Two Rescued From Garfield

I think the problem with the signage is that it's probably being stolen. Even though a 5K, it's still a tourist hike, so that would not surprise me. I can't find my own pictures but I was sure I've seen a sign there that mentioned the GRT. My first visit in 2001 there was at least one orange sign there. Google images shows several different configurations. Here's a couple. Both of these have a GRT sign.

JustJoe said:

I think the problem with the signage is that it's probably being stolen. Even though a 5K, it's still a tourist hike, so that would not surprise me. I can't find my own pictures but I was sure I've seen a sign there that mentioned the GRT. My first visit in 2001 there was at least one orange sign there. Google images shows several different configurations. Here's a couple. Both of these have a GRT sign.

Click to expand...

Nice pictures and maybe a good point. I've noticed in the last few years, ( maybe its just me) that signage in general has taking a beating. I have not been up Pierce in awhile, but that sign at treeline has been either been set up twisted or laying on the ground for quite some time. Thats a junction where given its usage by alot of beginning winter hikers, could be problematic if not signed correctly. Do trail maintainers maintain signage as well? or does it fall under the USFS and or AMC?

sierra said:

Nice pictures and maybe a good point. I've noticed in the last few years, ( maybe its just me) that signage in general has taking a beating. I have not been up Pierce in awhile, but that sign at treeline has been either been set up twisted or laying on the ground for quite some time. Thats a junction where given its usage by alot of beginning winter hikers, could be problematic if not signed correctly. Do trail maintainers maintain signage as well? or does it fall under the USFS and or AMC?

Click to expand...

There does seem to be a general decline in sign maintenance and/or increase in signage theft and abuse. I can think of a few signs that have been down awhile, like the one you mentioned near Pierce at Crawford/Webster junction. Curious as well who is responsible as you mentioned.

The Forest Service, some years ago, took down the signs on the Carters. When I inquired about this, they told me they adopted a policy of not replacing signs unless needed for navigation or resource protection. Arguably, this is a navigation case, but it may explain the (perception of) lack of sign maintenance in general.

Tim

bikehikeskifish said:

The Forest Service, some years ago, took down the signs on the Carters. When I inquired about this, they told me they adopted a policy of not replacing signs unless needed for navigation or resource protection. Arguably, this is a navigation case, but it may explain the (perception of) lack of sign maintenance in general.

Tim

Click to expand...

I followed the link you put up and thought that thread was very informative as I missed it last time around, ( was living in CO ). I can understand maintaining only the signs needed for navigation or resource protection, I mean there are alot of signs out there. That being said, even signs in the " Approved catagories" are in need of alot of TLC. I personnally think the AMC would do a better job at sign maintenace ( no offense USFS). I mean, I'm not a member and really not thier biggest advocate, BUT, they maintain trails and build them better then anyone Ive seen in the country.

sierra said:

I personnally think the AMC would do a better job at sign maintenace ( no offense USFS). I mean, I'm not a member and really not thier biggest advocate, BUT, they maintain trails and build them better then anyone Ive seen in the country.

Click to expand...

AMC handles the signs on their trails; usually signs are done by the same agency that maintains the trail. (I don't know if smaller groups, like WODC, have their own sign shop.) Every trail in the WMG is labeled "Trail name (maintainer)" and often the signs are marked, too. AMC signs are "AMC" in one corner and the land manager ("USFS", "NHDP") in the other.

Trail adopters aren't responsible for the signs. For AMC, at least, we do mention in adopter reports if a sign is missing or in bad repair, as with bog bridges, etc., but they aren't an adopter responsibility.

FRT is AMC. They could probably make it easier to submit trail condition information. I'll send an email that hopefully can find its way to the right person.

