Hut Article Library

Hut Systems in USA
Situation and Outlook 2020

By Laurel Bradley and Sam Demas, Fall 2020

[Excerpt from: Hut to Hut USA: the complete guide for hikers, bikers and skiers

Mountaineers Books, 2021]

This overview of hut systems in USA today reflects six years of research. The information presented is based on the sixteen featured hut systems and ten others, and is current as of late 2020. See charts Sixteen Featured Hut Systems at a Glance and Ten Other Hut Systems for the data supporting this snapshot of US huts. While there are many other huts in USA, these twenty-six hut systems come closest to meeting our definition of a hut system, which focuses on supporting multi-day hut-to-hut traverses.  This overview paints the first broad stroke picture of hut systems in the USA, briefly summarizing: where they are located, who uses them and how, amenities and service models, architecture, and business models.  It also outlines some of the challenges they face and points out some key trends. 

While the audience for this overview is the general outdoor recreation public, we believe it will be of interest to hut specialists as well.

Aquarius Huts in SW Utah were opened after we completed our research for the book
and are not included in this overview.

LOCATION AND GEOGRAPHY

Hut systems, concentrated in the West and the Northeast, are almost all located in mountainous regions rich in scenery and recreational activities. Colorado, with more than six hut systems, is the epicenter. Many American huts were established to shelter cross-country skiers, and hut systems crop up in such winter playgrounds as the Vail, Breckenridge, and Aspen area in Colorado; Sun Valley in Idaho; and west-central Maine.

You can’t have huts without trails. Almost every US hut system is located on an existing, signed trail network maintained by a land management agency or a local non-profit. Hut system managers and community volunteers help with trail maintenance; local snowmobile clubs may help groom trails. On average, the distance between huts is 6 to 8 miles. Long-distance trails, which are central to the European hut-to-hut experience, play almost no role in American hut life. The eight AMC huts on the Appalachian Trail in the White Mountains of New Hampshire and four of the Porcupine Mountains cabins on the North Country Trail are the exceptions.

US hut systems, with a few exceptions, are situated on federal lands—managed by the USFS, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service—and on state lands. The largest number of US hut systems permitted on federal land is on USFS lands. US huts attract nature because of proximity to wild places and wilderness areas in particular.  The huts themselves are never in federally designated wilderness areas; the Wilderness Act of 1964, with very few exceptions, man- made structures, road, and use of motorized vehicles and tools. In some hut systems public lands are mixed with private holdings including conservation trusts, timber company leases and tribal territories.

MODES OF TRAVEL AND EXTENT OF TRAILS 

Biking hut-to-hut
in Alaska

The very first US hut systems catered to hikers. The next wave, established between the 1960s and 1980s, mostly accommodated skiers. Since the 1990s, hut systems have begun to diversify modes of travel on their trails in a move to increase revenues in the former off-seasons. Today, about two-thirds of the nation’s twenty-six hut systems support more than one mode of hut-to-hut travel. Bicycling is on the rise, even in winter, with the advent of fat-tire bikes. The newest hut systems, including American Prairie Reserve and Adirondack Hamlets to Huts, have embraced multiple modes from the outset. The Adirondack Hamlets to Huts routes incorporate paddling and hiking; the system is also open to e-bikes. As American Prairie Reserve adds huts and connecting routes, paddling will join the list of modalities along with hiking and biking. While our sixteen featured itineraries cover nearly 600 miles, all the US hut systems add up to approximately 1870 miles, not all of which support traverses.

RESERVATION FORMATS

Huts around the world, notably in Europe and New Zealand, are rented mostly by the bunk, meaning that you share the hut with folks you don’t know. With exclusive-use rentals, you rent all the beds in the hut, whether you use them or not. In the US, about half the huts are shared, and the other half are primarily exclusive use. Two of the three systems in the eastern US are by the bunk. The two systems in the Midwest are exclusive use. Sixty-two percent of the systems in the West rent the entire hut, cabin, or yurt to a single party. The largest hut systems—the AMC and the Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association—follow Europe and New Zealand, inviting visitors to share space and to connect socially. These two systems combined have more than one- third of the total hut beds: 417 in the thirty-four huts in the Tenth Mountain Division  Hut Association and 414 in the AMC’s eight huts in the White Mountains.

HUT USERS

While huts as a recreational option are not well known in the US, every hut system we visited is very popular, with 70 to 80 percent occupancy typical during the high season. Friends and families gather in huts for sustained togetherness. Visitors to each system tend to be fairly local, traveling within their state or region, and some make it an annual event. By contrast, in Europe and New Zealand, huts draw huge numbers of international tourists.

Hut-to-hut traverses are great for vacation getaways and long weekends. Logbook entries testify to the popularity of marking special occasions including birthdays and anniversaries. All across the country, we encountered women’s groups enjoying the pleasure of each other’s company away from the distractions of daily life. America’s huts are generally family friendly but require parents to match their children’s strength, skill level, and capacity for communal living to the demands of the traverse and accommodations. The two AMC huts with access trails under 3 miles swarm with parents and children; kids grab upper bunks, reveling in a sleep-play arrangement resembling a jungle gym, and spill off front porches to nearby lakes, streams, and waterfalls. Most hut systems offer reduced rates for children. Other users include youth, school, and church groups, outdoor clubs, and hut-based education and therapeutic programs.

Setting the table, AMC Hut. Full Service huts

Bunks, Rendezvous Hut – exclusive use huts

Hut users, especially at the larger huts rented by the bunk with shared cooking and common areas, are a cooperative and communal bunch. At the Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association huts, you might find a few friend groups consisting of two or three couples, another couple on their own, an extended family group celebrating a significant birthday, and a party of young men. In the AMC huts, which accommodate between thirty-six and ninety-two hikers, overnighters strike a balance between respecting the privacy of others and engaging with fellow travelers in games and conversations during, and after meals.

Exclusive-use huts, with capacities ranging from two to twelve, are perfect for existing groups including families, friends, and groups bonded by their mutual love of hiking, skiing, or biking and the great outdoors. In our case, since we are just two, we invite along friends, family, and acquaintances to share the adventure and cozy spaces.

AMENITIES AND SIZE

On the most basic level, the hut is an enclosed shelter with a roof, a floor, a heat source, basic furniture for eating and sleeping, a logbook, a water source, and a toilet facility. Huts are further defined by their amenities, size, and capacity. What comes with the hut? How much does the visitor have to carry, and how much work is required to ensure a comfortable night? How many will share the hut, and how will capacity shape the experience?

Forging friendship with crayons over dinner at Francie’s, Summit Huts, CO. Self service huts

Devices discouraged in some hut systems

In the US, huts are predominantly self-service, with notable full-service exceptions being the AMC huts and the Yosemite High Sierra Camps—the oldest systems. We developed a shorthand code for hut amenity levels: basic, self-service, self-service+, and full service. We were surprised to find that every hut in the US has more amenities than almost every DOC hut in New Zealand, the hut capital of the world. Nearly all self-service huts in the US incorporate one or more gas burners or a stove in the kitchen area, and plastic-covered mattresses on the bunks. Kitchens come fully equipped with pots and pans, dishes and utensils, and some kind of dishwashing tubs. Contrast this to New Zealand, where only Great Walks huts have gas cookers and hikers carry their own dishes and utensils. US operators add extra touches such as playing cards, puzzles, and small libraries. Increasingly, huts have solar lighting fixtures and a charging station. Wood-fired saunas are a welcome, if uncommon, feature. The only US hut systems offering showers are the Yosemite High Sierra Camps and Maine Huts and Trails.

Interior Mount Tahoma Yurt

Most American hut-to-hut travelers, like backpackers, carry their own food, clothing, and more. Some hut systems provide sleeping bags and pillows; others supply only pillows. The self-service+ huts—the San Juan Hut System for bikers and the Three Sisters Backcountry huts—provide stocked pantries, allowing visitors to carry very little weight en route. This compares directly with some huts in Norway, where overnight visitors pay for pantry provisions on the honor system. A few US traverses require users to carry just about everything with them. In Alaska, the backcountry cabins are very basic; while log structures on both state and federal land are spacious and well built, the interiors have counters but no cookstoves or utensils, and the bunks are bare sheets of plywood. Hikers, bikers, and skiers carry everything except a tent; in winter, you might also need to haul firewood on a sled.

Outhouse, Peter Grubb hut, Sierra Club. Donner Pass Area.

Compared with Europe, where huts typically house forty to eighty people, American huts are small. While the AMC huts are built roughly on the scale of European huts, the US national average is about fourteen beds per hut across all 166 huts. Several owners have speculated in informal shoptalk that economies of scale begin at about fourteen beds per hut; small-capacity huts are expensive to operate.

Huts in the American West tend to be small, with an average of twelve beds; mountaineering huts in Alaska can accommodate as few as four, while the yurts in backcountry ski systems in the Lower 48 usually hold between six and twelve. The Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association, the nation’s largest, has an average of twelve beds per hut.

America’s full-service hut systems serve between thirty-five and one hundred guests; these include the AMC’s White Mountains huts and Maine lodge-to-lodge system, and also the Yosemite High Sierra Camps. They offer hot meals, bedding, and some house-keeping; the facilities are more spacious and may comprise several structures including separate bunk- and bathhouses. At the Maine lodges, visitors can opt for shared accommodations in the bunkhouse or a private cabin shared with their trail companions. The five backcountry Yosemite High Sierra Camps welcome visitors with an array of mostly seasonal structures including a dozen or more platform tents, toilet and shower enclosures, and the stone-and-canvas dining hall. The small tents, with capacity for two to six, offer some privacy in these encampments serving between thirty-two and sixty guests. 

ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN

Architecturally, huts in the US range from large to small, primitive to elaborate. Maine Huts and Trails offers beautifully designed lodges made of wood and stone with spacious, light-filled public rooms and indoor toilets. Typically, Colorado’s Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association huts are sturdy log or wood-frame structures, topped by a peaked gable, with a detached outhouse nearby. The San Juan Huts are simple, roofed, rectangular plywood boxes. 

The Three Sisters Backcountry huts are also small wooden structures, built with frames crafted from welded metal to allow for disassembly and seasonal removal (no longer required) and embellished with custom-welded decorative flourishes. Systems generally aim for design consistency across  multiple sites, in part to simplify maintenance. Surprisingly, rainwater collection from roofs—used extensively in New Zealand—is not widespread in the US. Solar energy is employed for lighting in most US hut systems.

