I wonder if someday new, more sustainable trails (with a gentle grade, switchbacks, good water bars etc) will be built to replace existing trails that are steep and prone to erosion (lower part of KRT comes to mind as a severely eroded example).
Microspikes are wear items
- Thread starter peakbagger
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
sierra
Well-known member
I posted a reply basically saying that inexperienced users were the cause of much trail destruction, but deleted it after.
That will never happen, because nobody has the manpower and the hours to do it. The reality is trails are bad for the land in that they are perfect avenues for water and water equals erosion. All trails attract water, water bars and rock walls help, but when you cut a trail, you invite erosion. Personally, it doesn't really bother me, the land is there to use imo, I don't mind stomping on it to get where I am going. That may sound crass, but at least I'm not a hypocrite about it. That being said, I clear water bars and remove a lot of debris as I hike and I hike every week. So, while I do add to the erosion as I hike, I do mitigate a degree of it by my hours of light trail maintenance week after week. In regards to closing trails or avoiding them during the shoulder seasons, I would never support that. I do honor closures like the Squam lake area closures, but if an area is open, I hike it.
Trails in the whites can be hardened and there have been attempts in the past and ongoing to do so on major trails that have been allowed to degrade. Old Bridal Path was maintained for year by volunteers but the volunteers dried up and a lot of their good work got bypassed by the public. When I hiked in NZ the government funded trail building and maintenance, on one popular trail, the Routeburn Track very similar to Crawford path, their budget 10 years ago was $300,000 per mile for maintenance. They flew up one yard bags of crushed rock with a helicopter to level out the trail and keep it dry.
If you look at the start of the rebuild of Old Bridal Path, it looks like the AMC is effectively going to build a very hardened trail. I expect a similar effort will be put in place on Falling Waters trail and expect the section along the brook and the falls may end up looking far different in the future as long as the money lasts and AMC gets their cut for managing it. I think previously I commented on the work done to date as "too good" Rather thana rough trail, they are going with rockwork that most people would love as their front steps. Great if resources were unlimited but they are not and IMHO, it would be best to spread the money around. Somewhat similar to the Crawford Path work where the local rocks were not good enough so they hauled in more via helicopter.
It predates me but people tell me that the lower section of Tuckerman Ravine trail used to go directly up the slope instead of the long stone lined switchbacks suitable for snow cats was built. I was in the area when the FS shut down the stretch between Hojo's and the upper Ravine for at least a season to completely rebuild and harden the trail. Lots of very large boulders were moved to create a rough but hardened set of steps. AMC reportedly spent a lot of resources long ago in building the Twinway from Greenleaf up to South Twin, that long ribbon of rock is not natural, it was built. RMC has been doing major trail reconstruction on the Northern Presidental's since they have had a paid crew and before. Look at trails like Lowes Path and they are nearly solid rock work. Lowes is now hardened to the point where micropikes are not going to do much but get dull on the rocks. If they can get the funding they have the skills but with the number of trails they have, they will never finish.
One of the claims to fame of the Grafton Loop Trail was that it was built to modern trail making standards, the work up the south side of Mt Speck is lesson in switchbacks and drainage. I dont now how many except to say numerous. The tradeoff is the slope never gets steep and the drainage never gets up enough velocity to erode the trail as its directed off. If I remember correctly it took joint crews from the state, AMC and MATC several seasons to complete the trail. MATC spent 17 years rebuilding the AT down off of Whitecap in the 100-mile wilderness and have spent over a decade with a full time crew in the Barren Chairback range. It can be done but it would require a very large block of specific funding. I know the RMC just barely scrapes along keeping a summer trail crew having volunteer work trips to collect volunteer hours that they can use to cover their share of funding agreements plus they ask the club members to donate to support the crew.
