PDA

View Full Version : Whistleblower at AMC



fadeleaf
08-25-2012, 17:51
Was randomly browsing info about the Huts and saw this:

"Overall the AMC system seems pretty stellar. However, I worked at this hut about 7 or 8 years ago. As many may know, much of the AMC experience for 'croo' is based on old traditions, in the vein of the Ivy League. One tradition, apparantly unique to this hut, was to pocket the lodging fee of any hiker who paid cash; often from a tired and sometimes sick person who could not make it back down the mountain. Towards the end of the summer, the croo had well over 1K in cash to blow on drinks and dinner, myself included, during two 'croo days' which are spent together at the base; whatever happened to the remainder, I don't know. After the end of the summer, I followed up with a phone call and was told they were changing things. I sure hope they were right. I regret to be a whistleblower at such a late date, however we all know old traditions die hard, and I'm sure the AMC institution can handle it."

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g46170-d661788-Reviews-Lakes_of_the_Clouds_Hut-Mount_Washington_New_Hampshire.html

Thoughts?
Or is this type of thing old news?

Spirit Walker
08-25-2012, 22:05
Not surprising really. We paid full price, in cash, for a spot on the dining room floor at one of the huts. The temptation to pocket that money would be huge.

fredmugs
08-26-2012, 08:05
If it cost nearly $100 a night to stay there and you only pocketed over $1,000 for an entire summer you weren't very good at it. Sounds fishy.

yellowsirocco
08-26-2012, 08:25
If it cost nearly $100 a night to stay there and you only pocketed over $1,000 for an entire summer you weren't very good at it. Sounds fishy.
Or maybe they were really good at it. If you pocket every single cash transaction things are going to look fishy. This would be like one a week pocketed and that is few enough to kep the managers from asking questions.

Papa D
08-26-2012, 08:33
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. I just hiked the Whites from VT 4 to Pinkham Notch last month and saw no need whatsoever to stay in the huts - - I did pay $10 to stay in the Dungeon of the Lake of the Clouds Hut but certainly not a full fare - the rest was LNT stealth camping or $8 tent platforms, which is sensible.
Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods. They were more like people you see at a ski resort - totally dependent on artificial things constructed on a mountain (like ski lifts and warming huts) - - they sipped their mugs of hot chocolate and ate from their monster bags of gorp and had this look on their face like "wow, we're really roughing-it" - it seemed so hokey from the perspective of someone who actually walks long distances and gets things done on their own. I really don't care if someone takes these people's money - like PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."

10-K
08-26-2012, 08:37
It could also be not true. If this was going on you'd think you'd hear more than 1 report from someone years later.

Maddog
08-26-2012, 09:03
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. I just hiked the Whites from VT 4 to Pinkham Notch last month and saw no need whatsoever to stay in the huts - - I did pay $10 to stay in the Dungeon of the Lake of the Clouds Hut but certainly not a full fare - the rest was LNT stealth camping or $8 tent platforms, which is sensible.
Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods. They were more like people you see at a ski resort - totally dependent on artificial things constructed on a mountain (like ski lifts and warming huts) - - they sipped their mugs of hot chocolate and ate from their monster bags of gorp and had this look on their face like "wow, we're really roughing-it" - it seemed so hokey from the perspective of someone who actually walks long distances and gets things done on their own. I really don't care if someone takes these people's money - like PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."
+1 Maddog:D

Wise Old Owl
08-26-2012, 09:06
Papa D they lack your vision.

hikerboy57
08-26-2012, 09:11
Lakes ,zealand falls,lonesome lake attract the most "tourists. they're just the most accessible.

Rain Man
08-26-2012, 10:46
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. ... Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods.

Well, I've surely been put in my place. Just returned yesterday from almost two weeks of hiking the AT in New Hampshire, including staying as a paying guest in Galehead Hut and Lakes of the Clouds Hut, plus getting breakfast at Mizpah Spring Hut and lunch at Lonesome Lake and Zealand Falls Huts.

Other nights I stayed in the woods, on porches, in a motel, and such.

Just count me among the clueless about "actual" hiking and "actual" life in the woods.

Rain Man

.

Tom Murphy
08-26-2012, 10:49
I don't see how this reflects poorly on the AMC. Every organization has a few bad apples.

Tom Murphy
08-26-2012, 11:05
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. I just hiked the Whites from VT 4 to Pinkham Notch last month and saw no need whatsoever to stay in the huts - - I did pay $10 to stay in the Dungeon of the Lake of the Clouds Hut but certainly not a full fare - the rest was LNT stealth camping or $8 tent platforms, which is sensible.
Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods. They were more like people you see at a ski resort - totally dependent on artificial things constructed on a mountain (like ski lifts and warming huts) - - they sipped their mugs of hot chocolate and ate from their monster bags of gorp and had this look on their face like "wow, we're really roughing-it" - it seemed so hokey from the perspective of someone who actually walks long distances and gets things done on their own. I really don't care if someone takes these people's money - like PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."

