New AMC Hut in Crawford Notch???

In comparing Maine Huts and AMC Huts I think the former are a better value but considerably different experiences for outdoor experiences. (My experience is that the Maine Huts are further travel time than the White Mountains and huts).

On the other hand, AMC Huts are much more affordable than Canadian Rockies backcountry facilities. Location. Location. Location. The Rockies have much more international appeal, a market Maine Huts is also seeking and will likely get for its winter hut to hut experience.

I have no objection to another hut but have not been to the proposed location. May check it out this weekend. I suspect I would prefer it over the Highland Center which, aside from its location, presents lousy amenities for the price and ease of access.

I agree with those who question AMC's math. It is certainly designed to be convincing but loses on the credibility factor.

bikehikeskifish said:

I noticed the average cost number as well... sneaky. Lonesome is $131 in-season and $33 self-serve. 8 months * 131 + 4 months * 33 divided by 12 comes to $54 average.

Tim

Click to expand...

Seems like $98.33 to me (131*8 plus 4*33)/12. Did I miss something? Dang expensive.

Love the 10th Mtn Huts out here. All self service, $30-40/night/person for the most part, some less. Come to think of it, they stink and are awful. Don't go to them.

The concern mentioned by the AMC about splitting up the 14 miles between Zealand and Mizpah has already been addressed by the AMC Highland Center. Its not a hut, but it was conveniently not mentioned.

surf88 said:

The concern mentioned by the AMC about splitting up the 14 miles between Zealand and Mizpah has already been addressed by the AMC Highland Center. Its not a hut, but it was conveniently not mentioned.

Click to expand...

The Highland center is not on the AT. The gap they are trying to fill is Zealand hut to Mizpah. The new hut would break that gap for AT hikers.

NHPR has an article this morning regarding the hut. Some new info. This is the first time I have read of NHF&G raising objections.

Anyone want to kick in for a private lease on state land for 6K a year? Maybe the summit of Cathedral Ledge?

http://nhpr.org/post/controversy-over-whether-allow-new-amc-hut-crawford-notch-state-park

Barkingcat said:

Heck, why not go big -- the summit of Mt. Washington? That's state land, right?

Click to expand...

Only since 2008

Barkingcat said:

That has be worth $6K.

Click to expand...

Last time it went for just over 1.5 million.

The MHT also gives you three meals for an overnight stay. I believe the huts have a service road so that supplies can be hauled in, and trash hauled out. MHT's mission is different from AMC too, with a focus on developing eco-tourism in the Western Mountains. I like the MHT system. I wish I could afford to live up there.

I wonder if any of the current huts could be built today, and I wonder what percent of people against the construction of a new one would be for the removal of the existing ones. Personally, I haven't been swayed one way or the other yet. If I could lease a few acres of land for $500 a month though, I probably would.

The Mount Washington B&B (AKA the observatory) already has the B&B franchise for Mt Washington . More than a few ex staff members have privately commented that they signed up to be a weather observer and ended up being a tourist attraction. Now that the state has taken over the management of the day to day summit operations with full time staff during the winter (WMTW used to provide some of that role and after the generator fire the state decided they didn't trust the obs and assigned staff to the summit) The obs has been maximizing the facilities they have for several years by hosting the edutrips plus several private guiding services http://www.emsoutdoors.com/gear/mount-washington-observatory/offering a climb up and night on Mt Washington.
Then add in the snowcat day trips. Sure all of these options are for "members only" but anyone with a check book can become a member.

Arguably both organizations are non profit and both have reasons for being in the whites, its just inevitable that a non profit will grow to exceed its income and will always be searching for more income to grow. The obs went through several very rocky years where they tried to expand the organizations reach off the mountain and it almost took them down and things like edutrips, hosting guided winter trips and snowcat day trips are revenue that have gotten entrenched in their budget that allows them to continue their core goal. I will let others argue what AMCs primary focus in the whites is but they are quite upfront, their current hut system is booked full and they want to build a new accommodation so they can host more folks.

If the hut gets built can we count on increasing the number of lost people in the Thoreau Falls Trail and Shoal Pond Trail areas ?

Realistically, it would probably mean that they would start blazing those trails again or at least clear blow downs...

With respect to TJs comment. I have about an inch thick EIS on the justification for the hut system that AMC had to pay the FS for in 1998 in order to get the hut system permit extended, the EIS argues that compared to no huts, the huts have less impact as it manages a resource.

By the way Wildcat, Loon and Attitash pay far less per acre for WMNF leases than AMCs payments and are far more intrusive to the forest.

peakbagger said:

With respect to TJs comment. I have about an inch thick EIS on the justification for the hut system that AMC had to pay the FS for in 1998 in order to get the hut system permit extended, the EIS argues that compared to no huts, the huts have less impact as it manages a resource.

By the way Wildcat, Loon and Attitash pay far less per acre for WMNF leases than AMCs payments and are far more intrusive to the forest.

Click to expand...

I have heard mention of a 500 page EIS done. I'm guessing your copy is double-sided. I definitely think there is value to managing the resource.

Interesting comparison with the ski areas as I was thinking about those arrangements as well. The ski areas do seem to face less scrutiny here, but perhaps it is because the economic impacts are more direct? I would be curious to know what they pay per-acre.

peakbagger said:

By the way Wildcat, Loon and Attitash pay far less per acre for WMNF leases than AMCs payments and are far more intrusive to the forest.

Click to expand...

So then have we not already done enough environmental damage across the board whether it be a ski lodge or a hiker's hut?

360 pages double sided and then about 100 pages of unnumbered appendices

Looks like they are rethinking the location? Still seems they are determined to build another hut.