EDIT: Looking at the pictures more carefully, we went from three signs to three signs, just with the GRT sign being replaced with a double of the Greenleaf one. I wonder if someone wrote down the wrong sign number when scheduling a replacement. If somebody's up there on a good day, could you check on the numbers on the back of the remaining signs?

jniehof said:

EDIT: Looking at the pictures more carefully, we went from three signs to three signs, just with the GRT sign being replaced with a double of the Greenleaf one. I wonder if someone wrote down the wrong sign number when scheduling a replacement. If somebody's up there on a good day, could you check on the numbers on the back of the remaining signs?

Click to expand...

I found another of my own from 2004. It's tough to see one, but there are 4 signs on the post. Which in it's proper state, is what I believe should be on it. 1 for the FRT, 1 for the GRT, and 2 for the Greenleaf Tr. so you can see it coming from either direction. I've also posted 2 links to Google images of Lafayette. You can see several different configurations of the signs. A lot with 1 or more being missing. And you can see the different degrees of weather to the signs indicating newly replaced ones.



https://www.google.com/search?q=mt+...=xcK7VInsNYeegwTW3ICoCg&ved=0CB8QsAQ#imgdii=_

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1....0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.img..6.0.0.PKpLPKhX5Js

Obviously that is a very important navigational sign. But again, being such a tourist trap of a hike, theft is most likely the culprit for the missing signs. I'm sure the AMC or whom ever does their best, but it's probably very had to keep up with replacing them. Just my opinion.

I beg to differ on "AMC maintaining and building them better". Realistically MATC, GMC and RMC, DOC (and other groups) in the New England region can match or better the typical work that AMC is doing of late. There are numerous skilled people who can build trails to a high standard but is comes down to resources. It takes a lot of labor and equipment to build a trail properly, there are some skilled volunteers who do incredible trail work but the reality is there are few folks that do it on a volunteer basis so the majority of the trail building is done by paid crews. Some of more skilled folks end up moving to whatever organization has funding. Unfortunately paid trail building is not a career, most folks drift out as the pay and career progression is quite limited.

Therein lies the rub, it costs money to build trails and maintain trails yet there is no long term reliable source of funding for this work and in general what is available is decreasing. The FS approach is to minimize trail maintenance under the guise of implementing Wilderness policy (the pemi bridge removal and the Dry River trail downgrade)and also allowing neglect or natural events to abandon trails (Mt Isolation trail west). Prior to that, the WMNF for many years shifted trail maintenance in the Whites to the AMC and for many years AMC had a large enough base of membership to support professional trail crews. Unfortunately, their membership is declining and AMC has made a strategic shift to move resources to their owned land in Maine from federal land where they are under increasing scrutiny. They still keep a presence in the whites because of tradition and their membership expects it but the Maine project is what they deem to be their future.

AMC (and other organizations) have been rolling out a new method of trail maintenance where they get unskilled volunteers to pay for the privilege to do trail maintenance. Alternatively they run youth programs and get paid to run trail maintenance under guise of youth development. They seem to think its the wave of the future as they recently elected to alienate one of their most successful long term volunteer trail crews to the point where they resigned en-masse. Unfortunately, although the "pay to play" folks may be enthusiastic, they aren't skilled so the trade off is quantity versus quality. This results in lots of tree trimming, water bar cleaning, trash pickup, possibly a log bridge and maybe even some turnpiking but its usually only on trails that are convenient to Camp Dodge (or another paid volunteer base) within a short distance of a trailhead. I suspect there are stashes of rusting griphoists and steel cable that eventually will be sold off as scrap or hung up on the wall of a lodge.

I unfortunately don't see a solution that is going to lead to improved trails and or signage in the whites. We may have all lived and hiked through the peak of the trail network in the WMNF. The major tourist routes will stay open but signage and blazing maintenance will decrease and lesser used trails will initial degrade and when damaged by natural events, they will be abandoned. Of course the number of hikers will continue so there will be more cases of folks getting lost.

peakbagger said:

AMC (and other organizations) have been rolling out a new method of trail maintenance where they get unskilled volunteers to pay for the privilege to do trail maintenance.

Click to expand...