I agree that most of the people that staying at the AMC huts consider themselves to be "roughing it". And I also agree that the demographic probably has a healthy overlap with the winter ski resort crowd.

But they are not long distance hikers or backpackers, so why judge them in that light? They are not there to hike long distance or "accomplish anything on their own". Most of them are on vacation with their families and are basically paying to stay at a hotel located above treeline. They are there for the experience of being in the mountains and the huts rates are a lot cheaper than a hotel in Conway or Lincoln. From that perspective, the huts are a good deal.

The AMC huts were based on the European model in the French / Swiss Alps. A grand walking tour with huts located approximately a day's hike apart.

My son and I progressed from dayhikes to backpacking over the course of a few summers. Some car camping trips and some hut trips were a key element of that transition. It was a lot of fun.

mudhead
08-26-2012, 11:08
Well, I've surely been put in my place. Just returned yesterday from almost two weeks of hiking the AT in New Hampshire, including staying as a paying guest in Galehead Hut and Lakes of the Clouds Hut, plus getting breakfast at Mizpah Spring Hut and lunch at Lonesome Lake and Zealand Falls Huts.

Other nights I stayed in the woods, on porches, in a motel, and such.

Just count me among the clueless about "actual" hiking and "actual" life in the woods.

Rain Man

.


With all due respect, the AMC caters to people like you. City etc. I am glad you enjoyed your time in NH. It is a nice place.

The huts have water, fine porches, and girls with wicked calves. For free...

Water Rat
08-26-2012, 11:19
Isn't the saying... Hike Your Own Hike? For my friends, who are just realizing their interest in hiking...and are working their way up to backpacking...the huts are going to be a good thing next month. It will give me a chance to spend time on the trail with friends I have not seen in a long time. My friends and I are not what anyone would call rich (we managed to find spots for $68 a night in each hut because we planned ahead), we have opted to do OUR trip this way. Sure will leave us more time to just enjoy the trail.

Here is a new take on the "rich" people who are staying in huts. Rather than treat them with disdain, you might want to embrace the fact they even have an interest in hiking. If none of the "rich" people had an interest in hiking, would we have any trails left? If Little Ritchie Rich takes an interest in hiking, don't you think daddy is going to put some money (not just toward gear) into his son's interests? Hiking...backpacking...is a dying sport. The younger generations have fewer people interested. Without money, and interest in preservation, the trails will suffer.

To each their own. If it's not your way of hiking, that is fine. Why should it bother you? They are staying in the huts, and away from your tent platforms. They are not infringing on your right to hike the way you want to hike.

Oh... Not that you know me, but I do have many, many trail miles on my boots. I do consider myself a "real" hiker. Damn proud of it. Additionally, I am also smart enough to know that not every hike has to be done the same way.

10-K
08-26-2012, 11:21
Where someone stays... does it matter?

Montana AT05
08-26-2012, 11:44
I thought the following was well known:

1. Rainman is indeed the kind of guy catered to by the AMC-like systems in New England, which is perfectly fine, just don't cross the Mississippi with that mentality please
2. The AMC hut system is a rip-off for thru hikers, work for stay included. I suspect all the "heroes" of the AMC and AMC hut dwellers (Benton, Thoreau) would be disgusted by the AMC concept
3. The AMC hut system is there to manage the sheer number of people (God help us if that particular thinking spreads south along the AT).
4. The AMC should indeed be disbanded and replaced with a Smokey's Mountain concept...shelter system, first come first serve after reserved slots taken. NO special amenities to attract...well you know...
5. If thru-hiking the Whites, stay away from the huts if possible (except to buy a snickers bar) and if you want to stay at one, quietly approach oen the the crew (croo is silly) and give him 20-40 dollars and say, can I stay inside after hours and help out as needed? They can use the cash to buy hipster glasses.
6. In the Whites, you can drive to the highest, most dangerous (OooOoo) mountain on the AT...and then sit in a cafeteria. :banana Don't get me wrong, that rocked. I ate a lot of food there at Pinkham Notch (after which I rode the lift, weeeee!)

All that said, on my thru hike, I found the AMC system ok and I stayed at Madison hut (slipped a guy some cash) and then I stayed at Carter Hut because the two people working it seemed cool and a hut dweller arrived whom I had met by chance in Vermont. Ya, the hut system seems very odd for me, I chalked it up to the sheer number of people in the area and the need to manage that, which is circular logic.

If you want to avoid privileged kids pocketing your cash, use a credit card.

kayak karl
08-26-2012, 11:58
even in a 100 day season that's only $10 a day stolen by a GROUP? that could even be done at a tent pad site. not much money at all.

