Whites and ADKs

[dvbl]

Never been to the ADKs. For those who have hiked a lot in both areas and are knowledgeable about both areas, I was just wondering how the Whites compare with the ADKs as far as:

-- steepness/ruggedness of trails
-- maintenance of trails (be nice)
-- number of leantos/tentsites per x amount of acres
-- general altitude of treeline
-- crowds
-- views
-- access/remoteness to trailheads
-- quantity/variety of wildlife

etc.

 

[Puma concolor]

Never been to the ADKs. For those who have hiked a lot in both areas and are knowledgeable about both areas, I was just wondering how the Whites compare with the ADKs as far as:

-- steepness/ruggedness of trails
-- maintenance of trails (be nice)
-- number of leantos/tentsites per x amount of acres
-- general altitude of treeline
-- crowds
-- views
-- access/remoteness to trailheads
-- quantity/variety of wildlife

etc.

** Adirondack trails are more rugged. Steepness ... tough to say. Depends on the mountain.

** White Mountain trails are maintained much more meticulously. Not nearly as much mud either.

** Within both ranges, the treeline varies depending on what is around the mountain in question. That said, there is far more above-treeline hiking in the Whites. Not even close.

** Less crowds in the Dacks. But I've always hiked on weekdays so it's never really been an issue in either range.

** Views are different but great in both ranges.

** I'd give an edge to more remote trailheads to the Adirondacks. Even for the Loj, you have to drive 5 miles from the highway.

** Wildlife ... hmmm. More bears in the Dacks. More moose in the Whites. Who would win the fight? Dunno.

What are you waiting for to visit the Dacks? Ain't nothing to it but to do it.

 

[TDawg]

Though I've only hiked there once (Marcy/Haystack via Johns Brook) and may not have the expertise you wish, I'll say that overall the approaches are longer, trail maintenance is comparable, and crowds....there's 6 million acres ,so you can escape them if you want to by choosing less popular areas (ie, not Mt. Marcy/Great Range). I've heard second hand from people who have experience in both that the ADKs are generally more rugged, but who knows...

It's a gorgeous area, it was great for me to see something new on my visit, enjoy yours.

(Let's try to not make this a "my sandbox is better than yours," thread )

 

[Tom Rankin]

If you want a comparison of the '46' vs the '48':

Many ADKs require the 'out' and the 'up'. In other words, there is a long walk just to get to the real mountain. This is not so much the case in the Whites.

Many of the ADKs peaks have herd paths, where the condition of the trail ranges from great to horrible (like Cliff!). Most of the 48 have groomed trails, not that they are all a piece of cake. I would rate the Whites as having better trails. This is not blaming anyone, it's just that the ADKs seem to be muddier, no matter when you go. Places like Bradley Pond and the Sewards are just ALWAYS muddy! As for access, most of the ADK trailheads can be accessed by a normal maintained road. Mostly true for the Whites as well. In Winter, some become more difficult to access. Fees are charged in some places to park in both ranges.

Both have their moments for steep trails.

Both have summits you can get to without hiking!

Both have long death marches, Allen, Owl's Head, Bonds, Santanoni's, etc. etc. Both have short and sweet hikes, like Hale, Cascade, Jackson, Phelps.

Both have places where you can string multiple peaks together if that is your thing.

Both can have severe weather above tree line and astounding views.

The tree line in the ADKs is about 4900'. Not sure about the Whites.

Crowds can range from nil to hundreds per day on both sets of peaks.

I really don't see much wildlife in the ADKs, and not a whole lot more in the Whites. You are more likely to see Moose in the Whites, and bears in the ADKs, statistically, anyway.

I believe the Whites average about 100' higher, but I do not know about the actual ascent required per peak.

Of course, there are a lot of other mountains in both ranges. I am not familiar with the lower Whites, but the lower ADKs are frequently bushwhacks. Some of the lower ADKs have trails, such as the peaks with fire towers on them.

FWIW, I am 115-er #487

 

[dvbl]

...Let's try to not make this a "my sandbox is better than yours," thread )

I agree. That would be silly.

Thanks to all for the great info.

 

[Mike P.]

ADK Mud is legendary, Some trails like the one to Marcy is not that rugged, others are more rugged. Very similar in many other cases, some pretty tough trails in both if you pick the right (or wrong) trails, some pretty mellow trails in both too.

Both should be considered required hiking.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

You forgot

-- air traffic / noise pollution



Tim

 

[Neil]

I'm not an expert by any means but my experience thus far suggests that the ADK's are wilder. Audibly, visually, kinesthetically and experientially.

