Franconia Notch parking survey

[DayTrip]

Nope, not true. I drive 45 MPH through there, as do the dozen cars fortunate enough to be stuck behind me at that time. And when the road converts back to two lanes each way, I move over so those cars can speed past me and make up that valuable 40 seconds they lost in the notch.

As to the parking issue, I'm not smart enough, nor do I care enough, to try to solve that.

You are in the extreme minority on the 45 mph. I drive through the Notch about 80-100 times a year and speeding, often excessive speeding, is quite common.

 

[DayTrip]

2) I suspect that forcing people to hike elsewhere due to parking, or "too much love" for Franconia Ridge, will also lead to more rescues. At least on FR, there are lots of people who can help you out if you get lost, run out of water, daylight, etc. People who don't have maps or compasses perhaps have either hiked the ridge before or at least looked up directions somewhere. Not everyone has a full set of maps, phone apps, gps, or WMG such that they can head north and decide, based on parking availability, where they will hike.

Tim

I went up the Skook last SAT and near treeline met two women descending who asked me "how far to the hut". I explained to her there was no hut on this trail, asked where they parked, etc so she asked me to show her where they were on her "map" - the map being a Google Maps picture on a website 1" x 1" that only had Rte 93 and Rte 3 on a green square. It would be interesting to see what happened to the volume of rescues with fewer people.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I suppose parking restrictions could lead to fewer rescues on the ridge proper due to fewer people going up. I wonder, however, what people who are turned away due to no parking will opt for instead? Will they go home? Will they go to the Presis? Garfield and the Twins are next closest and with similar views, but obviously get far last traffic, are probably weren't on that 1x1 Google Map image, were they?

I amend my suspicion to inquire what effect it will have on rescues.

Tim

 

[Raven]

The Flume now has a "no hiker parking" sign apparently. The squeeze is on!

I also received and I called on it, I was told that it was a scam looking for data, likely people who call, can pay by check or credit card.

Interesting. There was no indication on the notice I received that they wanted me to contact them. Just a warning notice.

 

[TJsName]

You are in the extreme minority on the 45 mph. I drive through the Notch about 80-100 times a year and speeding, often excessive speeding, is quite common.

I probably go through the notch 20-30 times a year, and I would say half the time I have no one in front of me, and the other half I do catch up to someone. I typically go 50-55 through the Notch depending on traffic and road conditions, so that would mean that they are going slower than I am (but feel free to check my math). I'd guess that at least a quarter of the traffic goes under 50. Of course, this is anecdotal and mostly limited to weekends - midweek local traffic might behave differently.

I suspect if you parked (or hiked up to a point) and tried to measure speed (a stop watch with a view over a fixed distance would suffice), you'd notice that most of the time, there isn't anyone coming and it would get boring. This would also only give you readings for the one location. It's unclear if the question we care about is, "How fast do people go through the notch?" (all 8 miles of single lane), or "How fast do people go in the section where people park along Lafayette Place?". My suggestion would work for the latter, but for the prior you'd want two stations - one at the start and end, to clock in and out times by vehicle. Of course, some vehicles pull off, so you'll lose some data unless you add more stations at each exit. I'd be curious if there is a significant difference on the Southbound side as it's mostly downhill. This in knowable, but who has the time?

 

[Becca M]

I drove through the notch yesterday (July 5) around 7pm and there were NO cars parked along 93 in either direction. I know it was a hot day and all (and not the 4th) but was surprised - usually there are some cars along that after the holiday.... wonder if anything happened or people really didn't park along it in the first place?????

 

[Mike P.]

A lot of the new traffic the last few years is driven by people only interested in replicating or beating other peoples Instagram feeds and getting likes and views. We had a perfect day in Mid-June for hiking and there were several people on Bondcliff and Bond but the new hikers are not looking at the doing the 48. If they were, they would be doing longer hikes from late May to the end of July when we have plentiful sunshine. (peakbaggers would be trying to optimize their time and doing longer hikes now..)

 

[dug]

Hike your own hike.

 

[sierra]

Feedback on a few of the above points. The State police are the ones that patrol the Notch. They are pretty stretched out in the North Country, not sure they will designate an officer to deal with a parking problem. As far as hikers being forced to hike else ware therefore spiking the amount of rescues because they have left the safety of the ridge? I'll be as to the point as I can be here. That's just to bad. If your going to hike the high peaks of the Whites, its your responsibility to know how. Yes, I know there are beginners, but that's no reason to make parking concessions for a hike. This whole issue has me shaking my head as just in the last week, the amount of TR for the Ridge on the 4k sites is astounding. In spite of the issue at hand, people cant see past the need to broadcast their hike, they are only adding to the crowds as more beginners see their reports. I'm against shuttles, quota's, bigger parking lots and any other stop gap remedy that will keep the crowds pillaging of the ridge. The sooner they limit the amount of hikers the better. People will be forced to hike else ware and they will benefit from doing so. Any measure to accommodate 1000 hikers on one trail, is to blindly ignore LNT and any other wilderness ( not in that sense) ethic you can name. Its a joke and nobody seems to care at all. I seem to be in the minority here in regards to this issue. Where's Guy when you need him.