On my fall hike on the PCT in Washington State, the terrain was different but just as rugged. We happened to hike over the Kendall Katwalk that is represented as the most expensive mile to build in the PCT. Kendall Katwalk Effectively they just blasted a footpath in the sides of steep granite slopes. You can see the drill marks in the rocks and in some places they have steel pins drilled in the side of the trail to keep rocks from sliding off, in few spots the trail gets skinny where rocks did slip (with a 1000 foot fall below. Throw in some nasty weather and wind noise and they could have filmed the Fellowship of the Ring party heading up to the gates of Moriah along this section. We hiked 73 miles and every bit of it was 3' to 4' wide well graded climb or descent from one valley to another, switchbacks galore, rarely if ever did we have to break pace due to the steepness of slope and we never needed our hands to climb a slope. In some cases, we were effectively on a one 3 to 5 mile uphill slope to gain 2000 feet with a similar hike downslope. The difference with the PCT was that when the national trails act was signed in 1968, the PCT was mostly not built and the majority of it was built by federally paid for labor (NPS and USFS). They also used horses to build it as the trail was built for horse travel. This is not lowland stuff, the trail is traversing the ridge line between pinnacles. Most of the budget for the trails act went to buy land out east for the AT while the PCT was mostly already on federal land so it went towards building the trail.
If you look at the start of the rebuild of Old Bridal Path, it looks like the AMC is effectively going to build a very hardened trail. I expect a similar effort will be put in place on Falling Waters trail and expect the section along the brook and the falls may end up looking far different in the future as long as the money lasts and AMC gets their cut for managing it. I think previously I commented on the work done to date as "too good" Rather thana rough trail, they are going with rockwork that most people would love as their front steps. Great if resources were unlimited but they are not and IMHO, it would be best to spread the money around. Somewhat similar to the Crawford Path work where the local rocks were not good enough so they hauled in more via helicopter.
It predates me but people tell me that the lower section of Tuckerman Ravine trail used to go directly up the slope instead of the long stone lined switchbacks suitable for snow cats was built. I was in the area when the FS shut down the stretch between Hojo's and the upper Ravine for at least a season to completely rebuild and harden the trail. Lots of very large boulders were moved to create a rough but hardened set of steps. AMC reportedly spent a lot of resources long ago in building the Twinway from Greenleaf up to South Twin, that long ribbon of rock is not natural, it was built. RMC has been doing major trail reconstruction on the Northern Presidental's since they have had a paid crew and before. Look at trails like Lowes Path and they are nearly solid rock work. Lowes is now hardened to the point where micropikes are not going to do much but get dull on the rocks. If they can get the funding they have the skills but with the number of trails they have, they will never finish.
One of the claims to fame of the Grafton Loop Trail was that it was built to modern trail making standards, the work up the south side of Mt Speck is lesson in switchbacks and drainage. I dont now how many except to say numerous. The tradeoff is the slope never gets steep and the drainage never gets up enough velocity to erode the trail as its directed off. If I remember correctly it took joint crews from the state, AMC and MATC several seasons to complete the trail. MATC spent 17 years rebuilding the AT down off of Whitecap in the 100-mile wilderness and have spent over a decade with a full time crew in the Barren Chairback range. It can be done but it would require a very large block of specific funding. I know the RMC just barely scrapes along keeping a summer trail crew having volunteer work trips to collect volunteer hours that they can use to cover their share of funding agreements plus they ask the club members to donate to support the crew.
On my fall hike on the PCT in Washington State, the terrain was different but just as rugged. We happened to hike over the Kendall Katwalk that is represented as the most expensive mile to build in the PCT. Kendall Katwalk Effectively they just blasted a footpath in the sides of steep granite slopes. You can see the drill marks in the rocks and in some places they have steel pins drilled in the side of the trail to keep rocks from sliding off, in few spots the trail gets skinny where rocks did slip (with a 1000 foot fall below. Throw in some nasty weather and wind noise and they could have filmed the Fellowship of the Ring party heading up to the gates of Moriah along this section. We hiked 73 miles and every bit of it was 3' to 4' wide well graded climb or descent from one valley to another, switchbacks galore, rarely if ever did we have to break pace due to the steepness of slope and we never needed our hands to climb a slope. In some cases, we were effectively on a one 3 to 5 mile uphill slope to gain 2000 feet with a similar hike downslope. The difference with the PCT was that when the national trails act was signed in 1968, the PCT was mostly not built and the majority of it was built by federally paid for labor (NPS and USFS). They also used horses to build it as the trail was built for horse travel. This is not lowland stuff, the trail is traversing the ridge line between pinnacles. Most of the budget for the trails act went to buy land out east for the AT while the PCT was mostly already on federal land so it went towards building the trail.
Last edited:
I strongly disagree with this statement. When full frozen snow/ice pack take hold, mountain snowshoes provide superior traction to Microspikes in almost every scenario.
Take a look at a Microspike and then take a look at a Tubbs Flex Alp. It's not even close.
The principal purpose of snowshoes is floatation. The fact that many now have aggressive traction devices on them is certainly a plus. However, on packed snow/ice I don't see how they make any sense. This is where microspikes shine. And, if the snow is really hard packed/icy, then regular crampons are the way to go. YMMV
IMHO, trail snowshoes have evolved relatively rapidly to become traction devices since Sherpa developed and patented the rotary pin binding. If you look at prior snowshoes designs pre Sherpa, they were just slightly modern versions of older shoes with modern materials that had been built by natives since they moved back into the area after the glaciers. Even native snowshoes evolved to match the snow and woods conditions. Pre sherpa, AMC groups used various native designs and for traction they strapped on steel claws to the bottom of the shoe that looked like half an animal trap. The surface areas of traditional snowshoes used to be much larger while modern recreational users tend to wear shoes that about 1/3 to 1/4 the surface area, these are near useless on powder and breaking trails but with rotary bindings and integrated front crampons with televators they can be real good going up packed trails with maybe a overnight dusting of powder. The tradeoff with rotary pin bindings is the are far less agressive heading downhill. Notice that NH and Game are using 25 plus year old Sherpa snowshoes about double the length (38") and somewhat wider snowshoes as they need the flotation off trail. The times I see them on icy trails I see crampons, even microspikes but its pretty rare for them to have snowshoes on heading down. .
When we do get enough snow I usually break cross country snowshoe trails across my property and occasionally adjoining properties and connect up with an RMC trail. If there is crust I may use my modern snowshoes, but if its deep powder my Huron Style snowshoes come out with slightly modern binding and definitely modern materials (Magnesium frames with nylon coated steel cable netting. Uphill travel is quite different with the Huron, The only traction is the friction from the lacing and the shape of the rear of the snowshoe. Its actually much faster uphill in powder than my MSRS that tend to slide backwards unless the snow is set enough to kick step up the hill. I may be swimming in snow with the MSRs while the Hurons can motor on
When we do get enough snow I usually break cross country snowshoe trails across my property and occasionally adjoining properties and connect up with an RMC trail. If there is crust I may use my modern snowshoes, but if its deep powder my Huron Style snowshoes come out with slightly modern binding and definitely modern materials (Magnesium frames with nylon coated steel cable netting. Uphill travel is quite different with the Huron, The only traction is the friction from the lacing and the shape of the rear of the snowshoe. Its actually much faster uphill in powder than my MSRS that tend to slide backwards unless the snow is set enough to kick step up the hill. I may be swimming in snow with the MSRs while the Hurons can motor on
A good mountain snowshoe is a safer option than crampons (unless of course it's crampon-mandatory blue ice), since they can provide similar (if not better) traction (longer span of points) while reducing the risk of spiral leg fractures.
And of course the fact that crampons (and Microspikes) significantly increase the amount of postholes, whether on the footbed, or immediately adjacent to it. It's the equivalent of guys peeing with the toilet seat down.