Yurts, common in western hut systems, combine coated canvas walls with steel or wooden interior supports. Yurts come in twelve-, sixteen-, twenty-, and thirty-foot- diameter models. These round buildings fit harmoniously into almost any setting. Yurts, popular in some of the snowiest landscapes, are often elevated on a wooden deck, which also provides welcome Firewood and the propane tank are sometimes stored under the deck. Wall tents are used by Sun Valley Mountain Huts.

American Prairie Reserve Yurts
in a cottonwood gallery

Evening glow, Trujillo Meadows Yurt,
Southwest Nordic Center

Huts aim to minimize human impact on wild places (see Environmental impact of huts: finally a scientific study!). Building footprints are modest and interior organization compact and functional. Most combine bunks and cooking and living areas into a single room. In the two-story huts, the sleeping quarters are usually upstairs. Look for special features: a mudroom provides welcome space to change out of heavy boots and wet rain gear; a covered walkway makes for a dry passage between the hut and the outhouse or fire-wood depot. Even in the Alaska backcountry cabins, remarkably consistent in design and materials, we found fanciful flourishes in the interior woodwork. Backcountry construction is a niche market. Some systems receive donations to cover the cost of hut construction (often memorial huts) and require maintenance endowments.

BUSINESS MODELS AND PRACTICES

Hut systems in the US are run by a variety of nonprofits, government entities, and small private businesses, with the exception of Yosemite High Sierra Camps, which is run by a large corporation. Overall, eight of the twenty-six traditional hut systems are privately operated business enterprises, twelve are nonprofits, and four are government operated. There is no dominant model, and this mix reflects ongoing experimentation in an evolving business sector.

Regional not-for-profits, including the Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association, Summit Huts System, and Alfred A. Braun Hut System in Colorado; the Mount Tahoma Trails Association in Washington; American Prairie Reserve in Montana; and Maine Huts and Trails, are a uniquely American structure for supporting hut-to-hut enterprises. This category includes some clubs— the AMC, the American Alpine Club, and the Mountaineering Club of Alaska. The charitable model taps into generous donations of money and time from passionate users and keeps operations focused not only on practical management issues but also on the larger mission. All four hut systems in the Northeast operate as nonprofits. 

By contrast, for-profit hut systems dominate in the American West (seven of the eleven systems), and they are all run by small family businesses, with the exception of the Yosemite High Sierra Camps, which is operated by Aramark, a corporate concessionaire. The mom-and-pop shops rose out of the 1980s boom in Nordic skiing and backcountry adventure. Several of these small businesses are on their second or third owners. These operations demonstrate that, with favorable terrain, solid management, hard work, and good luck, a hut-to-hut operation can support a family, especially when owners are firmly committed to the area and an outdoor lifestyle.

Government support for US huts is critical. Twenty of the twenty-six hut systems are sited on public lands (federal and state) and operate as permitted concessions. Equally important, the trails connecting most of these huts are built and managed by state and federal government agencies. Interestingly, since more than 90 percent of trail maintenance in the US is performed by volunteers, volunteers contribute a significant amount of labor to hut systems.

With few exceptions, including in Alaska, Hawaii, and Michigan, government agencies do not operate hut systems in the US. In Alaska, hundreds of backcountry cabins—a few with multi-day traverse potential—are not only situated on state and federal lands but also administered by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, US Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management. Cabins in Michigan’s Porcupine Mountains are operated by the state park. In national parks, hut systems exist as a concession in Yosemite and are operated by the National Park Service in Haleakala.

A new business model is emerging with Adirondack Hamlets to Huts (AHH), which is both public and private. AHH is not a hut system in the brick-and-mortar sense, but rather an entity that promotes this scenic region by connecting visitors who hike, bike, paddle, snowshoe, or ski with a network of existing routes and lodgings (motels, camps, and inns). AHH acts as coordinator and publicist, encouraging participation in European-style village-to-village journeys in upstate New York. The initiative has been partially funded by the state, aspiring to draw a few of the millions of annual international visitors to New York City and Niagara Falls farther north to this six-million- acre park. This model, using huts and trails to drive economic development, has broad appeal and also drives several hut-to-hut initiatives currently under development.

CHALLENGES

Most hut systems are doing well financially, as demand far outstrips supply. Marketing costs are virtually nonexistent, as systems rely on word of mouth and social media. That said, the costs and complications of setting up and operating a new hut system are considerable. While US hut operations are—across all types—financially viable, systems can fail and must adapt to harsh fiscal realities. Cascade Huts in Oregon, founded in 2007, has posted “closed until further notice” on Facebook. Maine Huts and Trails (MHT), also established in 2007 as a regional nonprofit, took on the task of constructing and maintaining most of the trails. In 2019, citing difficulties in attracting seasonal help and the high cost of building and trail maintenance, MHT shifted from a full-service to a self-service model of operations and now relies on volunteer staff during busy weekends.

Establishing a new hut system requires permits and negotiations with federal or state agencies, money, and a building plan.  Current owners and managers cite interactions with agency officials and bureaucratic procedures as their greatest frustration. High turnover in district offices makes it difficult for the USFS to establish long- term, productive working relationships. New systems must successfully undergo site and building plan review, and the National Environmental Policy Act requires an environmental impact statement or, in cases with less potential impact, an environmental assessment for actions “significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” These lengthy and costly processes can be difficult for a small operator. Plans must also comply with regulations related to insurance, health and safety, and fire and building codes. Some operators struggle to get designs past local inspectors, as building codes tend to be written to city and town standards and are difficult to adapt to the backcountry. Siting and construction of huts can be tricky, and there are no clear guidelines available. Backcountry construction is expensive, especially when materials must be transported by helicopter to sites inaccessible by road. A new generation of prefabricated huts on the horizon may simplify construction in the future.

Running a hut system involves a lot of hard work, mostly invisible to the visitor. Tasks run the gamut from reservations to resupply, and from maintenance to managing staff.

In a few cases (the Mount Tahoma Trails and Alaska Alpine Club huts), volunteers not only administer the system but also provide all the labor to maintain the huts (and trails). The owner of the Southwest Nordic Center hut system manages to do all the supply, maintenance, and reservations tasks himself. Only the larger systems— for example, the Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association, the AMC, Maine Huts and Trails, and San Juan Huts—hire full-time, year-round staff. But most outfits get the jobs done with seasonal help. Hut owners and managers must find and retain good part-time workers in remote rural areas. Full-service systems leverage tradition and location to recruit summer staff. The opportunity to work in the Yosemite backcountry will always prove irresistible to enough folks to fill the staff rosters each year at the High Sierra Camps. The AMC model of staffing huts in the White Mountains with college students lives on as a cherished tradition and powerful recruiting engine.

 NEW DIRECTIONS AND TRENDS FOR US HUTS

As hut systems expand, several trends are now clear. Hut systems are under development not only in the mountains but also at lower elevations and closer to towns and urban centers. Hut systems, new and old, continue to embrace multiple modes of travel. And projects that leverage hut-to-hut for explicit tourism and economic development goals are on the rise. Six new systems are in the planning and implementation phases, and five more are farther out on the horizon. If all of these initiatives come to fruition in the next decade, the overall growth curve of US hut systems will be as steep as that of the 1980s ski hut boom.

Imagine a hut system where you can stay overnight in a converted shepherd wagon like the working wagon shown here in the Pioneer Mountains in Idaho. 

Idaho shepherds wagon – portable shelter.

Existing hut systems continue to establish new huts, routes, and programs. The American Prairie Reserve, which opened three huts between 2018 and 2020, is beginning work on another of the projected ten huts. Adirondack Hamlets to Huts launched its first season in 2020 with four routes and has plans to expand. Two Colorado hut systems, allied under the Tenth Mountain Division umbrella, are moving forward with long- range plans. The Grand Huts Association, now operating only one of seven projected huts, has funding for a second. The Summit Huts Association opened a fifth hut in 2019, and as part of its master plan, the association is actively exploring options for both building new backcountry structures and repurposing existing structures. The Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association has completed a facility in Leadville, Colorado, to house seasonal staff, vehicles, equipment, and supplies supporting field operations.

Breakneck Pond, AMC Harriman Outdoor Center, Harriman State Park, New York– Photo by Paula Champagne.

The AMC Harriman Outdoor Center, an hour from New York City, points the way for urban dwellers to enjoy nature relatively close to home. (Photo courtesy of Appalachian Mountain Club) 

Like Adirondack Hamlets to Huts, two other initiatives embrace the European village-to-village model, which relies on existing infrastructure for lodging and meals. LandPaths, an innovative land trust in Sonoma County, California, is planning multiple treks designed to connect people with the land. Existing accommodations and newly built huts will serve as overnight shelter and as sites for environmental education and hands-on land stewardship activities. Since 2011, Friends of the Columbia Gorge has been working toward a 200-mile loop trail on both sides of the majestic Columbia River. Gorge Towns to Trails will promote multi-day trekking adventures in this popular scenic area, with overnights in inns, motels, and bed-and-breakfasts in small towns renowned for local wine and beer.

Other emergent hut systems are focused primarily on biking and skiing, with hiking sometimes in the mix. In Minnesota, Superior Highland Backcountry, an organization dedicated to expanding and protecting backcountry skiing opportunities in the northeastern part of the state, projects a network of huts above Lake Superior, along a ridge that stretches from Finland to Lutsen. In Oregon, mountain bikers can look forward to the completion of the 670-mile Oregon Timber Trail. The Oregon Timber Trail Alliance and Travel Oregon, the state tourism bureau, are working together to realize a route incorporating overnight stays in towns and, eventually, in purpose-built huts. The Alaska Huts Association, in collaboration with the USFS and Alaska Railroad, is raising funds for the Glacier Discovery Project, a three-hut hiking, biking, and skiing system with trailhead access by train. 

Other initiatives, some only in the discussion phase, demonstrate how huts figure in the national conversation. Master plans for both Snowmass and Aspen ski areas include backcountry hut systems. Snowmass, where three huts are proposed for both winter and summer use, has won USFS approval for its master plan; the next step toward the pro- posed hut system is the required environmental review. In California, the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council, which has completed 380 miles of a 500-mile route following ridgelines around the bay, hopes to build a hut network. The Alaska Trails Initiative pro- poses a hut-to-hut network from Seward to Anchorage as part of an effort to entice more visitors, especially from cruise ships, to spend time experiencing the state’s scenic wonders through human-powered journeys.

