Kevin Rooney
New member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 3,667
- Reaction score
- 354
The big difference to me is that I've hiked fairly extensively in the Adirondacks, and virtually not at all in the Whites. One difference I sense -- from studying maps and guidebooks -- is that the Whites seem to have a more elaborate trail system that provides multiple approaches to peaks and greater opportunities for loop hikes. Is that an accurate perception?
G.
Yes, it's an accurate perception. You will find some minor variations in trail signage, as some signs are made to USFS specs, some to AMC, some to RMC, some to Wonalancet, and there might be others as well. Mostly these differences are cosmetic. It's also rather rare to see anything other than paint blazes on trees, unlike the metal disks in the Daks. White paint is mostly often used for the AT, like the GMC uses to mark the LT and sections of the LT and AT which overlap. And, there's an effort to NOT put a daub of paint on cairns above treeline.
Another difference between the two regions is the relative height of signs/trail markings. Typically in the Daks these are placed very much higher than the Whites (as well as most other regions of the country where I've hiked). Have often been curious as to the reason why they were/are placed higher, but have not seen any explanations. Maybe the higher snow depths? Sorry, couldn't resist!
Last edited: