Restrictions on primitive camping in the WMNF?

[Trail Boss]

After spending the last few years hiking in the Adirondacks, I recently returned (after a a hiatus of 12 years) to hike in the WMNF. On the first day I hiked the Franconia Ridge, up Flume Slide to Flume and down from Lafayette via Greenleaf to the tramway parking. The second day I hiked from the Cog Railway station up Ammonoosuc to Monroe and down from Webster to the Highland Center. It was a memorable two days of spectacular weather and scenery and I plan to return to visit many other peaks. It's a longer drive for me than the Adirondacks but the trails and views are worth the extra time.

Naturally, having spent a lot of time in the Adirondacks, I tended to compare many things I encountered in the Whites to the Dacks. Aside from the incredible views and well-maintained trails, the one thing that stood out, like a sore thumb, was the presence of no less than five trail-side camp-sites between Liberty and Lafayette. I'm not familiar with the camping regulations in the Whites so I'm basing my opinion of what I know of Adirondack rules for primitive backcountry camping. An unmarked camp-site above 3500', or within spitting distance of a trail or stream (unless you can spit 150'), is illegal. Based on this criteria, I deemed the sites, all unmarked and ten feet from the Franconia Ridge trail, to be illegal.

I found this brochure on the WMNF's site: "Backcountry Camping Rules" but it doesn't explicitly indicate a camping-elevation-ceiling or a minimum site-to-trail distance (for Franconia Ridge). The closest reference that would apply to Franconia Ridge (Alpine Zone) appears to indicate no camping where trees are shorter than 8 feet. The 200 foot rule camping rule doesn't explicitly mention Franconia Notch. I'm unfamiliar with the zoning but even if this area falls under "Pemigewasset Wilderness" it doesn't include the 200-foot rule.

So, were the camp-sites illegal and can someone direct me to a clearer (or more comprehensive) set of camping/backcountry rules for the WMNF? Again, I'm relatively new to the area (first visited it in the early 80's but that doesn't count with regards to current regulations) so forgive me if I've asked a question whose answer is readily found.



BTW, I normally day-hike and have no immediate plans for camping. Other than my somewhat outdated circa 1998 AMC guidebook, I don't have a handle on what is/isn't permitted with regards to backcountry travel. For example, I recently learned from this forum that there's a parking fee charged at certain trail-heads (but not all trail-heads).

 

[nartreb]

You found the most complete and official description of the rules. There is no elevation ceiling [except treeline] and no single site-to-trail distance; the latter varies.

As you correctly surmised, a key question is whether the campsites were within the Pemi Wilderness - if they were, then they need to be 200 ft from any trail.

edit: I misread your location description. I thought you'd said between Liberty and Flume, which is all below treeline. From Little Haystack northwards, the treeline restriction applies (plus restrictions on being too close to Falling Waters or Liberty Springs trails)

In that area the border is carefully drawn so that the Franconia Ridge Trail falls outside the Wilderness. So if they were [below treeline on] on the west/south side of the trail they violated no rules, and if as you say they were within ten feet of the trail, then even if they were on the east/north side then they were almost certainly outside the Pemi and still not violating any rules. (I believe the border was drawn 66 feet from the trail.)

The Franconia Notch state park has separate rules (in short: no camping outside the established campground), it's not considered part of WMNF. But the Franconia Ridge trail is all outside the state park.

 

[David Metsky]

So, were the camp-sites illegal and can someone direct me to a clearer (or more comprehensive) set of camping/backcountry rules for the WMNF?

The link you found is essentially the full rules on camping in the Whites. If it's not forbidden there, it's legal. That doesn't necessarily mean it follows Leave No Trace guidelines but LNT isn't the law.

If you're not in a restricted area (Wilderness area, near a hut/shelter/campsite, or specified body of water/road) then you can pretty much camp where you want. There are no elevation specific rules except for those relating to the Alpine Zone.

 

[Peaks]

Well, a couple of good questions here, and I'll take a stab at it.

First rule to keep in mind: No camping within 1/4 mile of any developed facility, such as a shelter or established tentsite. Generally, you should see a USFS 8 1/2 x 11 sign on trails when you are within 1/4 mile of such a facility, noting that you are entering a restricted use area.

Second, no camping and fires in the Alpine zone, unless there is 2 feet of snow cover. Again, you should see a USFS 8 1/2 x 11 sign on trails alerting you to the fact that you are entering an alpine zone.

Third, the Franconia Ridge trail boarders on the Wilderness area. So, on the east side of the trail, it would be subject to Wilderness regulatons, but the Franconia Ridge Trail and the west side of the trail are not.

In your case, between Liberty and Little Haystack, the Franconia Ridge Trail is not one of the trails listed for no camping and no fires within 200 feet of the trail. So, bootleg campsites are OK on the west side of the trail, but in theory, not on the east side of the trail unless they are more than 200 feet off trail. But, between Little Haystack and Lafayette, it's all Alpine zone. So, no camping and no fires on this section of trail unless there is 2 feet of snow cover.