APX1, a company based in Sun Valley, Idaho, working with a group of investors, envisions a hut system extending from the US-Canada border to the US-Mexico border. This long-distance hut-to-hut route through Idaho, Utah, and Colorado will utilize existing trails and hut systems, and also build new trails and huts as needed. The reservation platform under development will be open source and optimized for hut system reservations, supporting both exclusive- use and by-the-bunk reservation models. The new huts will be owned and operated by APX1, while new trails will be built and maintained by a separate nonprofit.

Over the next several decades, US hut development will reflect past successes and respond to new needs and ideas. As the sector matures, American creativity may shape huts and hut-to-hut travel in ways that are surprising and uplifting. 

US HUTS — FUTURE POSSIBILITIES

You can count the seeds in the apple, but you can’t count the apples in the seeds.

—Anonymous

Until the 1980s, hut systems were rare in the US. With the burst of initiatives and innovations over recent decades, huts have finally gained a firm foothold on American soil and in the public imagination. Predicting the future is perilous; nevertheless, we can’t resist making some projections.

Huts, as a sector in American recreation and education, will begin to mature over the next decades. Some changes will be driven by economics, recreational trends, gear innovations, and climate change, while a commitment to rebalancing the human relationship with nature will drive other developments. We predict that biking will drive the next big thrust in hut system development. Long-distance bikers, on both gravel and single-track routes, represent an eager audience. Like it or not, as e-bikes proliferate in the backcountry, bringing hordes of new users to rugged places, huts—designed to meter and concentrate use—will be an environmentally sound response to help mitigate crowding and habitat disruption.

Climate change, which is negatively affecting destination ski resorts, adds incentives for these massive corporations, already struggling under unsustainable business models, to diversify into other activities. Ski resorts may try to leverage their extensive USFS permits and lobbying power to create upscale hut systems. Marketing campaigns will promote the joys of “uphill” and “side-country” skiing in winter, and tout the comforts of luxurious backcountry huts to affluent hikers in summer. 

Another possible scenario: European-style inn-to-inn or village-to-village traverses will flourish, with trails serving as stepping stones from the city to the country. As in Europe, trekkers in the US will be able to reserve farm stays and lodging in picturesque small towns, consume local food and beverages, and visit cultural sites along the way. Reservation platforms, developed in cooperation with local tourism and economic development agencies, will proliferate. Under these hut-to-hut networks, affiliated accommodations might be branded as walker, biker, and/or skier friendly. In short, hut-to-hut travel will become a more familiar option for average, fit folks looking for outdoor adventure.

But what about some more radical, visionary scenarios? As “local” becomes a dominant travel theme, the next generation of huts may be situated close to where most people actually live. We envision a set of front-country huts, that we call “nearby nature” huts, at the urban and suburban edges, allowing urbanites to spend time in nature close to home. Public transportation increasingly provides access to the vast networks of trails that already exist in these set- tings. Frontcountry parks and trails provide affordable, low-barrier portals for urban communities to enter the natural world, to learn outdoor skills, and to experience the healing balm of trees, grass, rocks, and waterways.

The Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC), originator of the first US hut system, is working toward a version of this future. Rustic, affordable frontcountry accommodations are under development in Averell Harriman State Park, 38 miles from the Bronx. AMC’s Harriman Outdoor Center is reaching beyond the usual white, middle-class hut- to-hut user groups by developing cabins and bunkhouses for people without the gear and skills for camping and backpacking, as well as offering a variety of youth leadership and engagement programs. With the goal of providing comfort and offsetting fear of the unfamiliar, this program serves, among others, African American, Latino, Asian, and other groups currently underrepresented in our great wild places.

The title of E. O. Wilson’s book Half- Earth: Our Planet’s Fight for Life refers to how much of our world must be protected in order to ensure the level of species bio- diversity needed for humans to thrive.  About 30 percent of the terrestrial domain is at least theoretically under some kind of protection. Half-Earth proposes an umbrella project under which a global army is mobilized to serve the planet and ensure our own survival. The troops will be eyes on the land, monitoring violations of legislated protections. Huts, designed to minimize human impacts, will house this new conservation corps. This army, composed of citizen scientists, academic researchers, and conservation workers, will repair eco- systems and restore landscapes. Some hut encampments will be temporary, relocated to new work sites as projects are completed and in response to overuse and climate change. These volunteer experiences will provide urban dwellers with respite from city life through opportunities for hands-on conservation work, while also connecting people dedicated to the restoration and preservation of the earth. 

Just for fun, imagine new (and existing) hut systems supporting snowshoeing, skijoring, dogsledding, llama or burro packing, long-distance running, and paddling sports—or hut systems that support people who want to travel with their dogs. Portable huts, including yurts, tents, sheep wagons, tiny houses on trailers, and camper vehicles, could be used to link existing huts to create new traverses. And somewhere, a kids’-scale hut system, with huts just a few miles apart, will expose children to the joys of hut life and the thrill of completing a “long- distance” trip. 

Huts will become ever more powerful places for learning and healing, places that allow people to reimagine their lives and the society they live in. A hut traverse will become a recognized cure for “nature deficit disorder.” Programs will teach simple green living skills that have application back home. Hut-to-hut will contribute to creating new generations of outdoor citizens, motivated to make healthy, earth-friendly life style choices and promote environmentally sound policies. Huts will function as authentic, safe spaces, embracing travelers who work and live together with friends, family, and—imagine!—people they don’t even know. Hut systems will become a new version of the summer camp, where young  and old learn outdoor skills and natural history together, and experience the pleasures  of steady physical movement through wild spaces day after day.

A pilgrimage is a long journey to some sacred place as an act of religious devotion or spiritual awakening. Hut systems will function as innovation hubs for new generations of environmental pilgrims seeking to update ritual journeys of redemption and spiritual renewal, rites of passage, and vision quests. Perhaps we will develop a new set of distinctively American pilgrim- age trails, with veneration of nature and personal reflection integrated into the hut- to-hut traverse. 

Huts will be settings where conversations between polarized groups can begin. Hunters and hikers, for example, have largely diverged in recent generations. United by a love of the outdoors, folks from seemingly opposed camps could come together to rediscover common ground. After a day spent in shared recreation or on a service project, hikers and hunters, bikers and anglers, snowmobilers and environmentalists might forge lasting bonds over dinner in the sheltering warmth of the hut.

Finally, we believe America will slowly begin to place huts at regular intervals along at least one of its long-distance trails. Remember Benton MacKaye’s vision of the Appalachian Trail as a trail connecting a series of communities for social transformation? It may be too late to situate huts along parts of the 2200-mile-long AT, but perhaps the situation is ripe somewhere else. The North Country Trail, still under development through the populated heartland, will eventually cover 4600 miles. This trail, the longest, youngest, and least tradition-bound national long-distance trail, may be the most likely to innovate, building linked huts along a few sections of what may become a coast-to-coast path.

US HUTS WILL COME OF AGE The land management community will come to acknowledge huts and incorporate hut-to-hut travel into long-range planning on federal, state, and local levels. Because pressures on some iconic landscapes are threatening to destroy their ecological viability, drastic limitations on public access will be necessary in some places. As research in recreation ecology documents that huts minimize human impacts, hut systems will be deployed by land management agencies as a conservation strategy. Skillfully designed, managed, and monitored hut and trail systems will direct people away from fragile and overused areas toward other carefully selected and hardened sites. Portable huts will also be deployed in order to change front- and backcountry use patterns.

Public parks, including our most iconic national parks, are chronically underfunded with no substantial funding increases insight. In the absence of adequate government support, we must leverage creativity to preserve our cherished places and to promote nature immersion for all. Robert Manning, a specialist in national parks, points to “parknerships” as one part of the solution. Financially stressed state and federal parks will partner with a wide range of nonprofit organizations, including new and existing hut systems. Hut systems with strong conservation programs might then get creative in their fee structures, trading overnights for work in the field. Outdoor clubs will partner with parks and develop hut systems operated by member volunteers to enhance lodging options on public lands.

As Americans learn to love their huts and as new systems rise, huts owners and operators will increasingly reach out to each other. The US Hut Alliance, comprised of hut system representatives and hut advocates, is coming together to exchange information, find common cause in operations, and speak with one voice on important topics. The alliance will articulate best practices and develop an ethics statement situating huts on the leading edge of environmentally sensitive recreation. See “Land Ethics for Huts” for an example of what this might look like. Finally, American land managers and hut operators can learn a lot from systems in Europe, Canada, and New Zealand. We believe land managers will begin to make study tours to see what is being done elsewhere, and that US systems will invite foreign hut specialists to hut- related conferences, workshops, and design charettes to generate promising ideas for the twenty-first century.

LAND ETHICS FOR HUTS 

A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty

of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise. 

—Aldo Leopold, “The Land Ethic,” in A Sand County Almanac

The community of practice for hut systems may decide someday to develop an ethics statement; this is our personal vision of the issues it should address. [Authors note: since this was written the US Hut Alliance has in fact adopted a values statement (link to website) that incorporates much of the spirit of this statement] These ethics will inform the development of a set of best practices for the hut community, and will become one basis for clearly branding hut systems as exemplary stewards of the land.

As organizations building and operating on wildlands, we have a particular responsibility to set an example in preserving and protecting our biotic community. We voluntarily and wholeheartedly operate our hut systems as stewardship tools designed to concentrate and mitigate human impacts, and to preserve wildlands while making them accessible for recreation, education, and conservation. We creatively weave Leave No Trace principles into every aspect of our programs and operations, and we share resulting innovations with other hut systems as an evolving body of best practices.

Our commitment to our customers, to land owners and managers, and most of all to the land itself is to celebrate and care for the special spirit of the place—the genius loci—on which we operate. Over time, we pledge to leave the land in better ecological health than we found it. Our hut systems are places for experiencing, exploring, and understanding  moral responsibility to nature. The land ethic drives our operational and business prac- tices, and includes: 

Environmental protection. The land is not ours; we are its stewards. We con- form with and strive to exceed federal, state, and local regulations designed to protect vegetation, soils, wildlife, and water and to ensure the overall environmental quality of the land we share with wild nature. We also work with regulatory agencies and legislatures to revise misguided regulations on huts.

Environmental education and conservation. We support use of huts for  teaching and hands-on work advancing environmental protection, conservation, and res- toration. We actively educate our clientele in low-impact outdoor skills and practices. We  strive to keep huts affordable for young people, families, and like-minded organizations. 

Siting, design, and construction. We strive to at least meet and, where feasi- ble, exceed regulations and best practices designed to minimize the human impacts on  the land. We will creatively adapt and apply Leave No Trace principles to guide the siting, design, construction, and maintenance of huts, trails, and associated amenities.