Montana AT05
08-26-2012, 12:33
even in a 100 day season that's only $10 a day stolen by a GROUP? that could even be done at a tent pad site. not much money at all.

Are you saying that theft is ok, or not important, if it's just a little?

AKBOb
08-26-2012, 12:46
even in a 100 day season that's only $10 a day stolen by a GROUP? that could even be done at a tent pad site. not much money at all.

....piont being :confused:

max patch
08-26-2012, 12:47
Well, I've surely been put in my place. Just returned yesterday from almost two weeks of hiking the AT in New Hampshire, including staying as a paying guest in Galehead Hut and Lakes of the Clouds Hut, plus getting breakfast at Mizpah Spring Hut and lunch at Lonesome Lake and Zealand Falls Huts.




With all due respect, the AMC caters to people like you. City etc.



Gee, did mudhead get his name because he likes to sling mud? That comment was not necessary.

I'm a quote unquote "real hiker" since you feel the need to classify people and I've hiked through the Whites twice. On my thru I did one work for stay and spent every other nite in my tent. On my return trip with my wife (who is also a backpacker) we spent every nite in a hut. Don't feel guilty about it either. Different trip, different experiences.

kayak karl
08-26-2012, 12:58
Are you saying that theft is ok, or not important, if it's just a little?
never said it was OK. as a business owner i try to control theft. how i react will be determined by the amount stolen. is it worth cameras? is it internal or customer theft? i do use mock customers to catch the moonlighters. a $10 a day i might write off as clerical.
i think that with this amount of money missing at a hut it would be very hard and expensive to prove it. i am sure there is more graft going on daily that they should be concentrating on. the more money coming, the more it covers a multitude of sin. this is the same in any company.

mudhead
08-26-2012, 17:38
[QUOTE=max patch;1329279]Gee, did mudhead get his name because he likes to sling mud? That comment was not necessary.

Heck I was trying to be civil. People that speak well of the huts strike me as urban, professional, and generally wearing enough expensive garments to gag a maggot.

They do not cater to me. Well maybe they do. They have water, and porches, and killer babe legs.

hikerboy57
08-26-2012, 17:54
Ive stayed at the huts maybe 10 or 12 times over the years and have met many section hikers and thru hikers and others like me who simply like the convenience to explore some great trails with just a daypack.im far from rich,much prefer to tent,but i can go really light.try going up the great gully trail with full pack,youll see what i mean.if i were to thru i doubt i would stay at more than 1. they are expensive and I also understand why people live just thrhike the at inNew Hampshire feel the way they do about the AMC and the cost of the huts. but for 1 or 2 nights so I could do some really cool stuff why not yes there's plenty of theaspen crowd too. I met some movies and TV actor at lakes and that Madison I met the guy who used to sing the Shaffer jingle.

WILLIAM HAYES
08-26-2012, 18:05
right on papa D

Chaco Taco
08-26-2012, 19:13
Stayed at Ethan Pond last night. Caretaker was picking up the slack for the last guy at the site that left to go to school. Sifting compost from the privy, moving rocks for water bars. These were some bad apples and should not reflect on the hard working folks out on the trails, not just the AT.

bamboo bob
08-26-2012, 19:29
I have done the Whites three times and slept on a few floors. The huts are not for thru-hikers. You get no sleep. The whole AT is really not about thru-hikers. There are a million users and only a few thousand LD hikers. The food is over rated I think. If they pocket the cash I'm not surprised at all. I think the croo has a cruise ship mentality the way they beg for tips constantly. I would prefer it was like the Smokies too but that is not their mission. Its an Alp's hut set up. And as that they are doing what they set out to do.

Double Wide
08-26-2012, 19:31
You know, as I read this thread it just makes me sick, some of the attitudes I see. Seriously, who gives a flying eff if people stay in huts? It's like you're looking down your nose at people whose idea of an outdoor adventure is different than your own. So what--you're a *real* backpacker and they aren't. Big whoop. At least they're out there enjoying the mountains in a way that appeals to them. Isn't that the essence of 'Hike your own hike'? I mean, I hear in on here all the time, but it seems like a big disclaimer, like "Well, as long as I say 'hike your own hike' I can insult and nit-pick your way of doing things". Man, enough is enough.

I've never met Rainman or 10-K, but as a relative beginner to the sport of backpacking, they would be two of the FIRST people I'd seek out for advice. They've got more miles under their boots than most folks on here, I'd imagine, yet I never hear them sneering at other people who we share the trail with. That's right, I said 'share'. The White Mountains aren't just for thru-hikers, and to say that the huts 'cater to someone like you' not only sounds like conceit, but also a good bit of you-don't-know-what-the-hell-you're-talking-about.

