is it me or the AMC sometimes acts like it owns the White Mountains?

[JustaTouron]

There hasn't been any trail relo's in the Whites in many, many years. That's why thier all erroded down to bed rock. A better reason is someone "clarified" the direction as unless you know the trail name, you might not realise it's part of the AT. And above tree line, which way a trail goes is often not real obvious.

Oh, the signs weren't wrong, it was just the equivalent of having a sign in VT that says "long trail" but not "AT" and expecting the hiker to know that the long trail and the AT are the same in that section.

[wakapak]

Oh, the signs weren't wrong, it was just the equivalent of having a sign in VT that says "long trail" but not "AT" and expecting the hiker to know that the long trail and the AT are the same in that section.

If anyone is setting out for any extended time on the Trail, then they should be doing a little research about the Trail in the area they are hiking. If they don't and then they complain about "not knowing" that the Trail is also using another trail with a different name, then it's their own fault really.

[JustaTouron]

If anyone is setting out for any extended time on the Trail, then they should be doing a little research about the Trail in the area they are hiking. If they don't and then they complain about "not knowing" that the Trail is also using another trail with a different name, then it's their own fault really.

Just out of curiosity: do the major guides (companion, databook, at guide) point out that in the whites the trails have different names and what names they are? Cause if not that is flaw in the books. If they do then the problem is user error.

[Rasty]

There hasn't been any trail relo's in the Whites in many, many years. That's why thier all erroded down to bed rock. A better reason is someone "clarified" the direction as unless you know the trail name, you might not realise it's part of the AT. And above tree line, which way a trail goes is often not real obvious.

Oh, the signs weren't wrong, it was just the equivalent of having a sign in VT that says "long trail" but not "AT" and expecting the hiker to know that the long trail and the AT are the same in that section.

It's the hikers responsibility to know where they are going.

[hikerboy57]

from the companion
"The White Mountains—One of the most impressive sections of the A.T., the Whitesoff er magnifi cent views with miles of above-treeline travel. Extra caution should be
exercised while above treeline, due to rapidly changing weather and the lack of
protection from it. Carry cold-weather gear, even in the middle of summer. Winter
weather, including sleet, snow, and ice, is possible on these high ridges year-round.
Each year, carelessness ends in death for a few visitors to the Whites. Pay close attention
at Trail intersections. Th e Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) maintains
many trails that cross the A.T., and the A.T. route is commonly referred to on signs
and in guidebooks by the name of the local trail it follows, such as “Franconia Ridge
Trail.” (And, to add to the confusion, sections above treeline from Mizpah Hut to
Madison Hut are oft en marked with yellow blazes on rock cairns, to stand out in the
snow.) When above treeline, stay on the Trail. Th is alpine zone is home to very
fragile plants. One misplaced bootstep can destroy them"

[Marta]

FWIW, I found the Whites to be confusing at times when I hiked through in '06. The ATC map set didn't work for me there. After I bought a set of AMC maps I was happier. Part of the problem was areas where heavy use had caused lots of paths to be trampled, offering choices that weren't on the maps. (Harriman SP was even worse that way.) My question became not why doesn't the AMC do a better job marking the AT but Why don't the AT maps show the trail names in the Presidentials? If they just printed Crawford Path, etc. on the maps, problem solved.

Who knows, maybe the new maps do.

Seven years ago today, I wrote in my TJ:

"While I was eating lunch at Zealand Falls Hut I was impressed again at how unfriendly the Croos are. I've decided, though, that it's just because they're yankees and don't know any better."

LOL

The reality is, if less-than-ideal trail markings and people who don't smile when you walk in the room are the worst of your problems, you're having a pretty good hike.

Walk on, friends.

[JustaTouron]

from the companion
"The White Mountains—One of the most impressive sections of the A.T., the Whitesoff er magnifi cent views with miles of above-treeline travel. Extra caution should be
exercised while above treeline, due to rapidly changing weather and the lack of
protection from it. Carry cold-weather gear, even in the middle of summer. Winter
weather, including sleet, snow, and ice, is possible on these high ridges year-round.
Each year, carelessness ends in death for a few visitors to the Whites. Pay close attention
at Trail intersections. Th e Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) maintains
many trails that cross the A.T., and the A.T. route is commonly referred to on signs
and in guidebooks by the name of the local trail it follows, such as “Franconia Ridge
Trail.” (And, to add to the confusion, sections above treeline from Mizpah Hut to
Madison Hut are oft en marked with yellow blazes on rock cairns, to stand out in the
snow.) When above treeline, stay on the Trail. Th is alpine zone is home to very
fragile plants. One misplaced bootstep can destroy them"

Then quite frankly, I think the companion should do a better job. Rather than complain/warn about the Whites is should read something like this:

(I am making up the landmarks, don't use this as a guide

1.2 miles past the route 9 the AT joins the laughing duck trail east for the next 5.8 miles. (most signs for the next 5.8 miles will refer to the smiling duck trail not the AT. You will see both white blazes and yellow circles.

.2 miles after sunset hut the AT splits from laughing duck trail follow the signs and white blazers for the AT.

at mile marker 925 the AT joins the the laughing girl trail west for the next 2.6 miles you won't see many white blazes, follow the pink diamonds.

Rather than whine about the whites at the AMC, the guide books should guide you thru the whites. If they aren't doing that shame on the authors of the guidebooks rather than the AMC.

[hikerboy57]

from awols guide c/o chin music's tj



they name the trails.or you can invest $9.95 in a maphttp://amcstore.outdoors.org/amcstor...J&dept_id=3023

[JustaTouron]

from awols guide c/o chin music's tj



they name the trails.or you can invest $9.95 in a maphttp://amcstore.outdoors.org/amcstor...J&dept_id=3023

Oh, so if the guidebooks do have maps and explain the route...what it he big deal? Read your guidebook.

[atmilkman]

from awols guide c/o chin music's tj



they name the trails.or you can invest $9.95 in a maphttp://amcstore.outdoors.org/amcstor...J&dept_id=3023

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I we're hiking the AT NOBO I assume I would be on the Osgood Trail NOBO (which would actually be south according to a compass) then at the Osgood Tent Site I would take the Osgood Cutoff to the east (which would actually be to the west according to a compass) which actually bends back to the south according to a compass. Then I would take the Great Gulf Trail to the east according to directions which would actually be west according to a compass and finally taking the Madison Gulf Trail which is also the AT north again which is actually south according to a compass. Am I reading this right give or take a few degrees?

[hikerboy57]

correct .

[atmilkman]

correct .

Well hell. That ought to tell people something if I can figure it out. I'm from Bama. We only know which way the end zone is. (shameless plug) ROLL TIDE!

[hikerboy57]

it's actually less confusing on the trail itselfthe signs are all clearly marked

[Alligator]

Awol's guide is not exactly a map guidebook, nor is the Companion. They are more for services. The map guidebooks which come with the ATC maps have the level of detail suggested. I don't have one handy at the moment to give an exact quote of a trail. There's also the White Mountain guide and that is very detailed too. One would have a really hard time getting lost with the maps and the guidebooks associated with those maps.

[jeffmeh]

I repeatedly encourage people to carry a "real" trail map through the Whites. The odds are pretty high of severe weather (particularly a thunderstorm) making it prudent to get below tree line ASAP. Knowing about the trails that are not the AT can get you to the best point of egress quickly. And if you need to hanker down for a while and use up your supplies, knowing how to get out to a road is not a bad idea either.

I feel the same way about those heading through the Smokies early when heavy snow is a real possibility.

Sure, there is plenty of trail on the AT where a map is not really required, and plenty of thru-hikers have gone without them altogether, but in certain sections having a trail map is just a basic, smart, safety precaution.

If one cannot follow the AT in the Whites, and is looking to assign blame, find a mirror.

[hikerboy57]

by the way, if you doubt the fury of mt washington winds, read chin musics tj account of a few days ago.

[JustaTouron]

correct .

As you seem familiar with both the companion and the guide? Does one of these do a better job than the other of laying out stuff exactly the way milkman did. 'Cause if so that would be a reason to choose one over the other.

Based on what I have read above here is what I would like to see in a guide (adapted to what ever format the guide actually uses)

Take the Osgood trail N (but the compass will read south) over this section for X.X miles.
At the the osgood campsite take the osgood cut off E (but compass will read west then south) for x.x miles
At the Great Gulf trail go E (compass would read west)
etc.

I don't think it is the AMC job to accommodate the AT and AT hikers, by relabeling trails that predated the AT.

But for $16 my expectation is that AWOL will make it easy for me to navigate it. Hopefully THAT isn't an unreasonable expectation which would cause someone to view me as being "entitled".

[Trance]

You dont even need a guidebook for the AT. I just went to summitpost and printed up the mileage and names of points on the trail and started hiking. The #1 thing I saw when I started my section at Springer in April was a ton of people who had "overprepared".

[hikerboy57]

the at guide, i believe is superior to the companion, although to a certain extent, they supplement each other. the guide has more maps,lists more water sources and campssites than the companion, as well as amazingly deceptive elevation maps( when it looked tough it wasnt, when it looked easy, it wasnt.)
for my thru next spring i'll probably go with the guide, although im an aldha member, the companion is free in pdf form to aldha members, so i'll have that as well.

[Alligator]

As you seem familiar with both the companion and the guide? Does one of these do a better job than the other of laying out stuff exactly the way milkman did. 'Cause if so that would be a reason to choose one over the other.

Based on what I have read above here is what I would like to see in a guide (adapted to what ever format the guide actually uses)

Take the Osgood trail N (but the compass will read south) over this section for X.X miles.
At the the osgood campsite take the osgood cut off E (but compass will read west then south) for x.x miles
At the Great Gulf trail go E (compass would read west)
etc.

I don't think it is the AMC job to accommodate the AT and AT hikers, by relabeling trails that predated the AT.

But for $16 my expectation is that AWOL will make it easy for me to navigate it. Hopefully THAT isn't an unreasonable expectation which would cause someone to view me as being "entitled".

No not entitled but you are misunderstanding the level of detail allowable in AWOL's guide and the Companion. Every mapset for the AT has a guidebook at the level of detail you are wanting. If you put all of that information into one book, it would fill up an extremely large book.