Visitor management. Staff proactively implement and monitor the results of our visitor management plan. This plan, articulating how we balance resource protection and  recreation, uses a combination of persuasive communication strategies and necessary reg- ulations to encourage hut users to minimize environmental impacts, and to ensure they do  not degrade the quality of experience for others.

Business ethics. Whether the business model is nonprofit, for-profit, or government operated, we actively engage our communities and strive to provide locals with affordable overnight accommodations. We work to be financially viable while operating exemplary environmental enterprises. We act in accord with evolving principles and standards, such as those articulated by the B Corps community: meeting high standards of verified social and environmental performance, public transparency, and accountability to balance profit and purpose. 

This entry was posted in Architecture/design, Economics of huts, Environmental impacts/mitigations, Essays, Future of huts, Hut operations, Hut systems and tagged Hut systems, Overview of huts on April 4, 2022.

 Trail towns: Deciding on Trails by Amy Camp

Book review by Sam Demas

Photos by Amy Camp

This first (and only!) book on trail towns outlines the history of the concept, discusses its future, and, best of all, distills what Amy Camp has learned in 13 years of working with towns that decided to make a trail part of their culture. Her work is grounded in the interconnectedness of nature and human culture; she views trails as a way to connect individuals and communities to the natural world. Her work in developing trail towns is guided by Aldo Leopold’s dictum, “A system of conservation that is based solely on economic self-interest is hopelessly lopsided.“

Amy’s 7 practices focus not simply on economic development — widely viewed the main purpose of trail towns — but emphasize the secret ingredients of memorable trail towns: creating a trail culture that engages locals in the trail, that invites visitors to learn the stories and enjoy the local hospitality of the community, and that makes the trail an authentic part of local culture. Camp makes a key contribution to the idea of trail towns by cautioning against relentless interest in economic benefits to the town, and shifting the focus to the relationship of the community to the trail.

Amy was in the right place at the right time. In 2007 she began working with a team to establish the first U.S. trail town program. The Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) is a rails-to-trails bike path connecting 18 towns, each of which has found its own ways to connect bikers to their town as they travel along the 150 mile trail. At the same time the Appalachian Trails Conservancy (ATC) was beginning to think about how it could to connect the 2,200 mile Appalachian Trail to communities along its corridor. While working with the GAP Trails Town program Amy and her team began to share what GAP was learning with ATC and other trails groups. Today there are 50 A.T. Community towns along the Appalachian Trail; other US long distance hiking trails, including the North Country Trail (29 trail towns) and Continental Divide Trail (18 Gateway communities) have developed programs, training, guidelines, and related resources. In 2013 Camp’s passion for trail towns blossomed into a consulting business, Cycle Forward, a platform for networking with and assisting trails towns throughout the U.S. and Canada.

But long distance hiking trails are just one type of trail that encourages the development of trail towns. Many are on comparatively short trails, using a range of modes of travel, including hiking, skiing, kayakingsome equestrian trails, and lots of bike trails. Camp’s book lists 21 established trail town programs encompassing more than 150 towns in 25 states/provinces across the U.S. and Canada. Throughout the book she gives examples of how they got established, creative ideas and programs implemented, challenges faced, and common myths, objections and caveats. And Camp details different operating models. From her experience consulting, leading workshops, doing training, and leading trips she has developed a set of broad and deep perspectives on trail towns, which are distilled as a set of practices. This is the inspiring core of the book.

7 practices of healthy trail communities

These are some questions/challenges addressed in each of the 7 principles chapters:

1. Adopt a shared vision

How do you engage a town in developing a shared vision? How can the trail and the vision be built into town planning strategies? How do you communicate this vision to citizens of the town and to visitors?

2. Physically connect trail to town

How do you create a safe and enticing route connecting town to trail? How to make it seem worth the trouble to leave the trail for a while? Strategies for using welcome signs, business directories, brochures, interpretive signs, plantings, public art, ride services, shuttles, maps, etc.

3. Extend an invitation to your trail town

How to make a town a friendly place to stop? What is hospitality and how do you make visitors feel welcome? Are businesses trail friendly? Are the locals trail users? Do locals identify with the trail?

4. Cultivate a trail culture

If culture is a way of life, what does it mean to have a “trail culture”? How do you jump start a trail culture in a new trail town? How do you celebrate the trail? How do you brand a town as a trail town? What are the consequences of not cultivating a trail culture? How to handle a culture clash when some folks don’t like or support the trail?

5. Know your trail towns market

How to determine the demographics of trail users? What do they like and need? How much are they spending? What are the measures of economic impact? How does a community offer memorable trail experiences and connect folks with the authentic sense of the place?

6. Share your trail towns story

What is the story of your town and how do you tell it? Describe what a sense of place means to the folks who live in your town. What are the key themes? How to stay authentic and keep from losing the town’s soul through overtoursim?

7. Commit to quality trails

What is a quality trail? Who builds and takes care of the trail? What are the special features and what is the destination appeal of the trail?

Audience Filled with anecdotes and ideas, Deciding on Trails is fun to read and inspiring. It is a must-read for people who live in trails towns, operate businesses and provide services near trails, town councils and government officials, and trail professionals. While not written for a general audience, it will also be of interest to folks who find themselves travelling near trail towns. Having learned through this book what it takes to create a trail town, my own experience of them is enriched. While I’ve always enjoyed exploring towns near trails and learning about them, my perspective is deepened and I know about what to look for in appreciating them! Deciding on Trails opens one’s eyes to what connects travelers to the towns they pass through, and how communities host travellers, tell their stories, and create an authentic trail culture. This book should be in public libraries in every town near a trail, and in libraries serving the travelling public.

Trail towns and the future of American trails Reading this thought-provoking book prompts speculation about the future of new front country trails in the USA. Rails-to-Trails, National Scenic Trails and other trails programs appear to be gradually leading the our nation closer to a European (actually, common around the world) model of walking and biking village-to-village, staying in village hostelries and, when between villages, in backcountry huts. While our geography and history are very different, the trend towards connecting urban, suburban and regional front country trail systems is definitely providing more people with access to trails. And it is embedding walking into the cultures of more cities and towns.

Of course we will always celebrate and protect our wild and wonderful backcountry trails. But as USA becomes an increasingly urban nation (80% of us live in cities and suburbs), we are innovating with a range of approaches to front country trails. Many seem to be looking more like those of the European Ramblers, as outlined in their Leading Quality Trails/Best of Europe program criteria. These criteria include designing trails with: a range of accommodations along the way (in addition to camping options), provision of services along the way (e.g. eating, shopping for groceries), access points for shuttles and/or public transport, a careful mix of wild nature and city/village cultures (e.g. museums and other local attractions), and resting places for picnics, etc.

Being proactive in trail design with these considerations is central to the trail towns philosophy. Providing opportunities for engagement with both natural and cultural history along the way, for learning the story of the landscapes and communities you pass through, and for connecting people and fostering vibrant trail cultures is what it is all about — the world over! These concepts are clearly articulated in this great little book!

This entry was posted in Books/resources, Village to Village and tagged cycling, trail towns, village to village hiking on July 31, 2021.

Book Review: The Mountain Hut Book by Kev Reynolds

By Laurel Bradley & Sam Demas

With the Mountain Hut Book, the prolific and trusted guidebook author Kev Reynolds offers an enjoyable and highly informative tour of the hut experience, and recommends some favorite huts and hut to hut traverses.   The book is an invitation to new audiences – outdoor enthusiasts whom the author is convinced will become hut-to-hut hikers once he uncovers mysteries shrouding this venerable pastime.  Hut novices will come away from this delightful prose traverse of alpine huts full of ideas about where they want to go, what to expect, and how to plan a hut trip.

[For a firsthand feel for the book read an excerpt (at the end of this review) from the first chapter.]

What is a hut, anyway?  Reynolds skillfully charts the evolution of alpine huts from primitive mountain shelters to comfortable hostelries “claiming eco-friendly credentials”.  Two definitions frame the subject: Walt Unsworth, Encyclopaedia of Mountaineering, 1992 offers the original definition of huts as shelters for mountaineers: “a mountain hut is a purpose-built refuge situated at some strategically high place in the mountains so that one or more peaks are readily accessible from it.  It may vary in size from a simple bivouac shelter to something resembling a small hotel in size and facilities.”  Contrast this specialized notion of the hut with Reynolds’ modern mountain hut: “A bit like a youth hostel, offering simple, reasonably priced accommodation and meals in a magical setting for visitors taking part in mountain activities.”

The mountain huts Reynolds extolls are far from the rudimentary garden shed or simple wooden cabin that the word “hut” conjures for many.  This book radiates the author’s enthusiasm, and his many positive experiences.  He revels in the architecture: “I love the diversity, the sheer variety of hut buildings.” Photographs, mostly by the author, confirm this observation—readers see small stone huts, large stucco lodges, and a few highly sculptural modernist structures. 

Kev Reynolds, courtesy literaryfestivals.co.uk

At the heart of the hut experience is, of course, the gorgeous mountain setting.  As a serious outdoorsman and guide, Reynolds provides perspective on how huts support trekkers, climbers, walkers, and wildlife watchers in indulging their passion for high altitude pursuits day after day.  The experience of taking shelter, and overnighting at the hut is central to this avocation.  Reynolds warmly conveys his appreciation of hut warden hospitality — with delightful sketches of some venerable hut guardians — and conjures the convivial atmosphere of mountain huts.  “Arrival at a hut invariably comes with a sense of relief, for it’s a guarantee of shelter, somewhere to relax, freshen up, slake your thirst and settle the nagging hunger that comes from a long day’s effort.”  Chapter two initiates the reader into the joys of hut life. With friendly conversational prose,  Reynolds provides personal accounts, memories, impressions and information on everything from sleeping and eating, to bathrooms to sociability. 

Hut conviviality, courtesy Kev Reynolds

While The Mountain Hut Book is not as detailed as many of Reynolds other 50 guidebooks, it provides expert practical direction to those fired up to learn more.  The chapter “Top Ten Huts” highlights a tiny but well chose sampling of these structures, in Switzerland, France, Italy, and Austria.  Not surprisingly, the European Alps are closest to Reynolds’ heart; he started his career as a mountaineer and guide, and has written extensively on hiking, mostly in the high heart of Europe.  “Hut to Hut,” the next chapter, presents a selection of ten classic multi-day routes in order of difficulty.  Illustrated with photographs of massive peaks which dwarf huts below, pristine lakes, verdant meadows, the descriptions are guaranteed to get the reader dreaming about their next walks.  This chapter includes clear maps, brief but useful route descriptions, and practical information including hiking times, level of difficulty and scenic features. Recommended guidebooks, many available from Cicerone Press, include even more detail about these classic walks. 