Funny thing is, I read a lot of asshatted opinions and comments here on the forum, but out on the trail, running into people who are out there actually, you know, hiking, everyone is friendly and helpful and pretty much non-judgemental (except for the occasional gram-weenie I've encountered).

Maybe we should try to be just as friendly and helpful here on WB as we are out on the trail. Otherwise, this place is ruined by a few bad apples, just like the crews in the AMC huts.

rainmaker
08-26-2012, 19:45
[QUOTE=Rain Man;1329220]Well, I've surely been put in my place. Just returned yesterday from almost two weeks of hiking the AT in New Hampshire, including staying as a paying guest in Galehead Hut and Lakes of the Clouds Hut, plus getting breakfast at Mizpah Spring Hut and lunch at Lonesome Lake and Zealand Falls Huts.

Other nights I stayed in the woods, on porches, in a motel, and such.

Just count me among the clueless about "actual" hiking and "actual" life in the woods.
Rain Man

Tell 'em cousin. I went through there last year on my wat to Katahdin and stayed at Zealand Falls, Madison, and Carter. I paid full price by credit card. Why? Because it was my hike and I wanted to.
Rainmaker

adamkrz
08-26-2012, 20:04
If it's a weekday and the timing is right I stay at the huts because I saved the money and spend most other days in my tent, The food has always been good and enjoy the pleasure of the company.


I can remember a few years back when the weather took a bad turn and was lucky enough to get to a hut and ride out a huge storm, also I almost never pay full price with the deals they send to my e-mail.

T.S.Kobzol
08-26-2012, 20:05
Actually it is as far from the Alps system as it can be

The food is over rated
The prices are 3x more expensive than Huts in the Alps
In the Alps the Huts are required to keep a few spots open as they are by law not allowed to refuse a hiker if they arrive at time when it is no longer safe to hike to another hut or town.

I wish the AMC built additional shelters on the pres range similar to lodges on the LT. $5 bucks per night would get you a plank and that's it. Leave the expensive Huts for families who can afford to shell out close to $400.per night for a family of four.




I have done the Whites three times and slept on a few floors. The huts are not for thru-hikers. You get no sleep. The whole AT is really not about thru-hikers. There are a million users and only a few thousand LD hikers. The food is over rated I think. If they pocket the cash I'm not surprised at all. I think the croo has a cruise ship mentality the way they beg for tips constantly. I would prefer it was like the Smokies too but that is not their mission. Its an Alp's hut set up. And as that they are doing what they set out to do.



Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

Supreme Being
08-26-2012, 20:08
You know, as I read this thread it just makes me sick, some of the attitudes I see. Seriously, who gives a flying eff if people stay in huts? It's like you're looking down your nose at people whose idea of an outdoor adventure is different than your own. So what--you're a *real* backpacker and they aren't. Big whoop. At least they're out there enjoying the mountains in a way that appeals to them. Isn't that the essence of 'Hike your own hike'? I mean, I hear in on here all the time, but it seems like a big disclaimer, like "Well, as long as I say 'hike your own hike' I can insult and nit-pick your way of doing things". Man, enough is enough.

I've never met Rainman or 10-K, but as a relative beginner to the sport of backpacking, they would be two of the FIRST people I'd seek out for advice. They've got more miles under their boots than most folks on here, I'd imagine, yet I never hear them sneering at other people who we share the trail with. That's right, I said 'share'. The White Mountains aren't just for thru-hikers, and to say that the huts 'cater to someone like you' not only sounds like conceit, but also a good bit of you-don't-know-what-the-hell-you're-talking-about.

Funny thing is, I read a lot of asshatted opinions and comments here on the forum, but out on the trail, running into people who are out there actually, you know, hiking, everyone is friendly and helpful and pretty much non-judgemental (except for the occasional gram-weenie I've encountered).

Maybe we should try to be just as friendly and helpful here on WB as we are out on the trail. Otherwise, this place is ruined by a few bad apples, just like the crews in the AMC huts.

Really glad you had the courage to address this. I can't be the only one who has noticed that there seems to be a sort of "reverse discrimination" going on here at WB. I can't begin to count the posts who have put down hikers with "nice" clothes or equipment or made some other snide remark. I believe that most hikers here are middle class and many are hikers who work 6 months out of the year in order to fund their hikes the rest of the year. They don't have much, but they don't seem to need much. There are very few "independently wealthy" hikers on WB. And I suspect that those who are have worked pretty hard for it.

Everyone here loves to hike and that should be the common thread without anyone putting down others for staying in huts or the kind of equipment they have or the clothes they wear or the shoes on their feet. It shouldn't matter about the weight of your pack or what's in that pack. And God love ya if you are hauling a big, heavy pack because you need our sympathy more than most.

