[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[at-l] traversing the whites

all this talk about the huts has been great - this seems to me an issue
where flaming could be rampant, and look how we've controlled ourselves!
:)    it's open-minded dialogue like this that makes this list such a
pleasure.

ok, enough of that.  i thought i'd relate my experiences in the whites.
before my thru, i'd been in the presidentials twice, and used a variety of
the off-AT alternatives.  the best is the perch, between washington and
adams.  it's about .8 miles off the trail, about 500-700 ft down, but man
is it worth it!  it don't get it's name for nuthin'.  shelter sleeps six
and you can't stand up in it (this to afford better protection in winter),
there doesn't even seem room enough for one that big.  there are also a
couple large tent platforms.  i did not stay there on my thru (wish i had),
i went from mizpah to madison.

from what i recall of the thruhiker attitude that year, it wasn't so much
the cost of the huts, but the cost of the tent sites.  it is easy to do the
whites without the huts, but then you can't do the whites without paying.
thruhikers actually liked the huts because that was the one option where
you could stay for free, if you got lucky.  a group of more than 2 often
was denied, but solo hikers are almost guaranteed a nights stay for work,
especially arriving early (but not too early - some croo masters didn't
like the "mooching thruhikers" and if you made it too obvious you were just
stopping for a free night, they said no.  other croos were awesome and
welcomed you with open arms.  what a fickle bunch are the croos.)

in 92, fees were $2-$3 depending on the site.  with a minimum 5-6 night
traverse, that's $10-$18.  personally, i don't mind paying that, especially
in return for the good trail work the AMC does, but after 1800 miles of
free lodging on the trail, it's hard to suddenly run into all that
"capitalism".  it seemed incongruous, sort of at odds with the "ideal" of a
thruhike.  funny how that ideal ebbed and flowed according to the wants and
needs of the thruhiker.

me, i agree with poohbear.  i like what the huts stand for, i don't
appreciate the hoards of ignorant people.  that in itself in incongruous.
and i mean ignorant in the context of hiking/wilderness ethics.  but i was
once ignorant.  (oooh, does that mean i am no longer?  i guess that was
pretty presumptuous  :)  it is fun to stride past all the tourists, and to
arrive all stinky and dirty at a hut, you get looks that range from utter
disgust to sheer adulation.

i love the whites...


mike
ke kaahawe AT92 TYT94 PCTsoon
mikeh@royalrobbins.com
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | For info http://www.hack.net/lists *

==============================================================================