setting the record straight on whitehouse landing camps

[berkshirebirder]

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]

I can only cite my own experience. 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]

"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.

[weary]

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

[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]

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]

"The wisdom of the rules as promulgated by Congress"

Nice oxymoron.

[bulldog49]

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]

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]

trying to protect the trail from commercialization

Only part of the time, evidently.

[bulldog49]

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.

[weary]

"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]

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.

[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.

Weary

[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]

By the way, after reading what TJ posted I believe my guess is not so wrong. I notice you haven't responded to him.

[emerald]

Where is that dead horse emoticon when everyone ought to have better things to do with their time? I know I do.

[Jeff]

Love to see a good debate on Whiteblaze. It's been awhile.

[emerald]

Unfortunately, we have this so-called debate every year. Surely there must be something worth discussing we haven't before?

[10-K]

Love to see a good debate on Whiteblaze. It's been awhile.

I was just thinking,.... "This thread has legs..."