For a group that preaches, "HIKE YOUR OWN HIKE" - maybe it would be wise to practice this motto on this site. There are a lot of hikers here with a lot of miles under their belt and obviously they are doing just fine.

peakbagger
08-26-2012, 20:17
I have a 1-1/2 inch thick copy of the Environmental Impact Statement that AMC was forced to develop when the huts were up for relicensing. They had to look at three options, No huts, limited caretaker services and what they have now. Many of the huts are in restricted use areas and the option of setting up campsites in place of the huts would not be allowed. The USFS conclusion was that the hut system as it exists today is the best of the worst options for these high use areas. The options for shelters in addition to huts is very limited, if you look carefully at USFS maps, they got quite creative in making jogs in wilderness area boundaries. Bascially the odds of anything new being built is slim to none due to the massive effort that would be required to get them permitted. THe AMC and USFS has basically resorted to fixing what is there and having a caretaker in place at the high use sites to try to minimize the impact whihc mostly consists of composting waste from the outhouse.

Realistically AMC manages the huts for a specific clientel who have been going there for years and likes the value they recieve, unfortunately thru hikers arent their clientel so they manage them as best as they can.

Marta
08-26-2012, 20:22
To put the price of the AMC huts in perspective... There are a couple of huts in Glacier National Park. I toyed with the idea of staying in one. $90 per night AND you have to pack in your own food and WATER. Yikes!

hikerboy57
08-26-2012, 20:27
To put the price of the AMC huts in perspective... There are a couple of huts in Glacier National Park. I toyed with the idea of staying in one. $90 per night AND you have to pack in your own food and WATER. Yikes!
apparently the only place where the huts are worthwhile is in the Alps.

greenmtnboy
08-26-2012, 20:31
Sounds like an audit is well overdue! Any financial fraud is against the law and should be turned over to the relevant authorities. If the hut system hand picks attractive "well-adjusted" college students who are going to $40K a year colleges the rest of the year, something is not right!

Chaco Taco
08-26-2012, 20:43
Sounds like an audit is well overdue! Any financial fraud is against the law and should be turned over to the relevant authorities. If the hut system hand picks attractive "well-adjusted" college students who are going to $40K a year colleges the rest of the year, something is not right! They arent hand picking anyone. They are taking whoever signs up. The numbers are way down for caretakers and croo members as in recent years. Its a thankless job dealing with everyday BS from people that dont know how to treat people. Most of the time, Im sure its fine. The caretakers we talk to always have a great attitude. Every once in awhile, some hiker comes along a screws it up for others and complains and is disrespectful when they dont get there way.

Duramax22
08-26-2012, 20:50
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. I just hiked the Whites from VT 4 to Pinkham Notch last month and saw no need whatsoever to stay in the huts - - I did pay $10 to stay in the Dungeon of the Lake of the Clouds Hut but certainly not a full fare - the rest was LNT stealth camping or $8 tent platforms, which is sensible.
Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods. They were more like people you see at a ski resort - totally dependent on artificial things constructed on a mountain (like ski lifts and warming huts) - - they sipped their mugs of hot chocolate and ate from their monster bags of gorp and had this look on their face like "wow, we're really roughing-it" - it seemed so hokey from the perspective of someone who actually walks long distances and gets things done on their own. I really don't care if someone takes these people's money - like PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."

So true. I felt the same way back in July after a 25mile hike we spent our last night on mt leconte in the shelter and we were known as the the "other people" to the folks in the lodge. After talking to them I quickly learned they were all from the big city and thought they were living like Davy Crockett out here in the "jungle" lol. One of the guys in the shelter was playing a harmonica and the folks from the lodge came over and were starring at us like we were animals at the zoo. They never did come up to the shelter, just kept there distance and watched. Was actually pretty funny.

hikerboy57
08-26-2012, 21:08
didn't know the AMC ran a lodge in mt leconte.

tdoczi
08-26-2012, 22:49
didn't know the AMC ran a lodge in mt leconte.


they dont. just as the amc doesnt run phanton ranch at the grand canyon, the chalets in glacier or the high camps in yosemite. amc doesnt have the market on that sort of thing cornered. same concept though.

Marta
08-26-2012, 22:55
apparently the only place where the huts are worthwhile is in the Alps.