The adopter program is a good one for taking the lower-level maintenance off the shoulders of the paid crews (and agreed, the higher level stuff really should rest with the skilled). I haven't done an AMC volunteer "vacation" yet. When I spent a week building the CDT, the forest service sent a person to oversee (as well as a flagger that had come through earlier, a sawyer and a few other folks on and off) and CDTA sent a staffer. It was a pretty good balance where the pros did the brain work and we grunts, grunted (stump busting and the like). The impressive bit was that CDTA didn't charge us a cent and provided our food (and volunteer cooks). Then CDTA went under. So even that model is apparently unsustainable in this world.

Bottom line, trails need money. One can make donations directly to AMC's trails fund, although I think that affects tax-deductibility and I understand people may be particularly averse with the Cardigan situation. WODC probably doesn't yet have more money than they know what to do with. There's always the ATC and now the CTDC.

jniehof said:

AMC handles the signs on their trails

Click to expand...

I'm wrong! AMC got back to me...USFS handles AT signage in the WMNF, including "feeder trails, spur trails, and all facilities regardless of maintainer unless located within a NH State Park." The rounded edge and unpainted also suggests USFS, AMC signs usually being white paint with green lettering.

I'll dig up and contact the correct ranger district.

We all know of "dangerous intersections" where, for one reason or another, there are more accidents than there should be. One would hope that somebody would ask the engineers to have a look and see what can be done. Maybe a warning light, maybe better signage, maybe redesigning the ramps or whatever.

Point is, there are spots that are troublesome, and we hope someone looks to see what can be done about it.

I agree with folks that to a great extent, hikers should go into the mountains prepared to care for themselves, but there are places where we would hope responsible authorities will step in and rectify. That may mean rerouting a trail, or putting in steps or a bar, and in this instance, thinking about better signage.

What I would suggest is simply putting up another sign just off the junction with the trail name and a mileage marker to the next trail junction, just to make people doubly sure that they are in fact heading to Garfield and not down to Greenleaf.

Whatever the cause, the current system is not working adequately.

I'm not suggesting we put up more signs everywhere, but I do think that the current system is not serving hikers adequately, and people are paying a price for it.

Brian

Earlier in this thread there were mentions of several treeless places where the hiker has a choice of more than one hole in the trees when seeking the trail. It is true that one can always prepare with a little map-and-compass work so as to know the correct magnetic bearing for the route from a known point, but another method is to build a very tall cairn right by the correct hole in the woods. Such a cairn can be seen above (most) snowdrifts, and if you have read the trail description you will know why it is where it is. IMO that big cairn matters as a lifesaver, so if I had only so much time, I would make that one taller. Just a hypothetical, and wouldn't want to exceed the USFS standards of course...

peakbagger @ #88 mentions the AMC's model for trailwork. What I did not know is that the membership is declining. That helps to explain their changes, but probably the changes result from financial calculations. At Cardigan in 2015 they plan on 6 weeks of teen crews at 10 teens/crew @ $302/teen, plus a week of adult crew: 10 adults @$385/adult. They work a 36-hour week: 2160 hours pre-paid at $18,950. Two leaders/crew and food is provided. Expand this to the 70 weeks of teen crew and 15 weeks of adult crew throughout the AMC and you can see big money flowing through 30,000+ hours.

There is a more detailed discussion of AMC's plans for Cardigan at post #26 of the thread titled "AMC: pay us to build...

hikerbrian said:

I think the phrase is, "There are old climbers, and there are bold climbers, but there aren't a lot of old, bold climbers." I've heard it attributed to different folks.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that is a variation of the "original". The Alaskan bush pilots say it a lot.

Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.

— E. Hamilton Lee, 'Ham' Lee began his long and distinguished career as an instructor pilot during World War I. After leaving the Army Air Corps, he flew the airmail for United Air Services, later United Airlines. The —old pilots, bold pilots— statement was made on his retirement from United Air Lines in 1949. 'Ham' Lee did indeed become an old pilot. On his 100th birthday he fly a restored United Airlines DC-3

Click to expand...