Many of the illegal sites in the USFS have a no camping sign, and fire rings have been disbursed.

When I was on the Franconia Ridge Alpine Zone over July 4 weekend, I noticed that the illegal campsite between Little Haystack and Lincoln had been brushed in somewhat. And I disbursed the remants of fire rings at Little Haystack and Lafayette. If they have reappeared since then, I'll disburse them again while I am up there again this weekend.

Your best reference for where it's legal to camp and where it's not is the USFS Backcountry Camping rules. I don't know if my reply clarifies things for you or not.

 

[Will]

between Liberty and Little Haystack, the Franconia Ridge Trail is not one of the trails listed for no camping and no fires within 200 feet of the trail. So, bootleg campsites are OK on the west side of the trail, but in theory, not on the east side of the trail unless they are more than 200 feet off trail

Well reasoned and well stated, though wrong. And you are one of the bright ones who do research. Imagine the difficulties average hikers have in figuring all this out! Thus the need to bring a lawyer and surveyor along with you if you want to sleep in the Whites.

A couple of the sites the OP refers to had "no camping - revegetation" signs up for awhile; some group or individual, legitimately or not, was trying to take these legal sites off the board by this means. Sometimes a caretaker or someone will simply brush in the legal sites. One of my favorites on the slope above Zealand Pond was totally trashed a couple of years ago because someone apparently didn't like us dirt baggers camping in his notion of what should be illegal.

 

[Trail Boss]

Thank you all for the prompt and detailed replies.

Wow! Talk about being within an inch of the rules! Based on your explanations, four of the five sites were between Liberty and Little Haystack so in wooded terrain thereby legal. I seem to recall three of the four were on the west side and one (large one) was on the east. Anyway, there was no signage indicating one shouldn't camp there. There was also one on the west side, in a thicket of stunted trees, between Little Haystack and Lincoln. That's the one that made me laugh out loud and say "Really? Here?!?" I imagine this is the illegal site mentioned by Peaks. The photo I have of this site (taken August 20th) shows a small pile of branches blocking its entrance. There are a few rocks strewn about, possibly another method to discourage tenting.

I must admit I'm surprised the four other camp-sites are permitted (frankly, a bit of an eye-sore being so close to the trail) but that's just the perspective of a newcomer. A few more hikes in the Whites and I won't even notice them. Thanks all for getting me up to speed with the local rules.


Addendum
OK, so just after posting, I read Will's reply and now I'm unsure which part is/isn't legal.

 

[Will]

I read Will's reply and now I'm unsure which part is/isn't legal.

Nor am I, and I have read everything there is, multiple times, and discussed the rules with experienced Whites hikers and officials. There is disagreement; different interpretations.

I am not an expert.

My quite possibly faulty understanding is that the Franconia Ridge Trail is outside the Pemi. East side, west side (all around the town, so to speak). One interpretation is that camping is legal ON the trail and to 66 feet out to the East, but illegal between 67 and 199 feet.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm referring obviously to the below tree line area of the trail you are discussing, above tree line is a whole other set of issues with their own complications.

 

[peakbagger]

There was an area just north of the Liberty Spring Trail junction with the Franconia Ridge trail that was not covered by the criteria in the backcountry regulations that was posted last year as "no camping revegetation area" by the FS. This was never covered by any written notice that I could find. These sites were quite close to the trail and not ideal but used to be popular when Liberty Springs was closed or folks didn't want to pay the $8. I am not sure of the status of these sites this year.

I believe that someone has posted the legal bounds of the Pemi wilderness area in the past and determined that the trail is the boundary. This would lead me to believe that camping on the west side of the trail is legal as lng as it is 1/4 mile away from any cabin or campsite and outside of the prohibited treeline area. The east side of the trail is in theory in the wilderness so the wilderness area restrictions would apply.

 

[David Metsky]

A couple of the sites the OP refers to had "no camping - revegetation" signs up for awhile; some group or individual, legitimately or not, was trying to take these legal sites off the board by this means.

Those are generally put up by FS Rangers and are legitimate. It's part of the forest management plan.

 

[Will]

Those are generally put up by FS Rangers and are legitimate. It's part of the forest management plan.

Absolutely. All part of the overall management plan. No one would put up such a sign just as a ploy to kill a particular legal campsite, must have been part of a big picture management plan.

In any case the signs are gone so the revegetation was, apparently, remarkably successful.

 

[Peaks]

Trail Boss,

Without furthering the discussion too much, I suspect that one reason why the USFS may tolerate campsites on both sides of the Franconia Ridge trail (assuming that the Franconia Ridge Trail is the Wilderness boundry) between Liberty Springs and Little Haystack is that there is no signs saying that you are entering a Wilderness Area, and therefore, doesn't enforce Wilderness Area restrictions.