We stayed in huts when we hiked in Finnish Lapland a couple of years ago. Ten euros a night for the reserved side of the huts. Free on the other side. Talk about swanky--I could live forever in one of these huts. Cute as can be. Compared to other huts in Finland, we were told these were "primitive" because you have to bring your own food. But for ten euros you get a bed, blankets, and pillow, kitchen with propane stove and all cooking and eating utensils, Jotul stove and woodshed full of firewood, stainless steel water pail and dipper, the nicest privies I have ever seen... Unbelievable. Especially since the weather can be pretty foul, and the terrain is exceedingly rocky.

tdoczi
08-26-2012, 22:57
To put the price of the AMC huts in perspective... There are a couple of huts in Glacier National Park. I toyed with the idea of staying in one. $90 per night AND you have to pack in your own food and WATER. Yikes!


its also not nearly as nice of a building, though i suppose more historic. i dont think id stay again as many glacier to swiftcurrent then down the highline to the road is totally a doable day hike, and theres nothing great to be seen in the immediate vicinity by turning north on the CDT.

sperry chalet, on the other hand, you should go for. its more expensive but a lot nicer and hiking to sperry glacier and back down in a day would be quite a feat, though i saw people at least trying it. or you could tent near either site.

Chaco Taco
08-27-2012, 06:10
So true. I felt the same way back in July after a 25mile hike we spent our last night on mt leconte in the shelter and we were known as the the "other people" to the folks in the lodge. After talking to them I quickly learned they were all from the big city and thought they were living like Davy Crockett out here in the "jungle" lol. One of the guys in the shelter was playing a harmonica and the folks from the lodge came over and were starring at us like we were animals at the zoo. They never did come up to the shelter, just kept there distance and watched. Was actually pretty funny.

No offense meant towards you but maybe at 22 they thought you guys were some partying college kids. Happens alot at that shelter. Why you gotta be so quick to judge people and seem know what they were thinking? It works both ways. That shelter is notorious for being rowdy and maybe you were messing with their wilderness experience. Another reason, stay out of the shelters. I know its the Smokies and all, but there are def places to camp. That particular shelter is long overdue to be torn down. Just because people with money choose to use it when they go hiking, maybe we shouldnt judge them so much. I dont give 2 craps if you choose to stay in a lodge or shelter. That is your business. Maybe with this stand offish attitude thinking you are better than these people just because you are sleeping in a shelter and being loud, people did look at you like you were animals. Just sayin, maybe its not just them.

Lone Wolf
08-27-2012, 06:47
people that stay in shelters ain't very outdoorsy. this includes most thru-hikers

Chaco Taco
08-27-2012, 07:06
people that stay in shelters ain't very outdoorsy. this includes most thru-hikers

shelter dependency is no bueno

Marta
08-27-2012, 09:17
its also not nearly as nice of a building, though i suppose more historic. i dont think id stay again as many glacier to swiftcurrent then down the highline to the road is totally a doable day hike, and theres nothing great to be seen in the immediate vicinity by turning north on the CDT.

sperry chalet, on the other hand, you should go for. its more expensive but a lot nicer and hiking to sperry glacier and back down in a day would be quite a feat, though i saw people at least trying it. or you could tent near either site.

Thanks for the recommendations. I won't make it there this year--next weekend is the end of the season. The price is $195/night, which is not to be sneezed at. For the second person in the room it's $130. But at least you don't have to pack in your own water... :-)

Tom Murphy
08-27-2012, 10:45
1. Rainman is indeed the kind of guy catered to by the AMC-like systems in New England, which is perfectly fine, just don't cross the Mississippi with that mentality please

There are plenty of cross country ski lodges out west that provide the same type of service.


2. The AMC hut system is a rip-off for thru hikers, work for stay included. I suspect all the "heroes" of the AMC and AMC hut dwellers (Benton, Thoreau) would be disgusted by the AMC concept


Yes, the huts are intended for the thru-hikers and it is a poor value for them since they have their food and shlter with them already. Benton and Thoreau embraced people enjoying nature which is what the hut try to promote. I do not think they would be disgusted the AMC concept.


4. The AMC should indeed be disbanded and replaced with a Smokey's Mountain concept...shelter system, first come first serve after reserved slots taken. NO special amenities to attract...well you know...


I agree that there is a bit of the "if you build it, they will come" going on with the huts. But the alternate would be no shelters at all. Shelters above treeline in the Whites would be a disaster.


6. In the Whites, you can drive to the highest, most dangerous (OooOoo) mountain on the AT...and then sit in a cafeteria. :banana Don't get me wrong, that rocked. I ate a lot of food there at Pinkham Notch (after which I rode the lift, weeeee!)

Most deaths on Washington today are from heart attacks. There was just another one a week ago in Tuckerman below Lion's Head.

The dangers is more from people underestimating the sudden weather changes. About four years ago, three Canadian teenagers hiked up Huntington in shorts and tee-shirts in the summer and got caught in a rain storm. They ended up breaking into the gift store [tip-top house] to get clothing. One of the boys has permanent brain damage due to hypothermia.