Plan Sec Hut, Photo by Jonathan Williams, Courtesy Cicerone Press

Triglav Hut, Slovenia, Courtesy Kev Reynolds

Finally, Reynolds sketches in the larger context mountain accommodations. Looking beyond the European alps, he offers brief information about bothies, lodges and huts in other parts of the world.  Reynolds omits information about huts in Greece, Slovenia, Scandinavia, Australia and elsewhere.  His focus is on high mountain huts; the book is not intended as a comprehensive view of huts. Using the European alps as the model, it admirably evokes and explains the mystique of the high alpine hut experience.  The Mountain Hut Book fills a gap in the literature and is highly recommended for purchase as a gift – for ones-self, friends and family – and for purchase by libraries serving communities with interest in the outdoors.

By Laurel Bradley and Sam Demas, January 2019

Excerpt from Chapter 1 of the book, courtesy Cicerone Press:

Loading…

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Books/resources, high mountain huts, History and tagged European huts, Kev Reynolds on January 29, 2019.

New Zealand Huts: Resources and Bibliography

New Zealand Huts Resources and Bibliography

by Sam Demas

(Note: this is part of the larger work New Zealand Huts: Notes towards a Country Study)

Following is a very brief selection of publications, web sites and organizations to begin delving  into the world of New Zealand huts.   There is a rich literature on huts and tramping in NZ, I recommend starting with two indispensable books:

• Shelter From the Storm by Shaun Barnett, Rob Brown, and Geoff Spearpoint (Craig Potton Publishing, 2012).

• Tramping a New Zealand History, by Shaun Barnett and Chris Maclean (Craig Potton Publishing, 2014).

The bibliographies and footnotes in these amazing works will immediately lead you deep into the relevant literature. 

[For those interested in more detail than is provided in the components of my own report, but are not yet ready to read a full book, check out my reviews of Shelter from the Storm.]

–>For a brief introduction, even better, read the downloadable reprint of the Introduction to Shelter From the Storm; this essay by Shaun Barnett is an excellent introduction to NZ huts.

Also by Barnett, Brown and Spearpoint A Bunk for the Night: A Guide to New Zealand’s Best Backcountry Huts, Potton & Burton, 2016(?).

Other insightful works on huts and tramping include works by Mark Pickering, notably:

• A Trampers Journey, Craig Potton Publishing, 2004.

• Huts: untold stories from back-country NZ, Canterbury University Press, 2010.

• The Hills, Heinemann Reid, 1988.

Golden Bay writer Gerard Hindmarsh has written about huts in some of the essays in his Kahurangi Calling, Potton and Burton, 2010, and Kahurangi Stories, Potton and Burton, 2017.

NZ huts are best understood within the context of environmental conservation and the role of humans in this fabulously beautiful, remote landscape.

• For a quick, informative and stimulating sense of the broader landscape/environmental history of NZ, see: Michael King’s magisterial overview Penguin History of New Zealand, Penguin Books, 2012. While a 500-page book can only skim the surface of a nation’s history, this one does it very well. For most of us, dipping into chapters selectively is more manageable than reading the entire book. The first few chapters set the pre-historic and early history, chapter 11 on the seminal Treaty of Waitangi is useful (even more so is the Wikipedia article), and Chapter 26, land under pressure, briefly provides invaluable historical context on environmental history.

• Wild Heart: the possibility of wilderness in Aotearoa New Zealand, edited by Mick Abbott and Richard Reeve, Otago University Press, 2011. These 17 essays by trampers, conservationists, historians, writers, scientists, and conservationists provide useful perspective on how Kiwi’s are thinking about the nature, roles, uses and protection of wilderness today. It gives a good sense of the many ways in which wildness is “at the nation’s psychological and physical core”.

• Environmental historian Geoff Parks’s provocative Theatre Country: essays on landscape and Whenua, Victoria University Press, 2006. The Maori word whenua means both placenta and people, and this series of essays explores how New Zealanders – indigenous and colonial — are, and are not, connected to the land they occupy. Parks’ thinking about wilderness and landscape seems to be in the spirit of William Cronon, but with a distinctive Kiwi sensibility. The essays range widely, discussing the historical views of landscape and the picturesque imported from British romanticism, nature tourism, and it frames New Zealand’s approach to landscape as a profoundly and misguidedly dichotomous insistence on dividing the nation into two distinct theatrical scenes, both playing out on a national stage largely outside the critical awareness of the actors: 1. the intensively cultivated 51% of the land, and 2. the highly protected, puristic notion of “wilderness” characterized by DoC’s management regime for the 33%

A few relevant websites:

• NZ Department of Conservation With persistent, creative searching, this extensive website will yield a wealth of information and perspective.

• Tramper.co.nz – A great site for locating tracks to walk and learning about the range of tramping and huts in NZ.

• Remote Huts A valuable online forum for those interested in the preservation and restoration of remote huts and tracks. Includes information about Permolat.

• Backcountry Trust Information about grants and projects of this remarkable hut and track maintenance program, funded in large part by DoC.

• Facebook sites for “Shelter from the Storm”, the Backcountry Trust, and the Federated Mountain Clubs, and other groups are great for staying up to date on developments and for networking.

• NZ Alpine Club source for climbers and information about a network of alpine huts.

• Wilderness Magazine , an excellent print and online publication, also has a useful website.

• Federated Mountain Clubs A key outdoors organization representing 80 clubs, FMC is at the nexus of outdoors activity and information. Their brief includes advocacy and information/ publishing. Their quarterly magazine Backcountry, available in print and online, is an indispensable source of information about huts, tramping and outdoor activities generally. Their page providing links to other websites is a great place to start exploring beyond what is listed above.

This entry was posted in Books/resources, Hut systems, New Zealand and tagged New Zealand Huts on January 1, 2019.

Shelter from the Storm: dream team, genesis and impact

Shelter from the Storm: dream team, genesis and impact

Sam Demas, September 5, 2018

(Note: this is part of the larger work New Zealand Huts: Notes towards a Country Study)

{Photo above by John Rhodes, courtesy Shaun Barnett}

Shelter from the Storm: the story of New Zealand’s backcountry huts deeply influenced my understanding of huts and how they are — in addition to shelter — both evolving cultural reflections of the terrain and the society in which they exist, and also manifestations of human relationship to nature.  I was so excited when I first read the book that I wrote an extended review in hopes of increasing sales/readership in the USA.  While traveling in New Zealand I learned how profoundly the book has shifted Kiwi perceptions of huts as a treasured elements of culture and history.  As an offshoot of talking with the authors and the publisher I pieced together a little bit about the genesis of the book and its publishing history.  Talking with trampers all over New Zealand I heard repeatedly about how the book has shifted perceptions and the national conversations about huts.  I am now even more impressed by the book and am moved to share my deepened enthusiasm.

The full impact of this book has likely only begun to play out.  It is a classic.  While I am clearly not the best person to write about its publishing history, what follows is the germ of a story I really want to tell to my hut friends in the USA.  So, I am moved to jot here some threads about the publishing history of this book, musings about its impact in New Zealand, and some personal notions about the future of huts.

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Books/resources, Essays, History, New Zealand, People and tagged Geoff Spearpoint, Rob Brown, Robbie Burton, Shaun Barnett, Shelter from the Storm on November 22, 2018.

Sperry Chalet – historic hut in Glacier National park

Sperry Chalet: historic hut in Glacier National Park

[Featured image (1914) above by Fred Kiser, Courtesy Ray Djuff Collection]

By Sam Demas, October 2017

Sperry Chalet, a much-loved historic hut in Glacier National Park, came to national attention on August 31, 2017 when the main lodge, or “dormitory” was badly burned.  Sadly, I never visited Sperry.  This is not a first-hand account; like many others, I still hope to get there some day.  Efforts are underway to rebuild and re-open this early exemplar of high mountain hospitality. May they succeed!

This post is an appreciation of Sperry Chalet as one of the oldest and most beloved high mountain huts in the nation.  It sketches the hut’s history and architecture, and briefly treats its prolific namesake Lyman Beecher Sperry.  This post is based entirely on secondary sources, mainly the work of Ray Djuff, but others as well.  Apologies in advance if any errors crept into my account.

For fuller information about the present and future — i.e. the Sperry fire, present conditions and efforts to re-build — please see the article by Ray Djuff, which he kindly granted Hut2Hut.info permission to print and the October 19 Glacier National media release reporting on the stabilization efforts to help the structure (which lost its roof and floor) weather the winter.

Sperry Fire, August 31, 2017, Courtesy National Park Service

5 helicopter trips were needed to transport all stabilization materials to the Sperry Chalet, Courtesy National Park Service

Sperry Chalet (Oct 2017) stabilized after fire in preparation for winter, Courtesy National Park Service

For fuller historical information about Sperry Chalet see chapter 10 (p. 128-137) of Glacier’s Historic Hotels and Chalets: View With a Room by Ray Djuff and Chris Morrison (Farcountry Press, 2001).  For a touching, first hand post conveying the depth of affection Sperry has engendered among park visitors and staff, see Courtney Stone’s Remembering a Grand Lady: the Loss of Sperry Chalet, 1913-2017.  And the website of the National Park Lodge Architecture Society.

Origins of the second oldest hut system in the U.S.

Between 1913-1915 the Great Northern Railway (GNR) built a system of nine Backcountry Chalets (see my separate post on this early hut system) and four hotels to provide park visitors with horseback (and hiking) access to the interior of the park.  This makes it the second oldest hut system in the USA, and until sometime in the 1930’s or 40’s it seems to have been the nation’s largest hut system.

Until the 2017 fire, Sperry and Granite Park Chalets were the last remaining backcountry chalets in this once-grand hut system. The Glacier huts (and hotels) were sited in places of great natural beauty, each one a day’s horseback ride apart from another lodging option.  Designed in the style of Swiss Chalets, these hut complexes were part of the railroad’s efforts to market Glacier as “America’s Switzerland”, as part of a promotional campaign aimed a wealthy Americans to “see America first”.  See the introduction to Glacier’s Historic Hotels and Chalets: View With a Room for an excellent overview of this ambitious initiative advanced by Minnesota railroad barons James Jerome Hill (the Empire Builder) and his son Louis Warren Hill, Sr.

Sperry Chalet: quick historical sketch

Built on the precipice of a magnificent cirque, Sperry Chalet offers some of the finest views in Glacier and provides access to to nearby Sperry Glacier.  The Great Northern Railroad was anxious to build on this strategic site to gain a monopoly on access to one of the most popular destinations in the park.

Legally designated a National Park in 1910, the Great Northern Railway (GNR) was quick to establish a near monopoly on lodging in Glacier.  Sperry was just one of a dozen or more construction projects initiated soon after formal designation as a national park.  At Sperry a tent camp was constructed in 1911 and hosted 461 visitors in 1912, its first season.  Construction on the stone kitchen and dining hall began in 1912 and the facility opened in 1913.  The “dormitory” — accommodating 75 guests — was constructed in 1913 and opened in 1914, and supplemented by a tent camp (which operated until WWI) accommodating another 75 guests.

The hut is accessed by 6.7 mile trail from Lake McDonald (with a 3,300′ elevation gain) and a gentler, scenic 13.7  miles through Gunsight Pass.  The blazing of the trail to the site of Sperry Chalet is an interesting story related below.  Accessible only by horse or by foot, Sperry Chalet is renowned for its views, remoteness, and its mountain hospitality during its 60 day operating season.  Even without electricity, the level of amenities made for genteel comfort in a backcountry setting.  In the early days lighting was provided by kerosene lamps, running cold water was available in the dormitory rooms and hot water was delivered on request.  The buildings were heated by wood stoves. Plentiful servings of good food was provided, family style, three times a day in the dining room.

Sperry dining room and kitchen in 1920’s, Courtesy Ray Djuff Collection

The hut was supplied by pack horses from Lake McDonald.  Human waste from outhouses and gray water were tossed over the cliff until the environmental effects became intolerable (see below) by 1992.  Lounging on the balconies to watch the sunset was a favorite activity.

Sperry, along with the other Glacier lodgings, suffered financially during the Great Depression. After the initial completion of the Going to the Sun Highway in 1933 park visitors increasingly visited by auto and overnights at the backcountry Chalets dropped off. 

Sperry closed (1943-46) during WWII.  By the end of WW II all but 2 of the chalets were accessible by car, the demand for saddle trips fell off dramatically and the railroad deemed the Chalets out-moded or unsupportable.  The GNR sold Sperry to the National Park Service for $1.  The Park Service let the hut as a concession to Martha Russell.  In 1954 the concession went to the Luding family, who operated it for many years.

What kept Sperry and the few remaining backcountry chalets going during the 1950’s and into the 1960’s was use by enthusiastic and fit cliques of park and concessionaire employees.  Ray Djuff says this was a second golden age of the chalets, which became prized hiking destinations for those in the know.  The back to nature movement of the 1960’s and backpacking boom of the 1970’s precipitated yet another golden age, which continues today.  People love these huts.  Getting reservations has long been very competitive, and will certainly be harder still in future.  As in Yosemite, the interest in backcountry huts on national park lands is intense.  Sperry continued to operate through August 2017 in much the same way as it did in the early days, as rustic shelter for backcountry travelers who appreciate comfort and conviviality at the end of a day of hiking in fabulous mountains.

[Coda: It is interesting to speculate what the Glacier hut system would look like today if the other backcountry Chalets at Glacier had been able to survive the incursion of the automobile into the center of the park.  If, like Sperry and Granite Park, they had been able to hold on until the environmental movement and backpacking boom a generation later, Glacier still might have one of the largest and oldest hut systems in the USA.  In any case, Glacier still has Sperry (assuming it will be rebuilt) and Granite Peak as reminders of a different era in National Park Service backcountry lodging options.]

Sperry Chalet, note rock work mimicking log joints, Courtesy Wiki Media

Architecture

Both of the main buildings comprising the Sperry Chalet complex were built of local stone and lumber from the area.  The kitchen/dining building was built by Italian stone masons in1912. Both structures were designed by architect Kirkland Cutter of Cutter and Malgrem in Spokane.  The one story 22’x80′ Kitchen and dining hall was a fairly unassuming stone structure.  The 32’x90′ two story lodge or dormitory, was built in the style of a Swiss chalet.  The balconies were a favorite feature of guests.  A nice detail in the stonework is the use of stone to look like the corner joints of a log cabin.  Following is the architectural data included in the description on the website of the National Park Lodge Architecture Society:

Sperry Chalet • Glacier NP, 1913
Classification IV
Location: Sperry Trail, Lake McDonald, Montana
Theme: Swiss Chalet; National Park Rustic “Parkitecture” with multiple rectangular structures
Original Architect: Cutter and Malmgren; some sources list Samuel Bartlett. Glacier Park Hotel Company
Construction: Glacier Park Hotel Company (later renamed Glacier Park Company), subsidiary of Great Northern Railway. Most aspects of design and construction were controlled by Louis Hill, president of GN Railway.
Structure: Two storey stone dorm building with asphalt roof, multiple porches and dormers. Interior walls cedar tongue-and-groove, floorboards are painted wood, interior and exterior railings are peeled log. One storey kitchen-dining room building, stone structure with wood shingle roof.
Known Timeline:
Construction begins, 1912
Kitchen/dining room building completed, 1913
Open for guests, 1914
Closed due to war, 1918
112 total season guest count due to depression, 1932
Dormitory altered, 1940
Closed due to war, 1942-1944
Concession transferred to Luding family, 1954
Dormitory altered, 1955
Dining Room altered, including roof replacement, 1961
Deck and balconies replaced, 1978-1979
Restoration of entire complex, 1996
New restroom building added, ca. 2008
Presently offers 17 guest rooms

Environmental impact: the “million dollar toilet”

For years kitchen waste was pitched over a cliffside and became, as in many national parks, a public viewing ground for the nightly feasts of “garbage grizzlies”.  In response to problems with beats attacking people in a number of national parks, culminating in several lawsuits after bears killed humans.  NPS implemented strategies (e.g installing bear boxes, visitor policies, and closing of dumps in the park) to break the connection in the minds of bears between people and food.  At Sperry a new strategy — packing out the kitchen waste beginning in 1954 — was implemented long before the aforementioned NPS policy changes.

Disposal of sewage was a harder problem to fix. While flush toilets were added in 1964, sewage disposal continued as before: dumped over the mountainside.  By 1992 the unenlightened practice of disposing of sewage finally caught up with the National Park Service.  The pollution effects of this practice were no longer possible to ignore; Montana state water quality tests were one indicator that precipitated discussions of Sperry’s future.  Sperry was closed after the Sierra Club Environmental Defense Fund threatened to sue NPS for this defilement of a beautiful high mountain area.  The cost of fixing the sewage problem was deemed prohibitive by NPS, which had many other pressing priorities.  NPS decided to close Sperry Chalet and Granite Park Chalet, which had similar conditions.

This decision prompted a public outcry in the form of a “Save the Chalets” lobbying and fundraising effort.  Public pressure resulted in action from the Montana legislators, getting Congress to direct the NPS to keep the chalets open and allocating $3.3 million to implement solution.  The funds were used to effect renovations at both huts, but most of the funds went to fixing the sewage problem (the most costly component was helicopter fees associated with complex backcountry construction).  Sperry and Granite Park were closed from 1992 – 1999 during  construction and renovation.

The elaborate project attracted much press coverage about the “million dollar toilet”.

Alas, the expensive toilets were removed in 2005 due to non-performance — they could not achieve a sufficiently high temperature conditions to actually compost the waste.  They were replaced with latrines using sealed drums, which were used to haul sewage from the huts by helicopter to a sewage treatment plant.

Today we know from experience that siting of high mountain huts is a significant challenge.  Site selection for Sperry Chalet was done quickly by the railroad, and without sophisticated consideration of the long term effects of human use, in particular waste disposal.  Sites like those of Granite Park and Sperry Chalets would no longer make it through the screen of an Environmental Impact Statement process.  However, high mountain huts “grandfathered in” are extremely popular and can prompt extraordinary measures to keep them open in compliance with environmental stewardship principles and practices.

Lyman Beecher Sperry: professor, naturalist, sanitary scientist, trailblazer

Sperry Promotional Brochure, Courtesy Carleton College Archives

Lyman B. Sperry, the namesake of Sperry Glacier (after which Sperry Trail and Sperry Chalet were named)  was a talented with many interests.  He was trained as a physician, taught at a number of midwestern colleges (Oberlin, Ripon and Carleton), promoted the establishment of Glacier National Park, and was a tireless lecturer on nature-based travel and on topics concerned with public health and human sexuality.

Several aspects of Sperry’s connection with Glacier Park are related in “Lyman Sperry and the Last of the Firsts”, a chapter in Randi Minetor’s book Historic Glacier National Park: the Stories Behind One of  America’s Great Treasures (Rowman and Littlefield, 2016 ). Apparently Sperry visited the Glacier area with two purposes in mind: to purchase land in the Avalanche Lake area as an investment, and to explore the wonders of the magnificent landscape.  In the end it seems his appreciation of the beauty of the region — or something like that — trumped his pursuit of land acquisition.

At some point (it is not clear if this happened before or after the discovery of Sperry Glacier, but I assume it was before) Sperry was approached by an agent of the GNR and asked to explore the region.  Sperry already had a reputation as a lecturer and promoter of travel and, according to Djuff and Morrison,

“Sperry was enticed to explore the Glacier Park region by a Great Northern Passenger agent who asked him to “make such observations as you shall find practicable regarding our scenic attractions.”  It was the first hint of the railway’s interest in developing tourism in Glacier — more than a full decade before the area became a national park. 

In June 1895 Sperry visited the Avalanche Lake area in the region that would become Glacier National Park.  Homesteader Charles Howe told him about a U-shaped valley he had discovered, and about a sighting from the top of Brown Mountain of a large glacier.   The thought of finding a new natural feature in a region that had been pretty well explored was exciting.  They went as far as the edge of the huge basin in June and realized they needed more  time and gear to do a proper exploration.  Sperry returned in August 1895 (with his nephew Albert L. Sperry and Prof. L.W. Chaney, a geologist from Carleton College) and mounted an expedition into the basin and measured the elevations of the surrounding peaks, made some geological observations, and analyzed the water of Avalanche Lake, determining its composition indicated the source was glacial meltwater.  There was clearly a glacier in the mountains high above them, and they looked for a way to find it.  They reached the edge of the massive glacier and determined they would have to return to complete their exploration and documentation.  Sperry wrote up his findings in the January 1896 issue of  Appalachia, and returned in summer 1896 to climb onto the glacier and fully document it.

