you this year. Heading out to walk the CDT soon.
Good luck to you and your family.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 15:49
I'd like to go on record indicating I don't care for using WhiteBlaze in this manner and hope it won't become more prevalent. This is a minor issue for NPS, MATC and a private landowner to resolve if there is an issue worthy of discussion at all.
It does not require the involvement of anyone else. Any day I expect to see on Google News we will now be trying cases in the local newspapers!
i don't like it either,never wanted to do this, but when you have someone bad mouthing you for 10 years and haven't even come in to meet us,it was time for me to speak up. so now i am glad the truth is out there finally,and this will be the end.
Alligator
04-30-2010, 15:50
I'd like to go on record indicating I don't care for using WhiteBlaze in this manner and hope it won't become more prevalent. This is a minor issue for NPS, MATC and a private landowner to resolve if there is an issue worthy of discussion at all.
It does not require the involvement of anyone else. Any day I expect to see on Google News we will now be trying cases in the local newspapers!If the moderation team thought it was inappropriate, we'd have taken it down. It's an AT issue. Next time use the report post and barring that don't read it. Thanks.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 15:52
You did great for a first time blog!! :)
I think we all learned a lot from this thread.
Sorry to say that I won't be able to walk in to see you this year. Heading out to walk the CDT soon.
Good luck to you and your family.
thank you,you have a great hike,i learned alot alot too!!!! take care:sunmiss the smilie stickers
Pedaling Fool
04-30-2010, 16:07
that would be nice,and left up or even just saying hiker service,so they know thats where to turn. what ever happens doesnt matter.just want to be left alone,hopefully this will be the end and they can pick on someone else.rumors and lies i don't like.
i don't like it either,never wanted to do this, but when you have someone bad mouthing you for 10 years and haven't even come in to meet us,it was time for me to speak up. so now i am glad the truth is out there finally,and this will be the end.
"The End", that's funny;) You are new to this "blogging" stuff.
BTW, you'll make the best hamburger along the AT, hope to see you'll again next time I'm in Maine.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 16:27
"The End", that's funny;) You are new to this "blogging" stuff.
BTW, you'll make the best hamburger along the AT, hope to see you'll again next time I'm in Maine.
we are hoping it will be the end,yeh i am a first time blogger,won't see me again till the next time we have to defend ourselves. takes up to much time:)love to see you again john when you are in the area.thanks
Please put up a reasonable sign so I don't walk past the Mahar Tote Rd and miss WHL next year. If I miss getting one of those 1 pound burgers I'll be upset!
....[I][B]This is the first time Linda is "raising" the issue here.
I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."
I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.
I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.
But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.
Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.
Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.
I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.
Weary
ARambler
04-30-2010, 19:24
...
Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.
...Weary
So, you like whl but hate the amc? You may be brilliant, but are siding with a self center bunch who do not have hikers welfare in mind.
In 2004, I turned on a tote road, because: 1) It was know that the matc were vandelizing whl signs, so no sign meant anything. 2) The road was not on my matc map, and the road had no sign. 3) I didin't think there was much new raod building in the wilderness and I was a little optimistic about how far I may have hiked. Fortunately after a short time, the road bent a little in the wrong direction and was not heading down to a lake. This is the only time I have had to use a compass on the AT.
It should not be necessary to know about these secret puddles to navigate to a reasonable resupply point.
When I got to Baxter Park, I wanted to hike out on the IAT. They would only allow me to camp at one campsite, and it was full. The rangers said the site I wanted to hike to was to far. So, not only are Maine bureaucrats not helpful to hikers, they really don't know or care who we are.
Rambler
So, you like whl but hate the amc? You may be brilliant, but are siding with a self center bunch who do not have hikers welfare in mind.
In 2004, I turned on a tote road, because: 1) It was know that the matc were vandelizing whl signs, so no sign meant anything. 2) The road was not on my matc map, and the road had no sign. 3) I didin't think there was much new raod building in the wilderness and I was a little optimistic about how far I may have hiked. Fortunately after a short time, the road bent a little in the wrong direction and was not heading down to a lake. This is the only time I have had to use a compass on the AT.