Tom Murphy
08-27-2012, 10:55
Actually it is as far from the Alps system as it can be
The food is over rated
The prices are 3x more expensive than Huts in the Alps
In the Alps the Huts are required to keep a few spots open as they are by law not allowed to refuse a hiker if they arrive at time when it is no longer safe to hike to another hut or town.


The model is the Alps system in the sense that you have a series of huts each a day's hike apart.

More expensive, yes.
More difficult reservation system and no open spots, yes.

The AMC have priced the huts beyond what most people can avoid. The same thing is true of the Red Sox and the Patriots. That they are alllowed to do that on Public Land is the difficult part to accept but the common repy to that argument is that the huts are the cash cow for the rest of the "good works".

I like going into the Highland Center all stinky from a few nights out and doing a pack explosion in the fireplace room next to the front desk. Good times.

Mags
08-27-2012, 11:18
people that stay in shelters ain't very outdoorsy. this includes most thru-hikers


http://www.pmags.com/gallery2/d/19561-2/aat.jpg?g2_GALLERYSID=761b96c7cfb86bd4d037ec289cd1 ac10

Backpackers who follow white rectangles for 6 mos without knowing how to read map, walk on a well defined trail that can be as much as five miles from a road and have ample guidebooks, logistic support and services are obviously outdoor experts


:)

Lone Wolf
08-27-2012, 11:21
far from it.........

10-K
08-27-2012, 11:27
http://www.pmags.com/gallery2/d/19561-2/aat.jpg?g2_GALLERYSID=761b96c7cfb86bd4d037ec289cd1 ac10

Backpackers who follow white rectangles for 6 mos without knowing how to read map, walk on a well defined trail that can be as much as five miles from a road and have ample guidebooks, logistic support and services are obviously outdoor experts


:)

I think about that all the time when I'm hiking with someone and they say some variation of, "I haven't seen a blaze in a while, do you think we're still on the trail?"

My first thought is, "What other well maintained trail, complete with sawed blowdowns and water breaks do you think is around here?"

(obviously doesn't apply everywhere but it does down here for the most part...)

Tom Murphy
08-27-2012, 12:01
My first thought is, "What other well maintained trail, complete with sawed blowdowns and water breaks do you think is around here?"

Of course, it also has to do with gaining some experience.

I have hiked a few neglected trails in New England where finding a sawed branch, or even better a footprint, has been a huge relief. Once you have done a few of those the AT looks like a highway.

10-K
08-27-2012, 12:09
Of course, it also has to do with gaining some experience.

I have hiked a few neglected trails in New England where finding a sawed branch, or even better a footprint, has been a huge relief. Once you have done a few of those the AT looks like a highway.

Righto... I was referring mainly to AT hikers. Generally speaking, the AT is going to be the best maintained trail of any distance you encounter if you're hiking the AT.

I'm thinking more along the lines of say... hiking from Erwin to Hot Springs or Erwin to Damascus where there really are no other trails to speak of that are maintained like the AT. I never wonder if I'm on the AT in these areas if I don't see a blaze because..... what other trail could I possibly be on?

tdoczi
08-27-2012, 12:14
http://www.pmags.com/gallery2/d/19561-2/aat.jpg?g2_GALLERYSID=761b96c7cfb86bd4d037ec289cd1 ac10

Backpackers who follow white rectangles for 6 mos without knowing how to read map, walk on a well defined trail that can be as much as five miles from a road and have ample guidebooks, logistic support and services are obviously outdoor experts


:)

i was thinking the exact same thing.

coheterojo
08-27-2012, 16:27
Aw jeez you guys. I stayed at huts both years, did work for stay, ate the free food, slept on the dining room tables and never had a single problem. Some of the food was better than some of the other food, some of the crus were nicer than others but, all in all, my stays were enjoyable, restful, well-located and, best of all, free. Where's the horribleness in that?

10-K
08-27-2012, 17:52
I've said this in many threads but I did work for stay at every hut I stayed at hiking through the Whites and am grateful I could. Did an hour or so of work for all the food I could eat and a roof to sleep under.

What's not to like about it? I weighed more in Gorham than I did in Glencliff.....

I personally don't see why sleeping on a tent platform or somewhere else has more virtue - it's just less comfortable.

Chaco Taco
08-27-2012, 17:58
Of course, it also has to do with gaining some experience.

I have hiked a few neglected trails in New England where finding a sawed branch, or even better a footprint, has been a huge relief. Once you have done a few of those the AT looks like a highway.