Like the GNR, Sperry soon became a fervent promoter of the idea of protecting Glacier as a National Park.

The next step was to provide visitor access to this remarkable discovery.  Sperry went straight to J.J. Hill to propose he fund trail construction from Lake Mcdonald to Sperry Glacier. It seems Hill was intrigued but concerned because the land was not yet protected as a National park and he ran a risk of losing his financial investment.  Sperry suggested the job could be done inexpensively by letting him (Sperry) hire a fifteen students at the University of Minnesota to build the trail in a summer.  Hill agreed to let the students do the work (apparently without pay) and provide them transportation to and from the park on the Great Northern.

[A final note on Lyman B. Sperry the lecturer and promoter: he traveled the nation and abroad for over 30 years lecturing on “Sanitary Science”, an early tributary of what later became  the disciplines of public health and human ecology.  His lectures at colleges and through YMCA programs, focused particularly on societal and individual  problems of sex and narcotics.  Sperry was part of a movement to counter the effects of roving quacks who dispensed advice and medications that confused young people and also filled them with fears and misunderstandings about these little-understood matters.  Among his lecture topics were “Male and Female”, “Human Longevity”, ‘Brain and Nerve”, “Narcotics and Narcoticism”, “Superstitions, Delusions, and Fads”, “Friendly Enemies”, and “Gumption and Grit”.  By all accounts he was a powerful lecturer.  With all this practice, its no wonder he was convincing in his promotion of national park status for Glacier, a topic for which he also developed strong conviction.]

Author’s note: I am deeply grateful to Ray Djuff for his research, on which I have drawn heavily, for our phone conversation, and for his providing the images used in this post.  Ray  is passionate in his research and generous in sharing his knowledge and resources.

This entry was posted in Architecture/design, Books/resources, Featured hut, high mountain huts, History, Hut systems and tagged Glacier National Park, Great Northern Railroad, Lyman Beecher Sperry, Sperry Chalets on October 22, 2017.

Book Review: “Walks of a Lifetime: Extraordinary Hikes From Around the World”

Book Review: Walks of a Lifetime: Extraordinary Hikes From Around the World

by Robert and Martha Manning, Falcon Press, 2017.

Hurrah! Another elegant invitation from the Mannings to ordinary folks to try long distance walking!

Martha and Robert Manning on the Kumado Kodo Pilgrimage Walk, Japan, Courtesy Robert Manning

Walks of a Lifetime (2017), like the Manning’s first guidebook, Walking Distance (2013), alternates compelling descriptions of 30 exceptional walks around the world with brief essays on aspects of walking. With these intelligent companion volumes, Robert and Martha Manning are now firmly established as discerning and trusted guides to some of the world’s best walks.  Their approach goes way beyond your typical “trail guide”.

Essays in Walks of a Lifetime delightfully amplify themes in the walk chapters, connect the reader to the larger world of long distance walking, and inspire closer attention to the world we walk.  The 30 topics include trail angels, pilgrimage, urban walking, philanthropic walking, place, and the philosophy and ethics of walking.  The authors celebrate the joys of advance research, discuss how to prepare and how to enjoy serendipitous “misadventures” along the way, and offer advice on answering the inevitable question, “how long will it take?”.  Further, they explore the expanded field around walking by musing on ecotourism, health, walking as political statement, walking as art, and they contemplate the existential conundrum of journey vs. the destination.

Each walk portrait presents the sort of information that never goes out of date, for example natural and cultural history, land management context, weather and terrain.  Descriptions are useful, satisfying, but hardly exhaustive.  Instead, the reader will be stimulated toward further research, and to embrace walking as a process of life-long learning. Robert contributes knowledges honed by decades of research and teaching on national parks around the world, and he also provides hundreds of high quality photos.  Martha, an artist, speaks and writes as an astute observer full of practical advice.  Both husband and wife have an eye for natural beauty, topography, and unique landscape features.  They also share their infectious enjoyment of people, culture and cuisine.   Specifically, the walk descriptions include:

Marron Bells, Colorado, Courtesy Robert Manning

Val D’Orcia, Italy, Courtesy Robert Manning

• Orientation to the landscape and its natural history, including geology, wildlife, botany, weather, soils, bodies of water, etc.;

• Cultural highlights of each area, including history, archaeology, museums, culinary traditions, agriculture, architecture, language, thermal baths, and local lore;

• The context of the trail/traverse: how the trail came to be, how it operates, nearby and connecting trails, the challenges and unique features of the parks and natural areas it traverses, the broader trail system and walking culture of the nation/region in which it exists; and

• Photographs that visually define each experience.

And, of course, practical information and advice is included:

• Getting to the trail head and back, getting around in the region;

• Availability of food, water, accommodations, bathrooms, campsites, etc.;

• How to hike the trail in sections, other possible modifications, and adjacent trails;

• Level of difficulty, type of terrain, safety considerations, and tips about gear;

• Trail protocols (important do’s and don’ts) and environmental ethics.

In Walks of a Lifetime the authors expand our concept of long distance walking beyond hiking remote woods and tramping distant fields to include sauntering through some of the world’s most populous cities (Sydney, New York, Paris and San Francisco).  They also include a range of bucolic to backcountry walks in places like Arizona, Hawaii, Georgia, Utah, Colorado, Maine, N.H., China, France, New Zealand, Italy, Portugal, Japan, Scotland, England and Wales.  And they take us on treks in some of the most isolated locations in the USA such as Denali in Alaska, Havasu Canyon and Aravaipa Canyon Wilderness in Arizona, and Popo Agie Wilderness in Wyoming.

The Manning’s continued emphasis on long distance walks for ordinary people is a refreshing corrective to the current craze for “through hiking” on such trails as the Pacific Crest and Appalachian Trail.  Such hikes, requiring months of time and almost superhuman effort, are not for ordinary people. This book is a tonic for the rest of us.  In fact, in Walks of a Lifetime, the Mannings offer even gentler and more accessible walks than in their previous guide.  They include four urban saunters, and also describe a higher proportion of domestic (U.S.) walks (seventeen) than in the 2013 volume (twelve).  As to level of difficulty, this latest guide includes seven walks of low challenge (compared with two in the previous book) and eight that are categorized as high challenge (compared with twelve in the previous book).

Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, an Urban Walk, Courtesy Robert Manning

The latest volume is published by Falcon Press, a specialist in trail guides.  The earlier guide, published by Oregon State University Press includes an index, further reading suggestions at the end of each chapter, a bibliography, and a sprinkling of sparkling quotations throughout.  The Falcon Press publication omits these extras.  I missed these.

One quibble: the maps in Walks of a Lifetime are extremely rudimentary.  While providing the highly detailed topo maps necessary for walking the walk is clearly not within the scope of this guide, better maps would definitely aid in amplifying the author’s text and in supporting the walker’s planning.  Falcon Press is capable of doing better by its authors and readers.

Readers new to long distance walking will find themselves in good hands as they select a walk and plan for their first trip.  Experienced walkers will enjoy perusing the options shared by the well-travelled and insightful authors. Written with intelligence, grace and gentle humor, the Manning’s two guides are perfect gifts for friends and family.  Each volume effectively encourages new readers to get off the chair, take a long walk, and savor the wonders of nature and culture at a slow pace.  Both guides are also highly recommended for libraries serving communities with interest in outdoor recreation.

Sam Demas, October 2017

This entry was posted in Books/resources, Literary, artistic, spiritual, Trails, Trip reports and tagged Book reviews, Extraordinary walks for ordinary people, Martha Manning, Robert Manning, walking on October 18, 2017.

Shelter from the Storm: The Story of New Zealand’s Backcountry Huts: book review part 1

Book Review by Sam Demas:

Shelter From The Storm: The Story of New Zealand’s Backcountry Huts

(Part one of a two part book review)

2012, Craig Potton Publishing, Nelson, NZ.

Text and most photographs by Shaun Barnett, Rob Brown, and Geoff Spearpoint.

With its highly-organized system of 1,000 backcountry huts New Zealand (NZ) — about the same size (area and population) as Oregon — is the hut capital of the world.  By comparison, the USA has about 110 huts operating within 17 different hut-to-hut systems; Switzerland and Norway each have about 500 huts.  Every nation’s approach to outdoor recreation — including how its citizens organize overnight stays in the wild — is based on local causes and conditions such as geography, size of the country, climate, terrain, history, economics, politics, and cultural values.  Shelter from the Storm is a richly illustrated, well-researched history of the causes and conditions that created NZ’s unique hut culture, and a beautiful tribute to the huts themselves.

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Architecture/design, Books/resources, high mountain huts, History, Hut operations, Hut systems, Trails on April 30, 2017.

Shelter from the Storm – Introduction to a Book About History of New Zealand Huts

Below is a reprint of the “Introduction” to the book: 

Shelter From The Storm: The Story of New Zealand’s Backcountry Huts

2012, Craig Potton Publishing, Nelson, NZ.

Text and most photographs by Shaun Barnett, Rob Brown, and Geoff Spearpoint.

Embedded below is the 14 page, beautifully illustrated “Introduction”, by Shaun Barnett, to the remarkable book Shelter from the Storm. In it he provides an overview of the benefits, history, and architecture of New Zealand huts. His “Introduction” gives the reader a feel for the book as a whole. For more on this book, see my two part book review of Shelter from the Storm click here for: part 1 and part 2. Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Architecture/design, Books/resources, Essays, high mountain huts, History, Hut systems on March 23, 2017.

Shelter from the Storm: book review part two

Book review continued:

Shelter From The Storm: The Story of New Zealand’s Backcountry Huts

(Part two of a two part book review)

2012, Craig Potton Publishing, Nelson, NZ.

Text and most photographs by Shaun Barnett, Rob Brown, and Geoff Spearpoint.

For part one of this review click here.  Following are some fascinating themes and stories that are skillfully elaborated in Shelter from the Storm, about New Zealand Backcountry Huts.

This book tells the story of how a geographically remote island nation came to create a robust international outdoor culture, and how a disparate collection of huts built for other purposes – I like the phrase infrastructure lying in wait — came to form the backbone of the world’s largest hut system. Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Architecture/design, Books/resources, high mountain huts, History, Hut operations, Hut systems, Trails on March 20, 2017.