It should not be necessary to know about these secret puddles to navigate to a reasonable resupply point.
When I got to Baxter Park, I wanted to hike out on the IAT. They would only allow me to camp at one campsite, and it was full. The rangers said the site I wanted to hike to was to far. So, not only are Maine bureaucrats not helpful to hikers, they really don't know or care who we are.
Rambler
Ah. Well, that's life, I guess. We all have disappointments. I said MATC is not bureaucratic. I haven't said anything about Baxter Park. But Mainer's are not just one breed. We have our differences, just like White Blaze members do.
There are several reasons why you got lost. One of which might have been White House Landing. "My way, or no way," is not always a wise choice.
Weary
camp mom
04-30-2010, 19:50
I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."
I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.
I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.
But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.
Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.
Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.
I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.
Weary
so what do we have to do after all these years where all sides know our position ,get down on our knees and request forgiveness and please ,please grant us the holy grail in the form of an approved sign? our first step was the welcome meeting with the PRESIDENT of the matc in 99 when we re-opened to hikers after 50 years and said an approved sign was forthcoming....not.feathers were ruffled and have yet to be smoothed.we just want to be left alone to do what we do best and that is to meet the hikers needs as best we can and live our life without this bull,tho i must admit this has been a bit FUN!clearing the air and hearing from our fans has made this more than worthwhile.Remember[not to sound like a promotion]we are here for the hikers not the beaurocrats who dont get the whole picture!!
Skidsteer
04-30-2010, 19:55
I didn't say Linda raised the issue before. We've been discussing the issue ad nauseum for many years. As Rick Ste. Croix reported a half decade ago in the MAINEtainer, "The Whitehouse Camps owner continues to put up business cards and signs at the junction of the A .T.
and the Mahar landing side trail. This matter was referred to National Park Service Ranger Todd Remelay by the Maine A.T. Club Executive Committee."
I merely suggested that opening the issue again as their camp starts a new hiking season is certainly an opportune way to drum up new awareness of Linda and Bill's business.
I'm not claiming that was why she reopened the debate. Because I have no way of reading her mind. I was just suggesting the obvious. A wise business without a sign needs to promote itself, and, perhaps inadvertently, Linda may have done so by posting links to her blog on White Blaze, explaining her longtime frustrations with MATC. We all know that some actions have unexpected consequences.
But just as I am refraining from linking the new discussion to the private benefit of WHL, let me suggest that those who seem to see an attempt by MATC to give some advantage to AMC, need also to avoid unsupported supposition.
Though we share quite a few members, the two clubs have totally different roles in the trail life of Maine. MATC is focused on doing what is best for the Appalachian trail. Our single activity is maintenance of the trail. AMC is largely a social club, albeit, with a small trail maintenance and scientific bent. As a result there have many disputes between the two groups over the decades -- including the decision decades ago by the Portland Chapter, AMC, to change it's name to the Maine Chapter, AMC, resulting forever more in a confusion in identity between the two totally independent clubs.
Some of us would have been happy to turn down AMC's request for a new side trail and sign to Little Lyford Pond camps. But AMC did its homework and approval as a result became the right thing to do. We are still awaiting a request from White House Landing.
I'm not suggesting approval would be automatic. Years of violations can't help but influence such decisions. But an application is certainly a first step.
Weary
Years of violations???
All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.
Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.
Just sayin'.
warraghiyagey
04-30-2010, 20:01
Years of violations???
All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.
Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.
Just sayin'.
:sun:sunWell said Skids. . . I've been through 4 years running and the only sign is one that appears to be a decades old wood AT style sign that says Mahar Landing. . . if the AMC or MATC is taking down signs pointing to White House Landing they are going well off trail to do so. . .
Hikerhead
04-30-2010, 20:05
All hikers carry a sign for whl and nail it to a tree when you go past.
warraghiyagey
04-30-2010, 20:06
all hikers carry a sign for whl and nail it to a tree when you go past.
:d:d:d . . . .
warraghiyagey
04-30-2010, 20:06
Will do . . . :sun
fascinated
04-30-2010, 20:17
Years of violations???
All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.
Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.
Just sayin'.
:sun:sunWell said Skids. . . I've been through 4 years running and the only sign is one that appears to be a decades old wood AT style sign that says Mahar Landing. . . if the AMC or MATC is taking down signs pointing to White House Landing they are going well off trail to do so. . .
Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.
It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 20:32
Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.
It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.
Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!!
Skidsteer
04-30-2010, 20:39
Well said? What part of the fact that MATC doesn't approve side trails don't you two (and others here) understand???? That is the responsibility of the NPS. It's been said repeatedly, and ignored here repeatedly by otherwise intelligent people. It's quite simple. AMC followed NPS protocol. WHL didn't. And WHL and some here seem to be going out of their way to pick a fight with MATC & Weary.
It's OK if you don't like AMC, but don't let that blind you to the facts. If WHL really wants to resolve the issue, they will file the appropriate paperwork with the NPS. But they clearly don't seem interested in doing that. I haven't a lick of patience for a business that spends their time and energy attacking the folks that make the trail possible. Or for hikers who put other hikers or businesses above the trail.
Weary has already said that he can't remember an instance that the NPS didn't take MATC's recommendation in a matter.
Try to keep up.
fascinated
04-30-2010, 20:41
Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!!
Signs for commercial businesses are not allowed on the corridor. If you want an MATC sign on the trail indicating a side trail (to the lake and then your business) you need to fill out paperwork with the NPS. Since the logging road only leads to your business, your application might be declined. But I don't know that to be true.
In the absence of filling out paperwork with the NPS, your best hope is word of mouth and that more AT hikers will learn how to find your place the old fashioned way. By themselves with the aid of a map and compass or GPS.
In the meantime, you are no different than any thru-hiker. You ain't special, and you don't deserve special treatment.
fascinated
04-30-2010, 20:42
Weary has already said that he can't remember an instance that the NPS didn't take MATC's recommendation in a matter.
Try to keep up.
That doesn't eliminate the need to file the paperwork. Smartass.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 20:45
[QUOTE=camp mom;1007070]Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.We were on our own from day one.We still are,and we will continue to take care of the people who mean the most to us......HIKERS!!!!![/QUO i really want to know why weary won't respond to our questions to him,i find that to be strange .i do not trust someone that does not look you in the eye when they speak,or not speak directly to you at all. think about it, as i said before speak to me weary.not everyone else's response.
camp mom
04-30-2010, 20:53
Signs for commercial businesses are not allowed on the corridor. If you want an MATC sign on the trail indicating a side trail (to the lake and then your business) you need to fill out paperwork with the NPS. Since the logging road only leads to your business, your application might be declined. But I don't know that to be true.
In the absence of filling out paperwork with the NPS, your best hope is word of mouth and that more AT hikers will learn how to find your place the old fashioned way. By themselves with the aid of a map and compass or GPS.
In the meantime, you are no different than any thru-hiker. You ain't special, and you don't deserve special treatment.
we do not want special treatment,we are tired of there lies ,see i am beating my head against a wall here. some people just don't get it. hello why haven't someone hiked in to see us or call,just like weary won't respond to us here. thats the issue.lack of comunication on there part.
Skidsteer
04-30-2010, 20:56
Smartass.
See? We agree on something already. :D
camp mom
04-30-2010, 20:57
That doesn't eliminate the need to file the paperwork. Smartass.
have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.
fascinated
04-30-2010, 21:02
have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.
You are asking for special treatment. No one owes you a visit or should send you a form. You need to do that yourself. But I will provide a link for you to contact the NPS offices in Harpers Ferry. No charge. ;)
http://www.nps.gov/appa/
Good luck. Seriously. I mean it.
fascinated
04-30-2010, 21:06
Camp Mom, when you contact the NPS, tell them you want to apply for an official side trail connecting to the AT in Maine.
Years of violations???
All I've seen and read seems to boil down to "he said, she said" with no real evidence on either side.
Yet, AMC has marked side trails to their camps with MATC's blessing and WHL does not. It reeks of favortism and elitism and is damaging MATC's stated goals to protect the trail corridor because a whole bunch of us vote with our pocketbooks.
Just sayin'.