Yes sir, sometimes just seeing that someone else has been on the trail makes me a little more comfortable that I am actually still on the trail

Digger'02
08-28-2012, 09:24
Was randomly browsing info about the Huts and saw this:

"Overall the AMC system seems pretty stellar. However, I worked at this hut about 7 or 8 years ago. As many may know, much of the AMC experience for 'croo' is based on old traditions, in the vein of the Ivy League. One tradition, apparantly unique to this hut, was to pocket the lodging fee of any hiker who paid cash; often from a tired and sometimes sick person who could not make it back down the mountain. Towards the end of the summer, the croo had well over 1K in cash to blow on drinks and dinner, myself included, during two 'croo days' which are spent together at the base; whatever happened to the remainder, I don't know. After the end of the summer, I followed up with a phone call and was told they were changing things. I sure hope they were right. I regret to be a whistleblower at such a late date, however we all know old traditions die hard, and I'm sure the AMC institution can handle it."

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g46170-d661788-Reviews-Lakes_of_the_Clouds_Hut-Mount_Washington_New_Hampshire.html

Thoughts?
Or is this type of thing old news?

I also worked at the huts and we NEVER did anything like this although we did accumulate about $1,000 in communal tips by splitting the tips to the house 7 ways instead of 6 (the actual number of employees). That 7th jar was for croo night which was awesome and well deserved.

One bad Apple perhaps, in my experience the croos were honest and hard working. I've never understood the problems with the AMC...just dont stay at the huts, its not that hard.

Driver8
08-28-2012, 12:01
Righto... I was referring mainly to AT hikers. Generally speaking, the AT is going to be the best maintained trail of any distance you encounter if you're hiking the AT.

Of course, that's not true in the White Mountains, where, most likely more than anywhere else along the A.T. corridor, there is a spider web of great, well-maintained trails intersecting with the A.T. The Whites are billed as notoriously confusing. Maps. Maps. Maps. Compass, maybe, too.

No doubt Shenandoah and the Smokies have lots of trails, too, but I doubt to the extent of the Whites network. Maps! Heck, but White Mountain Guide is a great read. (Just don't tell anyone who publishes it. Might upset a few of them. ...)

10-K
08-28-2012, 12:07
I also worked at the huts and we NEVER did anything like this although we did accumulate about $1,000 in communal tips by splitting the tips to the house 7 ways instead of 6 (the actual number of employees). That 7th jar was for croo night which was awesome and well deserved.

One bad Apple perhaps, in my experience the croos were honest and hard working. I've never understood the problems with the AMC...just dont stay at the huts, its not that hard.

I say again.... 1 report, several years after the fact..... It sounds suspect to me.

Were that a standard practice, or even relatively rare you'd hear more about it than that.

Anybody could have made that up.

T.S.Kobzol
08-29-2012, 23:53
Even if. What is the big deal? The Huts are almost always full so the non-profit corp makes their money. The few walkins pocketed as cash aren't going to hurt anyone. Let the caretakers enjoy some extra change.




I say again.... 1 report, several years after the fact..... It sounds suspect to me.

Were that a standard practice, or even relatively rare you'd hear more about it than that.

Anybody could have made that up.



Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

10-K
08-30-2012, 05:47
Even if. What is the big deal? The Huts are almost always full so the non-profit corp makes their money. The few walkins pocketed as cash aren't going to hurt anyone. Let the caretakers enjoy some extra change.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2


Well, I guess the big deal is that it's dishonest and stealing from your employer.

I'm not the ethics police or anything but taking money like that isn't something I'd teach one of my kids.

T.S.Kobzol
08-30-2012, 07:42
I agree with you on that. :-)



Well, I guess the big deal is that it's dishonest and stealing from your employer.

I'm not the ethics police or anything but taking money like that isn't something I'd teach one of my kids.



Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

Starchild
09-01-2012, 21:36
I can't imagine why anyone would pay to stay in a Hut. I just hiked the Whites from VT 4 to Pinkham Notch last month and saw no need whatsoever to stay in the huts - - I did pay $10 to stay in the Dungeon of the Lake of the Clouds Hut but certainly not a full fare - the rest was LNT stealth camping or $8 tent platforms, which is sensible.
Putting this as respectably as possible, to me, it seemed like the Hut guests were mostly clueless about actual hiking and about actual life in the woods. They were more like people you see at a ski resort - totally dependent on artificial things constructed on a mountain (like ski lifts and warming huts) - - they sipped their mugs of hot chocolate and ate from their monster bags of gorp and had this look on their face like "wow, we're really roughing-it" - it seemed so hokey from the perspective of someone who actually walks long distances and gets things done on their own. I really don't care if someone takes these people's money - like PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."

If that's how you feel I'd say you are the one who is really missing out. I have done my share, and excited about much more to come, of roughing it, but the huts are something much different then you describe to me. Maybe overpriced, but they do offer something very unique, a very primitive level of 'luxury'. Just having the structure, bed, and food as well as the ability to carry so much less weight on what would be a harsh backpack area, is very much appreciated.

Perhaps some consider the hut to hut traverse as roughing it, but for me it was hiking luxury a rare indulgence.