Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10-27-2003
    Location
    northern whites
    Posts
    3,906

    Default Proposed New AMC Hut Crawford Notch

    http://www.conwaydailysun.com/newsx/...tch-state-park

    The Crawford Notch RT 302 crossing has always been a bit of a desolate place in the whites. AMC started running shuttles a few years ago but access to resupply was normally a hitch or a real long walk. It is interesting that the AMC would build another facility on leased land as they reportedly had elected to only build new major facilities on land they owned after their near miss on losing the hut system on USFS land years back. Given the states perpetual need for funding I expect they can have a lot more control over the terms of the lease versus than when on federal land.

    Nevertheless if built its nice future option for those planning section hikes.

  2. #2
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    6,877
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    This link will lead to a topi map showing the precise location.

    http://www.nhstateparks.org/whats-ha...x?newsid=40193

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-18-2010
    Location
    NJ
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,133
    Images
    1

    Default

    odd. to non AT hikers in the whites (which is mostly everyone, btw) i always thought of the highland center as serving as the "hut" in crawford notch. if you're not married to following the AT then its basically right on the way between zealand and mitzpah. i'd think itd make more sense to put a new hut on either end (either between the carters and the mahoosucs or between the kinsmans and moosilauke) but i'm sure theres a million reasons not to.

  4. #4

    Default

    It's interesting what "hut" means to the AMC.
    Last edited by TJ aka Teej; 07-23-2015 at 13:49.
    Teej

    "[ATers] represent three percent of our use and about twenty percent of our effort," retired Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell.

  5. #5

    Default

    Sure. More "huts" in the White Mountains is just what we need.

    The AMC is a useful lobbying group. It also organizes most of the trail maintenance activities. I'm a virtually lifelong member.

    Its activities like the hotels it's basically an enemy of the backcountry experience in the Whites.

  6. #6
    jersey joe jersey joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-2004
    Location
    Highlands Region, NJ
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,914
    Images
    7

    Default

    The huts in the Whites just added to the experience for me. Much like the campgrounds in Shenandoah.
    If this project is done right, I can see it being a positive thing for the white mountains.

  7. #7
    CDT - 2013, PCT - 2009, AT - 1300 miles done burger's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-03-2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,437

    Default

    There is no need whatsoever for this. The hitch to the Highland Center was easy enough, and everything a hiker needs is there. Also, from Crawford you are only a few hours' hike from Mizpah and Zealand Falls huts.

    This is just another cash cow for the ever-expending AMC monopoly in the Whites.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    12-08-2012
    Location
    Brunswick, Maine
    Age
    58
    Posts
    5,153

    Default

    I don't care for the huts. Easy solution. I don't go to the huts. Those that like huts will like this. Works for them. No big deal. As to the Mahoosucs and a hut: I hope not. The Mahoosucs are tough. That fact keeps the crowds down. The crowds are already there in Crawford Notch. This just gives another option for the crowds.
    In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years. - Abraham Lincoln

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TJ aka Teej View Post
    It's interesting what "hut" means to the AMC.
    Hiker utility tax?

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-18-2010
    Location
    NJ
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,133
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdBrain View Post
    \As to the Mahoosucs and a hut: I hope not. The Mahoosucs are tough. That fact keeps the crowds down. The crowds are already there in Crawford Notch. This just gives another option for the crowds.
    if this is in response to my day dreaming aloud, i wasnt suggesting a hut in the mahoosucs, but one somewhere between carter notch and rt 2. to break up along stretch without any huts. past rte 2 i dont think theyd ever think of going. basically i was just saying breaking up the long stretches without huts that exist in a theoretical hut to hut traverse of the whites would seem to make more sense than sticking another hut right smack dab next to 2 already existing huts and the highland center. if amc is expanding the huts youd think a logical goal would be making it so you could start at glencliff and hike 8-10 miles a day staying at huts all the way to rte2. would be kind of cool if you were into that sort of thing. this idea though... i dont get it. or are the close to the road, easy to get to, year round huts (lonesome lake and carter notch) really just big money makers? i've never had the impression carter notch is. maybe lonesome lake is? its the only way this makes sense to me.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    12-08-2012
    Location
    Brunswick, Maine
    Age
    58
    Posts
    5,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdoczi View Post
    if this is in response to my day dreaming aloud, i wasnt suggesting a hut in the mahoosucs, but one somewhere between carter notch and rt 2. to break up along stretch without any huts. past rte 2 i dont think theyd ever think of going. basically i was just saying breaking up the long stretches without huts that exist in a theoretical hut to hut traverse of the whites would seem to make more sense than sticking another hut right smack dab next to 2 already existing huts and the highland center. if amc is expanding the huts youd think a logical goal would be making it so you could start at glencliff and hike 8-10 miles a day staying at huts all the way to rte2. would be kind of cool if you were into that sort of thing. this idea though... i dont get it. or are the close to the road, easy to get to, year round huts (lonesome lake and carter notch) really just big money makers? i've never had the impression carter notch is. maybe lonesome lake is? its the only way this makes sense to me.
    I wasn't really making any deep points. Just talking and proclaiming my love for the quiet Mahoosucs.
    In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years. - Abraham Lincoln

  12. #12
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    6,877
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    I would like to see more on this part of the plan:


    • AMC is also interested in creating a ski trail leading from the hut down to theroad connecting the state park with trails in the Zealand Valley.