 

[Mike P.]

What Sierra said and I believe Guy is still on the Ridge too.

 

[TJsName]

What Sierra said and I believe Guy is still on the Ridge too.

He exists anywhere someone thinks of him, and the ridge is likely one of many places where people do.

 

[skiguy]

Am I Spock do to being logical, or just as a foil to yours and McCoy's moral righteousness?

Respect for coming to our own conclusions is meaningless if we ignore how they are formed. Imagine two people who watch an opinion show on cable news anod hear a conclusion. One person just repeats that opinion; however, the second to verify that conclusion at multiple sources, does some research, and thinks critically about it, and then comes to the same conclusion. Are both of these conclusions respectable? On the surface, these people agree, but in fact one person's opinion is more valid because they can defend it in a way that the other cannot.

I don't disagree with anyone's right to have their own conclusions, but it's an odd right to exercise in a vacuum - like pooping in the middle of a hiking trail. I will consistently defend reason and respectfully rebuke fallacious thinking when confronted with it.

The Mr. Spock comment was made in jest and only refers to the logical side of things. You or Mr. Spock could never come close to foiling my moral righteousness. As far as one’s conclusions being more valid based upon one’s rehtorical defense being better than the other’s is a perception within one’s own mind. We all have our belief systems. So to have to express those beliefs within another’s rehtorical paradigm for validation is not IMO valid within itself and does not infer that person being in a vacume. As the old saying goes...”Actions speak louder than words”. Therefore relative to this thread my current actions are I will not be parking along the side of the road in Franconia Notch. I do not have to question the validity of that action nor defend it with a semantical dissertation. I believe it is not safe. There are IMO obvious inherent dangers present. Also at present it is against the Law. Yes I’m a rule follower. I do question laws . But in this situation there is nothing to question IMO.

 

[Raven]

In reality, regardless of the details, if parking along 93 is stopped and if there is not overflow parking to accommodate those cars (locally or by shuttle), then the impact to Franconia Ridge decreases. I'm good with that.

 

[sierra]

I just saw a picture of the cars parked along the highway near the Ridge. Of, this is working out just fine.

 

[Raven]

Busy one all over today. Cars are overflowing Appalachia big time, Pine Link, and Howker Ridge lots as well. Latter two are small. All have cars roadside. All access Madison Hut.

 

[TJsName]

Busy one all over today. Cars are overflowing Appalachia big time, Pine Link, and Howker Ridge lots as well. Latter two are small. All have cars roadside. All access Madison Hut.

Glad people are getting out on a beautiful day! Jealous, for sure.

 

[TJsName]

The Mr. Spock comment was made in jest and only refers to the logical side of things. You or Mr. Spock could never come close to foiling my moral righteousness. As far as one’s conclusions being more valid based upon one’s rehtorical defense being better than the other’s is a perception within one’s own mind. We all have our belief systems. So to have to express those beliefs within another’s rehtorical paradigm for validation is not IMO valid within itself and does not infer that person being in a vacume. As the old saying goes...”Actions speak louder than words”. Therefore relative to this thread my current actions are I will not be parking along the side of the road in Franconia Notch. I do not have to question the validity of that action nor defend it with a semantical dissertation. I believe it is not safe. There are IMO obvious inherent dangers present. Also at present it is against the Law. Yes I’m a rule follower. I do question laws . But in this situation there is nothing to question IMO.

A foil (noun) is a literary device used to create contrast between characters or events. Which I suppose a foil could foil something, that is not how I used it. Your remark was clearly in jesk, as was my response.

Rhetoric is different than reason, and the connotation around rhetoric is that it is often used without sincerity - arguing to "win" vs arguing to resolve. To write of my arguments as rhetorical is itself a rhetorical response.

The debate in question isn't what you or I will do, but about safety. Is it safe to park along the Parkway? The Kanc? 302? 16? Westside Road? There are ways to answer the question. Are there any answers that could change your mind? For me, there are. If there are for you as well, then I think we'll be ok.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Both sides lined with cars around 4pm today. No visible tickets or signs of enforcement.

Tim

 

[JToll]

At 6:15 PM Northbound in the Notch. There was a message board saying park only in the lots or use overflow parking at exit 34C. No no-parking signs and cars everywhere.

The biggest problem I saw was people walking in the travel lanes to get to their cars. This looked very dangerous.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

The biggest problem I saw was people walking in the travel lanes to get to their cars. This looked very dangerous.

Saw a couple trying to cross at the FWT trailhead. Clearly, no idea about the tunnel...

Every parking lot I passed today between Crawford Depot and Franconia Notch was overflowing well onto the roads.

Tim