DayTrip
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 3,716
- Reaction score
- 127
I think snowshoes are actually quite dangerous on ice and hard snow (and I dislocated a shoulder in 2013 to support that claim
). They might have aggressive traction but the decking prevents proper ankle movement, can hold up sections of that traction on uneven ground and the length makes for very awkward steps on steep and or rugged terrain. Icy steep trails and snowshoes are a prescription for disaster in my opinion. I agree that flotation is the only benefit of wearing snowshoes. If I'm on a packed surface of any kind I'm not in snowshoes.Microspikes are a great tool on easy to moderate grades and packed snow to moderate ice of most types. They're not crampons. Most people it seems are not willing to spend the money to carry both so they get Microspikes or Hillshounds of some sort. Good on most traveled trails in NH but by no means a "do everything" item.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
NH2112
Active member
Stab a knife and a fork into a piece of wood and see which one goes in deeper. If you need penetration fewer points are better than more. Snowshoes’ width puts a lot of leverage on your ankles, especially if they have rigid pivots like most mountain snowshoes do. Then add in the fact that mountain snowshoes have aluminum frames with teeth much more likely to be dulled or damaged by rock. I figure they’re called SNOWshoes for a reason.
Just a matter of time. Might as well get this out of the way for this Season.
Last edited:
NH2112
Active member
Do you pay a view tax if you’re blind?
8” of snow at the Boundary Bald Mtn trailhead today and I wore my new snowshoes to try them out. Didn’t go too far because I forgot to put on a belt and my pack pushed my pants down my ass. But there are no pöste-holen auf dem berg!
8” of snow at the Boundary Bald Mtn trailhead today and I wore my new snowshoes to try them out. Didn’t go too far because I forgot to put on a belt and my pack pushed my pants down my ass. But there are no pöste-holen auf dem berg!
Last edited:
...and to finish the comparison, Microspikes would be stabbing the handle end of the fork. Mountain snowshoes win almost every time.
NH2112
Active member
Not even close, microspikes stick so much better on ice than snowshoes because your weight is concentrated on a much smaller area, which is the exact opposite of what snowshoes are designed to do. Surface area is not your friend when moving on ice.
Thanks for the annual post hole rant video, always worth a laugh, for the kittens!
Snow shoes weigh more (then microspikes). A pound on the foot equals 5 on the back and so on and so forth. With microspikes (or crampons) you can be much more precise with your foot placement. If you have ever ce climbed (talking vertical ice here) especially with monos you will understand.
Sure you can concoct a scenario - hiking in soft snow and using snowshoes FOR FLOTATION and and you come across an icy bulge its nice to be able to just keep the snowshoes on. But that is the exception.
Sure you can concoct a scenario - hiking in soft snow and using snowshoes FOR FLOTATION and and you come across an icy bulge its nice to be able to just keep the snowshoes on. But that is the exception.
I find that once a snow shoe track is established that I still can make better progress with snowshoes that microspikes. If the track had transitioned to ice than back to microspikes. My theory is carry both and use them as appropriate. What I do not support is just foregoing bringing snowshoes and muddle through with microspikes. That is when psotholes happen.
sierra
Well-known member
I don't feel like jumping into the snowshoe/microspike/crampon debate, just came here to say this. I love crampons and don't care for snowshoes much at all. I will wear my crampons until, it's absolutely necessary to wear my snowshoes. I was descending Webster one fine day, plowing through about 6 inches of powder in my K10's with my dog trailing behind me. When we came upon a group all wearing snowshoes ascending out route and I could read their faces like a brail bible. To their credit they didn't say anything to me as they glanced at my spiked feet. Maybe they figured I knew better, and they chose to not get into, which I would have. I think preference plays a big role and all the above augments are based on just that. I understand the danger of postholes and I would never leave them, it's not ethical regardless of ones own predilections. That being said, one of my biggest pet peeves is the snowshoe crowd preaching to the barebooting crowd in a demeaning and egotistical tone. I believe in the ' freedom of the hills" keep your opinion to yourself, the constant ranting on netrailconditions every year makes me want to throw up. Just my 3 cents.
With all good intentions, but I think you just jumped in.
DayTrip
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 3,716
- Reaction score
- 127
On moderate to steep trails crampons are almost always my first choice and I go backwards from there depending on how things are going. While I try to be conscious of the condition I leave the trail for others, it is rarely a factor in what I choose to wear. I'm worried about my safety, not other people's opinions.
Similar threads
