Disgraceful trails - Letter to the Editor

[TCD]

Years ago we hiked in Yosemite. We picked up a hiking guide book, and sought out the "roughest" trails. The hike from Tuolumne out to North Dome was described as being very rugged. We ran the whole thing. I could have cleaned it on a bike; my God, I could have driven half of it in my Subaru Forester. We still joke about that today, especially on our annual trip across the Great Range in the Adirondacks. So it's a matter of perspective.

I'm sure she means no harm. And in fact, she makes a good point. Todays hikers are greater in number, but expecting an easier experience. Railing against that does no good; we are a self selected group here on these various forums. Reality demands that we allocate some additional trail maintenance resources to smoothing out some of the challenges today. Otherwise, we will face more SAR, more braided multiple paths, and more aesthetic damage. Closing our eyes and screaming "walk straight through the mud" will not accomplish anything. Trails have to be updated for today's population.

 

[talktapes]

What I find confusing is how someone can go out of their way to plan a hiking trip in NH, i.e. devote time and money to physically travel up here, purchase plane tickets, rent a hotel room/secure a campsite and all the other logistics, without having an inkling of what the general trail conditions are like in the northeast (or how a trail as relatively innocuous as the Jackson branch could inspire that kind of reaction in anyone, for that matter). It's like making a trip to the Rockies and then complaining the mountains are too tall, or that it's unsafe because of the grizzly population. Both complaints may be "true," but buyer beware.

To be fair we get a lot of local people who assume all trails on Washington lead back to the same trailhead, or start ascending Lafayette at 1 PM in the fall, so it probably all stems from the same place. I personally find trip planning half the fun (reading the WMG guide, looking at maps etc), but apparently most people can't be bothered with even the basics.

 

[TJsName]

Chatting with her on FB and confirmed who the poster is. She is sending me photos of particular sections to note (looks like where it follows a dried river bed)

Stronger evidence, I admit - and good on you for reaching out. I think a video chat is the best way to be sure the person your communicating with is who they say they are. No one wants to get catfished.

 

[egilbe]

I like the trails up here just fine the way they are (mostly).

 

[Bernerbabe]

Love this

 

[Bernerbabe]

Nice to see this retort

 

[expat]

And she didn't even encounter postholes, monorail, or winter trail-breakers who wear narrow snowshoes!

 

[hikerbrian]

Our dear White Mountains do indeed offer quite the challenge relative to their altitude, but there are plenty of other places in the country (and out, I assume) that offer equal or greater challenge on every level. A couple of examples from my limited experience:

1. Glacier Nat'l Park: OMG, the miles fly by like you're floating on a cloud, being gently wafted to the next alpine lake. (OTOH-1: grizzlies. Come back to the Whites and realize just how much easier it is to camp in non-bear country. OTOH-2: try to actually climb to the top of a peak in GNP and realize that few of the peaks actually have 'trails.' They're all loose, unstable class 3-4 scrambles. And then come back to the Whites and marvel at the fact that there are actually maintained class 1 trails to every single summit).
2. Yosemite: many of the trails are paved. But if you want to go anywhere interesting you're talking about cross country (off trail) travel, and once again, a whole bunch of class 2-4 passes which oddly enough are just as difficult out west as anywhere else.
3. Olympic Nat'l Park: Take the roughness of the Whites, add glaciers, higher elevation, less trail maintanance, and MUCH greater remoteness.
4. North Cascades: Take the roughness of the Whites, remove all the trails, make all of the approaches class 3, add glaciers, and make the summits technical rock climbs.
5. Alaska: don't even get me started.

The fact that Miss Alabama thinks the Whites are rough is interesting, but I think it speaks to her experience level and the type of terrain she's used to more than it does to the actual objective challenge the Whites present. It's all relative. The Whites are either trivial or extreme, depending on your perspective.

 

[Grey J]

Ok, so I can buy the part about the trails being rough but that can just as easily be seen as the attraction. I'm looking forward to doing the rock scrambles on the Caps Ridge Trail for the first time on my next visit. Sure, Jackson, while short, is rugged in places and that last scramble to the top is more than simple hiking (not a walk in the woods) and requires flexibility if not athleticism. However . . . meagre vistas? Come on, lady! What you talkin' about? The view from Jackson is superb.

 

[Stan]

I think a big difference in the Whites vs. hiking out west are switchbacks. They are much more common out west than in the Whites.

I'm impressed with the trails in the Smokies considering they get precipitation equivalent to the Pacific Northwest. Trails I've been on were in great shape ... though the whole side of a mountain may occasionally wash away!

I just read something poignant to the effect that the difference between a hardship and an adventure is the spirit in which it is undertaken.

 

[Rainman]

I perceive AMC ...volunteers to get light duty work done.
Its pretty depressing that AMC looks for trail adopters to adopt the primary trails to the huts rather than maintaining them themselves.

I see no problems with using volunteers to get light duty work done. It is a great way to allow the crews who can do heavier work to spend more time doing so.

I don't find it depressing at all that AMC uses adopters on any trail. For the work that they volunteered for, were trained for, and are expected to perform, they perform a vital function. I find it heartening that hundreds of adopters have decided to give back to the trails with the time available to them, instead of complaining about the poor conditions they find.

Also, the adopters are AMC. They may not be paid staff, but they are managed, and authorized to work on the WMNF, through the commitment of AMC to the USFS. The AMC is not shirking their responsibilities with adopters, they are meeting them with their adopters.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

peakbagger, your friend was quite correct. Trails out West on federal land benefit from federal tax dollars. They are also engineered for horses and are on land quite different from New England in geology, rainfall, soils, trees, and user groups. Different worlds, and both good.

When I am too old and feeble to hike New England I'll go hike Western trails.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

Having been south of the Mason/Dixon line for a bit now, I have seen that there is a difference in trail building and maintenance between the two areas. The primary trail up Mt. Mitchell is described as one of the most difficult trails in NC. However, I would rate it moderate if it was in NH. And if the author of the letter had been comparing the AT in the south with the north, there's no comparison. The parts that I've been on here have grades of no more than about 5-7%, slab along long ridgelines, and have switchbacks where needed. The AT is also well groomed in the south with stones larger than a fist generally being removed to the side. Even the best engineered trails in NH, sometimes having been designed for horse travel, are more difficult than nearly all trails in the south.

I have no doubt that someone who had never hiked anywhere north of Virginia received quite a surprise in NH.

What you write is true. A good discussion of the differences between trails in New England and trails elsewhere is to be found in the Student Conservation Association manual Lightly on the Land, chapter 1.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

I think thin soils, freeze thaw and heavy use are part of it. About the only option for heavy use trails is allow them to wear down to rock and try to keep water bars in place to reduce sheet flow or pave them with rock like Tuckerman's Ravine trail or much of the upper Falling Waters or the Twinway. The sidehilling I have seen down south and out west probably wouldn't survive a lot of new England freeze thaw cycles although the dugway roads built by Henrys loggers seem to survive pretty well . When hiking down south on the AT, the big use is the thru hiker bubble and some section hikers. I hiked a lot of sections off season outside the bubble and sometimes we could go a couple of days without seeing anyone. Not so in the whites where thru hikers are the minority. In general much of the southern AT are old ridgeline roads that were built for farming and terrain is far more gentle. It isn't until VT where the soils and trail transition to the thin soils on the ridgeline that turn to soup every spring.

RMCs trail crew is very good at armoring trails but it takes a lot of resources so the number of trails they can get to is minimal. When they do a section its top rate. MATC also does incredible rock work but they only can work on very limited amounts of trails. I perceive AMC has scaled way back on this type of work and have shifted to using youth at risk programs and volunteers to get light duty work done. They did participate in the Grafton loop Trail and at least on the west side some of the trail work is state of the art. The USFS also seems to have scaled way back on trail reconstruction although on rare occasions they do seem to do high profile work with contractors if there is funding available. I expect that the soon to occur major washout on Lincoln Woods trail at the site of the last high profile repair location will need another high profile repair soon. AMC treated the Cardigan Highlanders crew so poorly that the crew quit en mass so there goes any future quality rock work at Cardigan. Its pretty depressing that AMC looks for trail adopters to adopt the primary trails to the huts rather than maintaining them themselves.

I appreciate the mention, and would like to straighten the record. I had the privilege of leading the AMC Cardigan Volunteer Trail Crew until we all quit on 6 August 2014 after two years of trying to communicate with certain AMC staff. Two trail programs cannot share the same trails, we gave the staff a clear path do do everything their way, and we are having too much fun elsewhere to miss the place very much. I prefer to let others judge the quality of the AMC's work now.

The AMC tends the trails on the east side of Cardigan, which are all blazed in the color yellow. Trails along the ridgeline from Orange Cove to Alexandria Four Corners are blazed in white and tended by Cardigan Highlanders Volunteer Trail Crew (CHVTC), as are trails from the west side blazed in the color orange.

Several of the leaders from the former AMC crew have found a warm welcome and earned their tartans with the CHVTC. We tend 16 miles of trail on various State lands. In 2016 we logged 955 hours, chopped 36 blowdowns, cleaned 193 drains and side ditches, brushed 3 miles, blazed 4.8 miles, set 120 rocks and built a 12' bridge. I will not pretend to rate us in the same league as RMC, MATC, Trailwrights, BRATTs, etc. but we work safe and have fun doing what we can for the community and their trails.