AMC: Pay us to build our private spur for our paying guests.

AMC: close Hurricane Gap Trail. Public: comment until January 23 2015

Good evening, fellow hikers.

First, read the press release: nhstateparks.org, what's happening, press releases, proposed trail changes at Cardigan. We have a month to comment on this proposal, and the more who do, the more valid the process. I hope you post your comments on this thread as well. There are larger questions here which I do not address because I wanted to address the specifics of the AMC proposal as the state officials requested.


Dec 19 at 11:08 AM
The AMC makes two claims here. I offer my findings and recommendations:


1) Most users are AMC's paying guests from High Cabin. If this is true, the AMC has offered no traffic survey as proof. More important, even if true, their claim in no way invalidates the right of other hikers to walk this public trail as they go about their lawful business.
Those hikes are a matter of public record. Go to newenglandtrailconditions.com, search Hurricane Gap Trail, and find 35 trips over that trail recorded since Jan 9 2010. Furthermore:
- Most hikers do not post on netc.com. I use that trail to travel over that ridge regularly. It is sheltered from the wind, less icy, and less steep than the open ledges on Clark Trail. It provides the easiest access to High Cabin from both ends, making it vital for use by emergency personnel, especially compared to the AMC's proposed spur (see below). It is a pretty hike in its own right as it traverses a zone of small fir, spruce, and birch trees amid luxuriously deep green moss.
- This trail is on thousands of maps and guidebooks. It is convenient for countless hikers since 1931. To close it effectively means spending much time re-arranging the landscape to obliterate the trail, which is kept open by AMC volunteers.

2) The trail is so eroded that it is not feasible to fix it where it is, so it should be closed. I say it can be fixed, so need not be closed, and benefits the public where it is now. How to fix it?
Short version: once I heard of the AMC's plans, I went to the trail before snow fell. I looked at their proposed replacement spur, and at the east end of the trail where the deepest gully is, just uphill from PJ Ledge. I considered four possible fixes:
- SE bypass: A relocation around the gully to the south involves deep moss on gentle slopes, and would require a long stretch of trail hardening and drainage before it could be used.
- Fix it where it is: widen the gully, more steps, and better waterbars, including one at the mouth of the gully to send water out into the woods away from PJ Ledge and Clark Trail.
- NE connector: If you look at the map, you see that Clark Trail runs parallel to HG Trail just uphill of it until it turns right to climb up open ledge. I scouted between the two trails and discovered they are about 30 yards apart at the closest point, just uphill of the top of the gully on HG. That means that the AMC can helicopter two dozen of their 3x8x8' tamarack for bog bridges to the open ledge, and the bridges can keep the hikers above the fragile moss on that route. HG Tr downhill of there can be only a drainage ditch, but still with the new waterbar at the mouth of the gully. Uphill of there to the High Cabin, the trail needs only 3 waterbars and about 8 rock steps in gullies to be easily hikeable as well as stable. Uphill of High Cabin, there are a few more places where waterbars and steps would help. This is the kind of work that a volunteer crew of 6 or more and a chainsaw operator can do in a weekend by staying at the High Cabin. That would mean the AMC got no rent from the place for a weekend.
- Private spur from N: The AMC's plan to build a spur trail from Clark Trail down to the cabin means they have to build the trail over a granite escarpment about 20' high, using a slot in the ledge that looks to me like a 30-35 degree angle. That means jackhammering many steps from the rock ledge, or tearing up the woods to find rocks enough for the staircase. It also means that tired guests with large packs must climb onto an icy and windy ledge, find the spur, and make their way down it and across the headwaters of Bailey Brook on stone steps or a small bridge, then there is over 100' of woods to have to harden into a durable trail so they don't erode it like the present trail is.

I favor the NE Connector. It stabilizes the present trail, preserves a popular and ancient public trail, and doesn't require specialized skills to build or tend. The AMC's paid seasonal professional crew has many jobs elsewhere on popular trails much more eroded than this one.

I believe the AMC's claims are on soft ground. Let us see what others think.

You'll recall that on December 21 2014 I posted a response to the State of NH's request for comments from the public about the AMC's request to close Hurricane Gap Trail (HGTr) on Mt. Cardigan, and to replace it with a spur trail leading from Clark Trail to their High-Cabin for the exclusive use of their paying customers. Public emails are due at [email protected] by January 23 2015.

In my response I questioned the AMC's two claims:
1) that most hikers on the present trail are their guests. But on newenglandtrailconditions.com there are 35 hikes on HGTr recorded since January 9 2010. It is also much more sheltered from stormy weather and has less ice flow than Clark Trail.
2) that HGTr is not feasible to fix. I visited the site, considered four fixes of which the NE connector is most feasible, and am of the opinion that closing a popular public trail to replace it with a private one is as unnecessary as it is arrogant and outrageous.

Now new information has arrived: The AMC has applied for a Recreational Trails Program grant to use public money to pay them to erase HGTr and build their exclusive private spur trail. Why do that? Because they didn't get as rich as they are by spending their own money when they can use their matching share of labor to leverage money from other people, of course.
Normally the project is to repair or restore a trail needing major repairs or relocation after a large-scale natural disaster like Hurricane Irene or a decision by a landowner to revoke permission for a popular public trail. Such are perfectly reasonable ways to spend our tax money.

The purpose of this grant request is unprecedented, and the AMC does not need the money which per the RTP guidelines must be between $5,000 and $50,000. The AMC's 2013 annual report lists the Club's endowment at $60,505, their operating surplus at $152,000, and the increase in their net assets at $5,750,000 (www.outdoors.org or AMC Outdoors magazine July-August 2014 pg. 26).
The AMC will have six weeks of staff-led volunteer trail crews at Cardigan in 2015; each is 10 people at 36 hrs/week, totaling 2160 hours. The volunteers pay for the privilege: 5 weeks of teens @ $3020/week, + 1 week of adults @ $3850/week. $15,100 + $3850 = $18,950 gross income from these volunteers. These are in addition to three trailwork weekends and 29 adopters tending short sections of trail for routine upkeep ( www.outdoors.org/volunteer/volunteer for trails/learn more about volunteer opportunities/ 2015 Teen and Adult Trail Crews; adopt-a-trail/orphaned trails).
By the way, the AMC currently charges $159/night + tax to rent the High Cabin, and there are no weekend nights open before late May. That means an income of at least $6000 just this Winter and Spring.

No, the AMC does not desperately need the money. But there is one more twist yet to come.

If you go to the Nh State Parks website, nhstateparks.org/pertner and community resources, recreational trails program, there is a pdf called NH Recreational trails program Guidelines. Open it and read past the first section "Eligible Projects" to the second section "Ineligible Projects." There you can read the last sentence; "For profit trails systems... are also ineligible." What exactly is a private spur for the exclusive use of paying guests if not a for profit trail?

The guidelines for RTP grants say the landowner has to give permission in writing before the application is considered complete and eligible to be decided by the grants administrator in the Bureau of trails. How the DRED officials who are ampowered to give or deny that permission decide will be heavily influenced by the public's comments. You can email them at [email protected].

Thank you very much for your time today.

Great info - thanks for bringing this to light!!!!! This is completely insane.

If you are a NH resident, be sure you copy your executive councilor when you send an e-mail to DRED. This link will get to the right councilor http://www.nh.gov/council/districts.html.

To folks not familiar with NH politics, the governor is fairly weak and tends to be short term, executive councilors have the power of the purse and can be in office for decades. Most state departments really don't want the council looking over their shoulders.

Please note: in paragraph 4 line 2 I state the AMC's endowment is $60,505. The true number is 1000 times more :$60,505,000. I apologize for any confusion my error caused.

I just wrote to email provided. I'm an AMC member but this simply outrageous!

Thanks for the update on the Appalachian Money Club's latest scheme.

There's no way this would be considered a for profit trail system. I can understand being upset at the closure of a trail that you like, but I take issue with a lot of the rest of your post, especially what you consider the motivation and the money, which isn't always fungible.

I think people should speak their minds, for sure, but please seek out multiple sources of information.

Good evening, Mr. Metsky,
You are quite right. The public trails on Mt. Cardigan State Forest are not a for profit trail system, but a private spur for the exclusive use of paying guests at High Cabin who generate an income of ~ $20,000 a year is pretty likely to be a for profit trail. The RTP guidelines do forbid spending public money on such a trail, and the burden of proof is on the applicant, which is the AMC.

You are also right that income results from activities that also have costs. Nonetheless, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit the size of the AMC can find private funding (indeed, they have a Special Projects fund of their own they can tap), and I have shown that they already plan 2160 hours of staff-led volunteer-paid trail work at Cardigan this year. They really do not need public money for work on Hurricane Gap Trail.

Lastly, please re-read my post "AMC: Close Hurricane Gap Trail" from 12/21/2014. The public does use this trail, the AMC's claim that most users are their guests is unsubstantiated, and I did visit the site, consider four possible fixes including the AMC's, and conclude the NE connector is most feasible while keeping the trail open to the public. My sources of information are open to the public and personal observation on the ground.

Thanks again for writing. You do an excellent job of moderating these fora, by the way, Sir.

Creag Nan Drochaid said:

Thanks

Click to expand...

You are a gentleman. I hope to come back in some future life as a gentleman so I won't call quite as many people asshats.

Grants usually go to those who request them. It's likely the AMC has a paid employee who responsibility is to write grants. Schools and corporations have employees who write requests for grants too. If endowments were taken into consideration, a Harvard education should be free, their endowment is in the Billions and yet kids go to some really old buildings and pay a lot of money to go there. The cost of a college education goes up annually at a rate on healthcare can match.

Private trail only? Is it gated and do you need a password? Even the privately owned Elk Lake Lodge in the ADK's allow all hikers to use their trails, some are closed during hunting season. Will they not allow non-members to fill water bottles and use the bathroom like they do at the huts in the Whites? if you hike beyond the cabin, what happens, does the trail led off a cliff, limbo or to a private security firm that handles the undesirables? (or just a spur to the cabin from another trail ending at the cabin? I can't imagine them not allowing water and toilet use)

Assume they listed what the grant was for but have they ever done any maintenance on the mountain on other trails? Did they collect money for that? If not, how dare they do volunteer work on the mountain.

What would the public money have been used for otherwise? State and federal budgets are made in such a way that if they budget a set amount for outdoor recreation and it goes unused, next year they will not budget it and when a group "needs" it, it will not be in the budget. (There are too many needs and desires for too few dollars, everyone has a pet project. If not in your state or for something you want, we refer to that as Pork)

Is that the way it should work? Probably not, you might want to give it back to the taxpayers (a few dollars each) or help the needy. (depending on one's political slant of tax relief or helping the needy) and then next year you could tell the people, this year we are going to use the money for trails and SAR but it does not work that way.

Dear Will,
As you know, you do not have to wait until some reincarnation to act with kindness and courtesy towards other people. You have free will and control over your own actions, and can choose to act as you will right now.
Preaching aside, what is the benefit from alienating people when we can avoid that and still get the message out? I want to inform possibly interested parties so they will send their comments to [email protected]. I hope they will also post on this thread so our community can discuss these issues.
And by the way, your compliment was unexpected but welcome, and I thank you.

Mike P. said:

Even the privately owned Elk Lake Lodge in the ADK's allow all hikers to use their trails, some are closed during hunting season.

Click to expand...

Not taking sides either way, but wanted to point out that the trails on Elk Lake Lodge property that are open to the public are open because the state negotiated a conservation easement with the Lodge for public access. So, they've gotten financial compensation for "allowing" all hikers to use those trails. And there are many trails and destinations on the property that are in fact open only to paying guests of the Lodge.

That's the arrangement in many places. In the Adirondacks, a similar arrangement allows public hiking on the trails in the AMR. There are also private trails in the AMR that are not open to the public.

I've only hiked Cardigan once, so I'm not familiar with all the trails. Where are the trail that are the subject of this thread located? Are these trails on private land or public land? What, if any, easements or other legal agrements already exist?

TCD, Hurricane Gap Trail runs through the saddle between Mt Cardigan and South Peak. Clark Trail runs just north of it until it bends uphill to climb exposed icy ledges to the warden's cabin, where it turns right uphill to the summit of Mt. Cardigan. Both trails are entirely on Mt. cardigan state Forest, so no leases involved.

Moderator Note
Threads merged to keep all the information in one place

If you go to the Nh State Parks website, nhstateparks.org/pertner and community resources, recreational trails program, there is a pdf called NH Recreational trails program Guidelines. Open it and read past the first section "Eligible Projects" to the second section "Ineligible Projects." There you can read the last sentence; "For profit trails systems... are also ineligible." What exactly is a private spur for the exclusive use of paying guests if not a for profit trail?
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting, Creag.

The question that comes to mind, mainly to see if this could be setting a new precedent for future plans, is this:

Is anyone aware of these types of grants being given in similar situations, where a trail is given public grant money to be used for private paying customers?

If there is not a history, I worry less about it happening in this case and more about this grant being used in future cases to fund private or semiprivate trails, lodging, etc.

Aye, Raven,
You have seen the bigger picture. Plenty of money has gone to fix trails that lead to AMC huts. So far as I know that has never involved closing a trail the public relies on in order to replace it with one for the paying guests only. When the public's access is diminished for the benefit of the paying guests only, that is indeed something new.
In this case, the DRED officials want to gauge public sentiment before they decide what to do. If they decide the new private spur is OK and Hurricane Gap can be closed, there is the landowner permission for the RTP grant request to be decided by the RTP grants administrator in the Bureau of Trails. That administrator can still rule the grant ineligible because the new spur trail would be a for profit trail and the RTP guidelines forbid such grants.
The DRED officials might instead decide to deny the private spur request and favor another of the three fixes I studied, or yet others of which we know not. If they and the AMC amend the RTP grant request accordingly, the AMC is only fixing the present Hurricane Gap Trail and RTP money is no longer blocked by RTP guidelines.
The only sure thing here is that DRED wants our comments, and I hope many people are sending them. Thank you for yours.

I think harping on the idea that the trail is for profit is not beneficial. The AMC isn't making money on the High Cabin in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it is that big of a draw and the maintenance and upkeep costs aren't insignificant. I also think the state benefits from having the cabin use offered to citizens of the state. The trail is to provide access to a resource - everything else is noise, IMO. The cabin exists - there's going to be a trail to it.

The stronger argument is about closing public access to the Hurricane Gap trail. Concentrate on that to make your case as it's a tangible loss to the community. I don't recall having hiked the trail before, maybe I have but it didn't make an impression on me one way or the other. Losing trails is generally a bad thing, but I've worked to close trails which have deteriorated to the point that the work to save them is simply not worth it for the amount of use they get. I can't say if that is the case here.

I agree with Mr. Metsky's emphasis.

The matter of the AMC's private spur being a for profit trail only matters if and when the grants administrator considers the RTP request per the RTP guidelines. Before that can happen, the DRED officials have to approve the changes the AMC wants.

We return to the task at hand, comments on the DRED press release. Happy writing!