The Whites have more above tree line hiking.

The people you meet are....oh, I don't think I'll go there....

 

[funkyfreddy]

I've done the NH 48 and a lot of other hiking in NH. So far in the Adk's I've climbed about half of the 46 with a handful of other hikes.

I would say the hikes are longer in the ADK's with the exception of Cascade/Porter, of course. I can't see anyone who enjoys hiking the Whites not enjoying the ADK's, just be prepared for a longer approach to the summits in most cases.

The black flies can be vicious in both places, unfortunately

To echo Tom...... You have a better chance of seeing moose in the Whites and bear in the ADK's, at least from what I have read and experienced. There are places I know of in the Whites where you are almost guaranteed to see a moose at certain times of the day.....
this used to be the case with bears at Marcy Dam in the ADK's, not sure how the canister rule in the High peaks area has affected their behaviour.
Historically the bears have been much more aggressive in the ADK's.

I would say that the ADK's are also less crowded than the Whites, probably due to the distance they are from Boston and NYC. If you compare the highest peak in the ADK's (Marcy) with the highest in NH (Washington), you will find Marcy much less crowded due to the fact that everyone has to walk up there and there are no outlet stores, railroads, parking lots, or hotdog stands on the summit, lol.

 

[TCD]

I've hiked lots in the Adks and only some in the Whites.

Adk trails are more rugged (some are not well laid out, and are steeper in stretches), and the maintenance is not as good. (Sadly, major trails like the Northville-Placid trail have been almost abandoned by NY State, but that's another thread.)

The Whites are bigger and have much more acreage above treeline. That's mostly because of the Presidential Range. If you knock out the presis, the two ranges are about equivalent.

The Adks are more remote because the development history was different. In the Whites, there are highways through all the major N-S passes (Pinkham, Crawford, Franconia). In the Adks, it would be analogous if there were highways through Ausable Pass, Avalanche Pass and Indian Pass. That would knock out the remoteness of the High Peak Region in a hurry! The Central and Western Adirondacks are less mountainous, but there are large very remote areas if you want to find them.

Another differences: Huts! Except for the privately held Adk Mountain Club facilities at Heart Lake and John's Brook, there is no hut system in the Adks. The Adk Leantos are extremely primitive open shelters with no services. That adds to the remote feel.

I really enjoy hiking both ranges! I happen to live in the Adks, so I only get to the Whites occasionally.

(Don't forget to hike in Vermont, while you're passing through in either direction!)

TCD

 

[marty]

(Don't forget to hike in Vermont, while you're passing through in either direction!)

TCD

And don't forget to hike in Maine, if you get lost driving in the Whites and are heading eastbound.

 

[Chip]

, kinesthetically ....

D'oh ! Fancy Words !

Does that mean the Dacks are harder on the knees ?

 

[DSettahr]

So far, just about everyone here has generalized the Adirondacks as consisting of only the High Peak region. It is important to remember that, in addition to the 3 wilderness areas, 1 wild forest, and 1 intensive use area in which the 46 summits lie, there is a plethora of other places in the ADKs to go hiking. The Adirondacks offer so much more than just the High Peaks region... its a shame that more people don't utilize the other resources, and are instead confine themselves to the High Peaks.

The Adirondack park definitely offers far more opportunities for solitude than the White Mountain National Forest. Wilderness areas such as the Five Ponds Wilderness receive a fraction of the use that the High Peaks gets. The Pepperbox Wilderness Area, near Old Forge, contains a total of 22,560 acres, and only 2 miles of marked trails and no lean-tos. Thats 1 mile of trail for every 11,280 acres... in contrast, the High Peaks have 1 mile of trail for every 808 acres.

For sure, the WMNF beats out the Adirondack Park in terms of above tree-line hiking. The Adirondacks have only 2 peaks with significant alpine zones, Marcy and McIntyre, compared to the Presidential Range, where one can cover multiple peaks and stay above treeline for miles. The Adirondacks offer so much more than just the High Peaks though, and its too bad that more hikers don't take advantage of these other opportunites, and instead concentrate their use in the High Peaks, where much of the already fragile resources have been negatively affected by over use.

 

[Tom Rankin]

So far, just about everyone here has generalized the Adirondacks as consisting of only the High Peak region.

Well, I started talking about 'other' areas, like the fire towers, which you are well-acquainted with.