Also, the site you mention between Little Haystack and Lincoln is within the Alpine Zone, and thus, you need 2 feet of snow cover before legally camping there.

 

[Will]

The east side of the [Franconia Ridge] trail is in theory in the wilderness so the wilderness area restrictions would apply.

No. Everybody has to do his own due diligence, but I am personally satisfied that the Pemi Wilderness boundary is generally 66 feet off trail to the East. Thus, one interpretation is that sleeping is permitted on the trail or up to 66 feet off trail E, then prohibited between 66+ feet and 199+ feet off trail E, then permitted 200 feet+ on out. Another interpretation is that the reference to 200 feet away from a trail does not apply to the FR Trail since that trail is not itself within the Pemi Wilderness boundary, and thus sleeping is permitted on the Franconia Ridge Trail on out E continuously. [EDITED TO ADD: Obviously, until other restrictions cut in]

To the W pretty much everybody agrees sleeping is permitted except when other boundaries cut in.

The 1/4 mile prohibition around Liberty Springs Campsite obviously applies. As do the tree-line restrictions.

None of this has anything to do with Leave No Trace, common sense or courtesy, all of which are far more important than the rules IMO.

My position is clear over the years: we should not mislead people about where they can sleep, just because we believe it's for the greater good of preventing our beloved areas from getting trashed. I'm not referring to you, I think you just listened to other people, believed, and passed it on in good faith. We need to _advise_ LNT, common sense, courtesy; lead and show by example. But truth is a huge value that can't be brushed aside.

 

[peakbagger]

Thus my objection to the FS "spot posting" sites under the general authority of a management plan. If they want to post the sites as no camping, they should be listed somewhere publically accessible in advance. A visitor to the area should be able to in advance be able to look at a set of concise rules like those posted by the FS and then be able to plan that if they stay within the rules that they can camp. Putting up spot signs under a general authority clause with no prior specific notice to me is bad form. If they don't want folks to camp in specific areas outside of the specifically banned areas, they should have a section appended to the rules with these exceptions.

Realistically, the sites on the ridgeline are generally used by AT thru hikers who tend to get in late inevitably after the Liberty Spring Site is full. For many years the caretakers would direct folks up to the ridge for overflow as the alternative is quite a steep drop down down the slope. Although it happens, I just don't see much attraction for someone to setup immediately adjacent to a trail at 3 in the afternoon and spending a weekend with folks walking right by.

A general observation is that a large number of 4ks in the whites have spots just at or before treeline or on the wooded summits very close to the summit. These generally are very small clearings that might at best hold a small tent and generally aren't very pleasant spots but they do seem to get use.

 

[Will]

Although it happens, I just don't see much attraction for someone to setup immediately adjacent to a trail at 3 in the afternoon and spending a weekend with folks walking right by.

YES!

It rarely happens because it makes no sense. I reluctantly admit I have stopped by afternoon near-trail-legal campers (mostly elsewhere) to converse and subtly tried to make them feel uncomfortable about it. Suggested alternatives. Pointed out the uncomfortableness of it. Been borderline obnoxious. But never tried to lead any legal camper to believe he was in an unpermitted area.

The sites talked about in this thread are almost always late setups/ early departures. Plus LNT. No harm, no foul.

 

[RoySwkr]

Thus my objection to the FS "spot posting" sites under the general authority of a management plan. If they want to post the sites as no camping, they should be listed somewhere publically accessible in advance.

I agree

A general observation is that a large number of 4ks in the whites have spots just at or before treeline or on the wooded summits very close to the summit. These generally are very small clearings that might at best hold a small tent and generally aren't very pleasant spots but they do seem to get use.

Of course that helps if you want to be on the summit at midnight

Another explanation is that the summit may be flatter than the terrain on the way up. Disadvantages include that they are likely to be farther from water and if secluded they often contain toilet paper from day hikers.

 

[Will]

... they are likely to be farther from water and if secluded they often contain toilet paper from day hikers.

In the Presidentials, particularly, there are many legal sites where the common wisdom provided here is that there is no sleeping permitted. But yes they are frequently ALSO bathrooms for the masses who can't be bothered to bury. Sometimes you can press in past the gardens but sometimes you just have to say to yourself, crap is just dirt that hasn't quite optimized.

 

[JCarter]

In the Presidentials, particularly, there are many legal sites where the common wisdom provided here is that there is no sleeping permitted. But yes they are frequently ALSO bathrooms for the masses who can't be bothered to bury. Sometimes you can press in past the gardens but sometimes you just have to say to yourself, crap is just dirt that hasn't quite optimized.

I can say that I was somewhat disappointed that when I camped on Stairs Mtn back in August, the first use my trowel got was burying somebody else's "unoptimized dirt". Kind of detracted from the Wilderness Experience.