  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-08-2012
    Location
    Taghkanic, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,978
    Journal Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by burger View Post
    There is no need whatsoever for this. The hitch to the Highland Center was easy enough, and everything a hiker needs is there. Also, from Crawford you are only a few hours' hike from Mizpah and Zealand Falls huts.

    This is just another cash cow for the ever-expending AMC monopoly in the Whites.
    AMC customers don't hitch, it's not their clientele. They cater to people who don't have the ability or experience (or desire) to backpack the whites but still want to visit this magnificent place. These are not people who hitch. And yes AMC gains substantial revenue from these structures.

  14. #14
    Clueless Weekender
    Join Date
    04-10-2011
    Location
    Niskayuna, New York
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,863
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TJ aka Teej View Post
    It's interesting what "hut" means to the AMC.
    About the same thing that Hutte means in the Alps.
    I always know where I am. I'm right here.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    12-08-2012
    Location
    Brunswick, Maine
    Age
    58
    Posts
    5,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TJ aka Teej View Post
    It's interesting what "hut" means to the AMC.
    That ain't nothing. You should see the "cottages" of Acadia. Maybe you have.
    In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years. - Abraham Lincoln

  16. #16
    Some days, it's not worth chewing through the restraints.
    Join Date
    12-13-2004
    Location
    Essex, Vermont
    Age
    64
    Posts
    2,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdoczi View Post
    if this is in response to my day dreaming aloud, i wasnt suggesting a hut in the mahoosucs, but one somewhere between carter notch and rt 2. to break up along stretch without any huts. past rte 2 i dont think theyd ever think of going. basically i was just saying breaking up the long stretches without huts that exist in a theoretical hut to hut traverse of the whites would seem to make more sense than sticking another hut right smack dab next to 2 already existing huts and the highland center. if amc is expanding the huts youd think a logical goal would be making it so you could start at glencliff and hike 8-10 miles a day staying at huts all the way to rte2. would be kind of cool if you were into that sort of thing. this idea though... i dont get it. or are the close to the road, easy to get to, year round huts (lonesome lake and carter notch) really just big money makers? i've never had the impression carter notch is. maybe lonesome lake is? its the only way this makes sense to me.
    This makes sense from a thru-hiker point of view, but thru-hikers constitute a very small portion of hikers in the Whites. Many, many more hikers are there for a few days, peak-bagging, loop hiking, etc., and enjoy the huts for what they are.

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-18-2010
    Location
    NJ
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,133
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Deadeye View Post
    This makes sense from a thru-hiker point of view, but thru-hikers constitute a very small portion of hikers in the Whites. Many, many more hikers are there for a few days, peak-bagging, loop hiking, etc., and enjoy the huts for what they are.
    i agree wholeheartedly that AT thru hikers arent the majority users of the whites, no doubt. but that, to me, just makes this hut even more redundant with the highland center. they cover the exact same area. a hut in the kinsmans or carters would open up a new area to people who didnt want to backpack that isnt currently very accessible.

    also, the number of people who do a non-at hut to hut to hut hike, i have found, is very high. i dont imagine anyone wanting to do zealand-new hut-mitzpah as they are all so close together. i could see a market for doing carter notch-new hut say somewhere around rattle river or kinsman notch to new hut to lonesome lake to franconia notch. at the moment, as i said in my first post here, i think a lot of people who for whatever reason dont want to do zealand to mitzpah in one shot just stop at the highland center, it is literally right on the trail, just not on OUR trail.

  18. #18
    imscotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-13-2011
    Location
    North Reading, MA
    Age
    60
    Posts
    1,237
    Images
    7

    Default

    It will be interesting to hear the local reaction to this. I seem to remember the Highland Center being a bone of contention in the permit renewal process. It is hard for local businesses to compete against a 'nonprofit' offering the same services.
    Last edited by imscotty; 07-23-2015 at 23:35.

  19. #19
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    6,877
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdoczi View Post
    i agree wholeheartedly that AT thru hikers arent the majority users of the whites, no doubt. but that, to me, just makes this hut even more redundant with the highland center. they cover the exact same area. a hut in the kinsmans or carters would open up a new area to people who didnt want to backpack that isnt currently very accessible.
    This hut will be built on state land-- not a coincidence.

    As to redundancy, is it your belief that this hut will not be well-used and popular?

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-18-2010
    Location
    NJ
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,133
    Images
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb View Post
    This hut will be built on state land-- not a coincidence.

    As to redundancy, is it your belief that this hut will not be well-used and popular?
    i would think less well used and popular than if built somewhere else that doesnt already have such places very (as in under 3 miles away) nearby, yes. will it get used? i'm sure, at first especially.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •