View Full Version : Thru hikers at Daicey Pond
Should thru hikers have a shelter reserved for them at the edge of Daicey Pond, with a view of Katahdin, or should they be relegated to a shelter back in the trees, as is currently true? Or, another way to put it, should foot travel into the park be rewarded with a prime shelter location, or should car travel into the park take precedence?
well i think that one should realize that people who rent the cabins have earned it and well no, thru hikers should make reservations just like the normal joe ,to them in the "suvs"it could be their hike the whole summer in one week If i have learned one thing thru the yrs is most of those suv people only dream of a thru hike or a long distance hike:dance ky
Why should they get preferential treatment? If they want the lakeside cabin, shouldn't they just reserve it in advance like everyone else has to?
dougmeredith
06-23-2005, 10:19
should foot travel into the park be rewarded with a prime shelter location, or should car travel into the park take precedence? I don't think you are portraying this accurately. Neither mode of travel is given precedence. Those who choose to pay are rewarded with the better location.
Doug
Alligator
06-23-2005, 10:34
Don't they already get some preferential treatment? Do they have to reserve the shelter that is there? I mean, can they just walk right in and stay at the shelter? Isn't it kind of tough for "regular" folks to even get reservations? Is it real far to the pond from the shelter? Wasn't the park donated to the folks of Maine, I don't remember Baxter SP being donated explicitly for the AT?
Just a few questions, while I've been to the park several times, I never stayed at Daicey Pond.
Where's the shelter at, I have this map
http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/camping/daicey_pond.html?
Footslogger
06-23-2005, 11:02
Should thru hikers have a shelter reserved for them at the edge of Daicey Pond, with a view of Katahdin, or should they be relegated to a shelter back in the trees, as is currently true? Or, another way to put it, should foot travel into the park be rewarded with a prime shelter location, or should car travel into the park take precedence?=====================================
Maybe ...but it was thru-hiker's behavior that triggered the re-routing of the AT around Daicy, as I understand it. In 2001 a bunch of thrus camped out at Daicy the night before they summited Katahdin. They got pretty loaded, loud and misappropriated a lot of firewood from other campers/campsites.
I got there around noon the next day to register for my leanto at Katahdin Stream and the Rangers gave me the lowdown. We had a great lunch along side the pond in full view of Katahdin. But, by the time I got home from that hike I learned that the trail was being detoured around Daicy. I'm guessing that the re-route was already in the works when this happened but it kinda drove nails in the coffin.
'Slogger
TJ aka Teej
06-23-2005, 13:04
There were many nails pounded into the coffin that was AT shelters at Daicey. The Daicey Rangers spent too much time registering hikers, refereeing debates about who desevered a spot, patroling for stealth campers, policing drinking, dogs, pot smoking, skinny dipping, and litterng. The Director fielded too many complaints from the cabin campers about thru-hikers taking over the library by hanging laundry inside, and monopolizing the wood stove, dock, and porch. Thru-hikers themselves didn't help much by bootlegging Katahdin during and after a blizzard that closed the Park, unfortunately just a few days after the Director was mailed a summit photo of finishing thrus - complete with a dog, moons, and middle fingers. Without notifying the ATC or MATC the Park rerouted the AT away from the campground through a bog and parking lot, dismantled the two shelters, built the Birches up by Katahdin Stream, changed the rules allowing stays to read 'long distance' instead of 'thru-hiker', and cut a new trail from the Park boundary straight to the new camping area. I'd say that thru-hikers should be very thankful that the AT wasn't rerouted to the new trail, or worse - had no AT shelter set aside for them inside the Park at all. It's good to remember this: Despite the lack of respect given to him by AT users over the years, the AT had no greater friend inside Baxter than Buzz Caverly - who has just retired. I predict the the next few years at Baxter will have AT users fondly recalling the 'good old days' of Buzz's stewardship.
I predict the the next few years at Baxter will have AT users fondly recalling the 'good old days' of Buzz's stewardship.
"We have seen the enemy, and he is us" --Pogo
Sad to say, it has been the thru-hikers who have destroyed this wonderful tradition. Mos thru-hikers are courteous, respectful and polite. But, it is the minority of thru-hikers who have this overblown sense of entitlement who have ruined this tradition for others.
Gazing across Daicey Pond at the Big K on the last night of my thru-hike is something that will be forever etched in my mind.
Here is hoping that other selfish a-holes don't ruin it for others.
What wonderful tradition, Mags?
The previous shelter for thru hikers was in a non-descript, mosquito infested spot, even though the general area is among the most glorious in the world. It was as if it had been put there so as to ensure that no one other than a thru hiker would even consider sleeping there. I can't help but wonder how much better the new place is.
That thru hikers left that dump to spend a bit of time looking at the mountain from the public facility at Daicey Pond wasn't because they had a sense of entitlement, but rather simply because they had a brain.
On balance, I suspect those who stay at Daicey Pond realized a net benefit from seeing thru hikers-- few leave their private cabins area anyway. If there was a problem with a few hikers over the years, the rangers had law enforcement powers and the ability and training to deal with that.
Seems to me that the park does accomodate thru hikers, but only to the extent that they can be sure that no weekend camper will EVER covet thier camping conditions.
Rick B
Well said, Teej. See my post under the Buzz C. retirement thread.
Back in the days when thru-hiking was an event, the Park would always bend over backward to accommodate thru-hikers. See the many thru-hiker accounts from the 60's and 70's. Today there are just too many people doing the hike and giving each one individual treatment just isn't feasible, even without poor behavior by some hikers. At least some accommodations are available to thru-hikers. Everyone else has to reserve months in advance for peak seasons. If hikers want to stay at Daicey, there's no restrictions on reserving a cabin and timing one's arrival to coincide with the reservation -- which is possible although somewhat difficult.
There were many nails pounded into the coffin that was AT shelters at Daicey. The Daicey Rangers spent too much time registering hikers, refereeing debates about who desevered a spot, patroling for stealth campers, policing drinking, dogs, pot smoking, skinny dipping, and litterng. The Director fielded too many complaints from the cabin campers about thru-hikers taking over the library by hanging laundry inside, and monopolizing the wood stove, dock, and porch. Thru-hikers themselves didn't help much by bootlegging Katahdin during and after a blizzard that closed the Park, unfortunately just a few days after the Director was mailed a summit photo of finishing thrus - complete with a dog, moons, and middle fingers. Without notifying the ATC or MATC the Park rerouted the AT away from the campground through a bog and parking lot, dismantled the two shelters, built the Birches up by Katahdin Stream, changed the rules allowing stays to read 'long distance' instead of 'thru-hiker', and cut a new trail from the Park boundary straight to the new camping area. I'd say that thru-hikers should be very thankful that the AT wasn't rerouted to the new trail, or worse - had no AT shelter set aside for them inside the Park at all. It's good to remember this: Despite the lack of respect given to him by AT users over the years, the AT had no greater friend inside Baxter than Buzz Caverly - who has just retired. I predict the the next few years at Baxter will have AT users fondly recalling the 'good old days' of Buzz's stewardship.
What wonderful tradition, Mags?
Seeing Daicey pond with Katahdin behind it on the last night of a thru-hike.
Perhaps it was not wonderful for you. I
The night before we summited, my group of four thru hikers walked up to Daicey Pond, where both Katahdin and a full moon were reflecting off the water. We were struck speechless by the scene.
kartoffsky
06-30-2005, 14:03
Camping in the woods? Smoking Pot? Drinking Demon Rum? Swimming Naked? The HORROR! I won't even address the depravity of doing laundry or huddling around a wood stove.
If a camp director got a mean picture in the mail it's possible that a)the culprits were jerks b)the director acted like a jerk one time c)some poor overworked ranger (forced to waste his/her time registering hikers and psychically determining that litter was left by hikers) acted like a jerk one time. Maybe all of the above. So what? Why is that a reason to punish *any* group of park users?
Maybe the 60's and 70's were better because there hadn't yet developed in the camping/hiking world a cadre of holier-than-thou control-freaks dedicated to stomping on other peoples' fun in pursuit of their own "purer" buzz. Yeah litter sucks. And I accept that Baxter wants to keep dogs out. But I've spent enough of my life on the trails of New England to know that day hiker and car campers and random yahoos are just as productive of trash and dog doo as anyone else.
How about finding a way to accomodate all people, including people who hike in? How about offering a work-for-lodging deal where poor people could clean up the litter/dog doo left by their richer brethren in exchange for the right to camp? How about reconsidering the philosophy that we should keep the unwashed public off of public lands?
By the way I'm a leave-no-trace hiker. I was born & raised in Vermont. I don't litter. I don't have a dog. Heck, I don't have a car. I recycle. Right now I'm living off meager savings working with disabled slum kids. When I get my "vacation" I'm going to take public transportation to the trailhead and about 500 miles later I hope to reach Katahdin. You think it's no problem to schedule/afford a reservation? You think you could hike that far and make it on one particular night? Well good for you.
When I arrive I'm going to find someplace pretty and camp. I'll wash my underpants and hang them up. I'll stay away from the Big House. I'm going to swim naked. I might smoke a joint if I can find one. Maybe I'll smile. Maybe I'll finish reading Don Quixote. Maybe my facial hair and wet naked body will enrage some aging baby-boomer. I hope not, but I'm prepared to risk it. Maybe the rangers will get me but I doubt it and I don't care too much. Maybe I'll see you there.
Much love,
-Kartoffsky
There were many nails pounded into the coffin that was AT shelters at Daicey. The Daicey Rangers spent too much time registering hikers, refereeing debates about who desevered a spot, patroling for stealth campers, policing drinking, dogs, pot smoking, skinny dipping, and litterng. The Director fielded too many complaints from the cabin campers about thru-hikers taking over the library by hanging laundry inside, and monopolizing the wood stove, dock, and porch. Thru-hikers themselves didn't help much by bootlegging Katahdin during and after a blizzard that closed the Park, unfortunately just a few days after the Director was mailed a summit photo of finishing thrus - complete with a dog, moons, and middle fingers. Without notifying the ATC or MATC the Park rerouted the AT away from the campground through a bog and parking lot, dismantled the two shelters, built the Birches up by Katahdin Stream, changed the rules allowing stays to read 'long distance' instead of 'thru-hiker', and cut a new trail from the Park boundary straight to the new camping area. I'd say that thru-hikers should be very thankful that the AT wasn't rerouted to the new trail, or worse - had no AT shelter set aside for them inside the Park at all. It's good to remember this: Despite the lack of respect given to him by AT users over the years, the AT had no greater friend inside Baxter than Buzz Caverly - who has just retired. I predict the the next few years at Baxter will have AT users fondly recalling the 'good old days' of Buzz's stewardship.
You think it's no problem to schedule/afford a reservation? You think you could hike that far and make it on one particular night? Well good for you.I think the point made earlier was not that it was easy for thruhikers, but that it sometimes seems that thruhikers feel entitled to special privileges/rules because they are thruhikers.
TJ aka Teej
06-30-2005, 18:19
By the way I'm a leave-no-trace hiker.
Please consider for a monent that your behavior will indeed leave a trace.