Well I've heard a half dozen reports from trail volunteers and maintainers about violations by the business. No one ever told me they weren't true, until Linda reopened the discussion as the new hiking season gets underway.
The reports of violations ended when MATC complained to the a National Park Ranger and he showed up and talked to the proprietors. I wonder why?
Weary
Yes ,and thank you and all the others who give tirelessly to the trail. Just do not defend trying to bully WHL They are providing a service that to many here like,want, and need.I think a little cooperation in the beginning would have prevented this whole situation.Please cooperate in the future and give some consideration to their needs to make some signage possible like a dozen other clubs do and not hide behind some glib phrase as wilderness when most everyone knows this to not be the case. And again thanks for all the trail work
Yes ,and thank you and all the others who give tirelessly to the trail. Just do not defend trying to bully WHL ....
Hmm. I wonder why I feel a bit bullied by this thread.
have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.
You are asking for special treatment. No one owes you a visit or should send you a form. You need to do that yourself.
I don't really want to get into the middle of this, and I do respect WHL for what it does and have only heard good things from my friends who have visited there. However, I have to agree with Fascinated on this point. It's not their responsibility to send you the form to fill out, it's yours.
Good luck. Seriously. I mean it.
And I agree with this point whole heartedly. It really sounds like you run a great place for hikers, so I hope that you fill out the needed paperwork and the process goes smoothly for you. :sun
Yes ,and thank you and all the others who give tirelessly to the trail. Just do not defend trying to bully WHL ....
Hmm. I wonder why I feel a bit bullied by this thread.:)
Skidsteer
04-30-2010, 21:45
Hmm. I wonder why I feel a bit bullied by this thread.
Hmm. I wonder why I feel a bit bullied by this thread.:)
Because you're reading all the posts twice? :)
fiddlehead
04-30-2010, 21:48
Wow! I need to get my 2 cents in here.
Unfortunately, I've never been to this camp in question (WH landing)
I tend to hike the trails for the wilderness experience when i can find it.
I would like to say, I don't like business signs on the trail advertising business catering to hikers.
I also don't like the hut system in the whites that is run by the govt. or their caretaker,the AMC.
I don't see much difference between the two.
IF i had to make a choice between letting the govt. run the hostels, hotels, camps, whatever you want to call them, and private businesses, I would opt for private businesses WITH some restraints.
First of all, not in wilderness areas. (I understand the 100 mile wilderness is far from a wilderness area), so that point is perhaps moot in this circumstance.
I can only begin to imagine what the trail would look like if anyone that owned land near the trail could put up a sign advertising their business. Perhaps many of us would not hike the AT if that were the case.
I think the best compromise at this time is to let the WH camp place find other ways of advertising their business. I remember in the old days, folks that had nearby businesses would sometimes hike into shelters and write directions to their business in the registers. Most everyone read the registers so the information got out to the people who wanted or needed it.
Of course, I haven't (yet) tried the burger. Perhaps I would be the first one arguing for a billboard.
I do believe that we need more people like Weary who spend big parts of their life trying to keep it wild. Sometimes I wish he would compromise a bit more, but he is good for the trail.
In the meantime, you are no different than any thru-hiker. You ain't special, and you don't deserve special treatment.
I know we ain't supposed to feed trolls, but I can't help myself.
:welcome thanks for putting up a post evern more dumberer than any of mine.
white_russian
04-30-2010, 22:23
hello why haven't someone hiked in to see us or call,just like weary won't respond to us here. thats the issue.lack of comunication on there part.
Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.
no maintaineers has never been in to see us,no rick st .croix,
i don't like it either,never wanted to do this, but when you have someone bad mouthing you for 10 years and haven't even come in to meet us,
Paperwork???? nobody ever mentioned to us we had to fill out a form for a sign.nobody came to us with anything.
have them send me the paper work and we would gladly sign it.but you know what bet they don't.
Maybe it is time to change your paradigm. Maybe if you stopped complaining about people not doing things for you and you took some initiative people might be interested in working with you. How about you go and meet these people where they are instead of wanting them to come to you. I mean you are the one wanting something, but you want everyone to hold your hand through it all like a child.