Also, there is the Adirondack Quest, which is designed to get people out to all areas of the Park, doing a variety of activities.

I know there are other lists in New Hampshire as well, such as the NHHH, 52 with a view, the Y list, etc.

 

[una_dogger]

I feel as though the terrain in the Daks (and also the Catskills for that matter) can be much more technical/rugged than the Whites, with the Whites having alot more mountains that are purely "walk ups" and the Daks having alot more mountains that involve some hand over foot climbing in areas. While the Whites offer a ton of above treeline hiking challenges, the challenges in the Daks to me involve a bit more technical climbing and the mental challenge of facing obstacles posed by steep, rocky overhangs and exposed terrain.

To me, the Daks have a much more "wild' feeling to them. I think, in part this is due to the long approaches to most mountains.

The Whites feel more spread out to me and the Daks more compact, when I'm in the Daks, I feel like I'm really surrounded by lots of tall mountains.

Both ranges have alot of special things to offer.

 

[Puma concolor]

... and don't forget the Catskills, an entirely different and righteous range in its own right.

(Edit - Una dogger beat me to it by a minute.)

 

[--M.]

I grew up with the Whites and started learning the 'Daks in college (~25 years ago). My experiences:

==The Whites are more developed, with trailheads right off the highway. This is why the Pemi is so popular: you can actually get away from the road noise. In New York, it's much quieter (these are, of course, vast overgeneralizations).

==Water: the 'Daks have more lakes & rivers. More canoeing.

==Fishing: It may be better in the Whites (or not), but my personal experience has many more fish caught in New York.

==Size: New York is gargantuan compared to central New Hampshire. Whoever commented on this hit a key point. The Blue Line would cover much of New England. From eastern Massachusetts, getting to NY takes (and seems) longer than going north.

==Treeline drama: Advantage to the northern Presidentials. The ADKs are generally more rugged & remote (I liked the point about huts and lean-tos), but the exposure up top of the Rockpile and Jefferson (and...) is more out-there than anywhere I've summited in New York.

==Backcountry skiing: My personal experience has been that New York gets better and more snow -- and skiing Camp Santanoni and Avalanche Lake (just before last month's avalanche!) were utterly transcendent in ways that New Hampshire skiing hasn't been for me (yet?). This may have something to do with the long approaches (>5 miles in each case).

I love both, and think there needs to be more cross-pollenization, and I make sure to visit each area each year if possible.

Good thread!

 

[Peakbagr]

I've spent a lot of time in both areas.

My experience is that the ADKs are wilder, with much longer approaches.
The trails in the Whites are laid out better, I'm guessing from a longer history of hiking and mountaineering.

The Whites soil is of a different composition and ADK black mud is, is, is, dark and evil. I've never found any trails in the Whites that approach the mud wallows near MacNasty or the Bradley Pond trail.

Far more erosion on many of the ADK trails and lots of exposed tree roots.
The trail crews in the ADKs(thank you Pete and ADK) are as hard working as you'll find anywhere. I'm not sure if its the formal Wilderness designation of so much of the High Peaks, but no motorized equipment is allowed. As such, the recovery from major wind storms and hurricanes can sometimes take a lot longer in the ADKs than in the Whites.

The trailless ADK100's are very wild, difficult and most see few visitors, in comparison to the much more highly travelled Trailless NH100's.

The ADKs have the Adirondack Loj(drive up) and Johns Brook Loj(walk in 3.5 miles). Far different than the series of AMC huts that can put you near many of the White Mt 48.

With the exception of the Algonquin, Little Haystack to Haystack traverse, Skylight, Marcy, and portions of the Upper Great Range, there is nothing else to compare to the above treeling experience of the Prezzies and Franconias.

They are both wonderful experiences in their own rights...just different.

 

[forestgnome]

I just received a comp. copy of the new "Adirondack Alpine Summits, An Ecological Field Guide", by Slack and Bell (I contributed the photo of the black bear) It's a great guide that fits in the pack and looks to be well-suited for the White Mtns. as well.

DSettahr makes great points about the areas other than the High Peaks. Can anyone recommend some places to hike and camp away from tree-line peaks and vistas? Thanks

Happy Trails

 

[Tom Rankin]

DSettahr makes great points about the areas other than the High Peaks. Can anyone recommend some places to hike and camp away from tree-line peaks and vistas?

I mentioned the ADK Quest above and the ADK Fire tower challenge

Also:

ADK Hundred Highest

NY 100 Highest

That should keep you busy for a while!