“On Trails: An Exploration” by Robert Moor

On Trails: an exploration by Robert Moor, Simon and Schuster, 2016

Book Review by Sam Demas

Robert Moor is intellectually intrepid in his exploration — as a writer and a walker – of the genesis, meaning and wonder of trails.  Trails of all kinds.  He writes in the spirit of intellectual adventure represented by authors like Henry Thoreau, John Muir, Robert Macfarlane, Annie Dillard, Jared Diamond, and Bruce Chatwin.  Through fluid writing, artful character sketches, long walks, and deep research, he opens our eyes to the fact that trails are everywhere one goes in the world, and that they all have stories to tell and wisdom to impart.  As Moor says, his book is a trail whose destination is a quest for the wisdom of trails. I’ve read (or listened to) this book several times in the past year and am finally sharing my enthusiasm with the readers of hut2hut.info. Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Books/resources, Essays, History, Trails on February 23, 2017.

 Cross-cultural Comparisons of Huts: methodological notes

Cross-cultural Comparisons

as a Component of Country Studies of Huts: methodological notes

by Sam Demas

(Note: this is part of the larger work New Zealand Huts: Notes towards a Country Study)

While learning basic facts about NZ huts (e.g. how they are organized, operated, funded, and used), I was quickly drawn to trying to understand the cultural context of huts and long-distance human-powered travel in NZ.  While I made progress in learning the facts, developing even a slightly nuanced understanding of the broader context for NZ huts will take more time, travel, tramping, talking and reading.

This “NZ country study” – still a work in progress — is one building block in a larger project to compare and contrast huts across 6 – 8 nations.  Tramping, traveling and talking in NZ informed my approach to country studies in part by stimulating many questions of cross-cultural comparison.  I found myself trying to compare what I was learning in NZ with what I knew about the topic in the USA.  Wow!  Confronting my incomplete and idiosyncratic understanding of my own culture was a useful, if humbling, experience!  Travel abroad can certainly help us understand ourselves and the place we call home, as well as a bit about other peoples and lands.

I’m just beginning to learn how to think about cross-cultural comparisons and have a long ways to go……. 

So what follows is not a cross cultural comparison of NZ huts with US or other nation(s); I simply don’t know enough yet to go there.  Rather these are thoughts and questions, using NZ as an example, towards a more intentional method of cross-cultural comparison as a lens for studying and comparing hut systems.

The hope is that these notes will stimulate useful comments and criticisms, and perhaps even lead to collaborations in exploring this arena of comparing hut systems around the world.

1. In beginning a country study, I focus on ascertaining the obvious facts about a hut system so I can begin to draw comparisons with huts in other nations.

2. This leads to identifying the unique features of each nation’s hut system, comparing and contrasting them. What makes this hut system different from others in the world?  For example, in NZ this includes:

• Historical development of tramping and huts

• Tramping culture and tramping clubs of New Zealand

• The large DoC government-owned and operated hut system

• Great Walks and other categories of tramps and huts

• Hut architecture and design

• Private walks and huts

• Maori operated huts and tracks

• And small but interesting topics such as: the innovative gear industry of NZ, car relocation services, the Kiwi bach as a related architectural type,

• Overview of the relevant literature, including books, magazines and websites; and a sense of the state of relevant publishing, maps, libraries and archives.

3. Next, I try to drill deeper, looking at key attitudes, metrics and indicators of land use, environmental awareness, and recreational culture. Most nations do not have book like Shelter from the Storm, which provides a starting point for such analysis.  Among the topics in this arena are:

• Land use and environmental attitudes:

  • What are the historical patterns of land use and how do they influence environmental attitudes today? It was invaluable to have a broad overview, such as that provided in Chapter 26 “Land under Pressure” in Michael King’s Penguin History of New Zealand. This includes a sketch of the historical patterns of land use, the dawning of environmental awareness, the arc of environmental activism and legislation, and key environmental organizations. This background informs questions I ask in interviews and casual conversations. Geoff Park’s Theatre Country is another example of environmental history shedding light on present attitudes and challenges.

  • What percentage of land is in public ownership and how is it administered for recreation and conservation?

  • What is the role of private land and of land owners in recreation and conservation?

  • Extent, operations and changing attitudes towards wilderness, national parks, and other lands with conservation value? Wild Heart edited by Mick Abbott and Richard Reeve, for example, brings together differing perspectives, and points to areas where Kiwi attitudes converge and diverge from those in the USA, Australia and elsewhere, and specifically addresses ideas about huts and wilderness.

  • Key features of the culture’s attitudes about and engagement with environmental issues such as protection of natural resources, recycling and consumer habits, environmental education programs.

• Recreational culture in general:

  • What is the historical arc of recreational culture over time? For example, in former British colonies, how were British attitudes to alpinism, rambling, outdoor clubs, and hunting absorbed, transformed and/or rejected. The prevalence and extent of elitist vs. egalitarian ethos of tramping and tramping clubs, and of alpinism, for example. These evolved differently in New Zealand than in Ireland, Canada, and the USA. These differences may shape and can help to understand cultural differences in recreation in these nations.

  • Roles of clubs and other mechanisms for promoting and supporting participation in tramping? Extent of permission and overlap with conservation organizations?

  • What are the recreational motivations and values of a culture (e.g. solitude, not seeing others, tolerance for crowding, etc.) and how do they shape huts, tramping and camping? How and why have the relationships of hunters and trampers evolved?

  • What is the history and culture of long distance, human-powered travel in a nation? Extent and nature of trails and of accommodations for skiers, walkers, and cyclists? How are hospitality traditions of a nation reflected in modern recreational culture?

  • Miles/km of tracks/trails and nature of the trails? Nature and difficult of the terrain? Trends in trail maintenance?

  • General health and fitness of the populace, rates of participation in long-distance human-powered travel, preferences for terrain, accommodations,

  • Trends in camping, hiking, cycling, etc.? How do these affect interest in/use of huts and other accommodation systems?

  • Rights of access – NZ, USA and Ireland have similar laws around legal rights of access for walkers on private land; these are based largely on English laws that have long since been changed in the UK. Most other European nations seem to recognize traditional rights of way to a greater extent than the former British colonies. Similarly rights of access to coastal lands (e.g. Queen’s chain in NZ) differs among nations and can affect the extent of tracks by rivers/seas/ocean. The overall impact of these legal differences is of course affected by the extent of publicly owned lands, by other relevant legislation. Is there a Walking Access Commission or other entity advocating for the rights of walkers?

  • Laws related to recreation – For example, in NZ the laws providing for health care for trampers injured in the backcountry, combined with laws prohibiting recreationists from suing a company or government for liability in case of death or injury create a more relaxed and creative approach to outdoor recreation than in the USA.

  • Tourism and impacts on nature

• Attitudes toward, use, and role(s) of huts:

  • Societal attitudes towards and extent of knowledge of, huts as recreational infrastructure?

  • Hut etiquette varies among cultures, and differences can be sources of tension in the remarkable experience of communal living that huts provide. It will be interesting to study differences among nations and how they relate to deeper cultural traits, preferences, and values.

  • Level(s) of amenities and how this reflects cultural preferences and traditions? Nature of the terrain? Demographics of use (age, gender, race, education, domestic, international). Rates of participation compared with other recreational opportunities?

  • Use of huts for educational, conservation, therapeutic purposes?

  • Affordability of huts?

  • Categories of hut visitors catered to? For example, in NZ huts are categorized as catering to Backcountry Comfort Seekers, Backcountry Adventurers, Remoteness Seekers, and Thrill Seekers. In the far less developed hut systems of the USA, there is no guidebook to hut systems (I’m working on one now!), and there are no equivalent categories signaling the comparative level of amenities/difficulty/challenge of a hut system.

4. Finally, I hope to understand some of the broad historical and socio-economic context, the key challenges of a nation that condition efforts to create its environmental future, and how these factors may influence the present and future roles of its huts. In the case of New Zealand, some of the fascinating broad features of Kiwi culture that resonated with me include a set of conflicts and conundrums that arise in part from its unique position as the last large land mass to be settled by Europeans.  In his Penguin History of New Zealand, Michael King opens the book with a quote from Geoff Park that summarizes a central conflict of the nation’s identity and future: 

New Zealand’s fertile plains were the last that Europeans found before the Earth’s supply revealed itself as finite.  Our relationship with them has been completely unsustainable…..[We] have exploited these islands’ richest ecosystems with all the violence that modern science and technology could summon….We must live with the rest of nature or die with the rest of nature.

While the environmental challenges faced by Kiwis are certainly not unique, they create a set of salient characteristics of NZ culture that influences attitudes to huts, tracks, tramping and outdoor culture.  This seems particularly so due to the rapidity of environmental degradation in this young nation, the broad awareness of the populace of the issues, the comparatively large amount of land in the conservation estate, broad popular support for DoC and its brief to protect and conserve natural resources, and the apparent strength of the environmental movement.

A few of the remarkable contradictions, conflicts and conundrums that struck me as central to NZ’s current challenges and environmental futures:

• The rapid deforestation of over 50% of the land in pursuit of the goal of creating the Great Britain of the southern hemisphere, complete with a pastoral landscape aesthetic creates ongoing environmental challenges.

• The designation of 40% of the nation’s land mass as part of the conservation estate sets up a stark dichotomy in land use: developed and conserved.

• These islands with no native terrestrial mammals have established an economy based on animal husbandry.

  • An island of 3.5 million people, produces food (especially particular dairy and meat) to feed 40,000,000 people per year, which incurs internal environmental costs.

  • Kiwis have among the highest annual rate of consumption of meat per person in the world.

  • The growing export economy for dairy products is utilizing water resources at a stunning rate. A very wet nation appears to be facing issues of water quality and, in some areas, sufficiency. Resolution of this issue may open a Pandora’s box of issues, including Maori water rights.

• The role of Maori citizens in civil society in general, and in conservation and tourism issues in particular is a major challenge and an opportunity.

• The legal personification of former national parks, such as Te Urewera, is a remarkable development, introducing a parallel system of land rights and management. It will be fascinating to see what the Maori do with the dozens of huts for which they are now responsible.

• An island nation with a sense of isolation from the rest of the world, Kiwi’s are in fact very much tied into the rest of the world. They are: curious about and engaged with the larger world, while mindful of the fact they have created something special that they don’t want to spoil, and simultaneously always looking elsewhere for answers, affirmation and a sense of what is worth paying attention to. This brings to mind the aphorism “be careful what you wish for”, and is encapsulated in Allen Curnow’s warning,

Always to islanders danger, 

Is what comes over the sea.

• New Zealand is “Clean and Green” and “100% Pure”, and also competing in the international economy with nations that have no such aspirations.

• An important part of NZ economy is international tourism, which inexorably veers into “mass tourism”, and

  • strains the patience of Kiwis and threatens the natural beauty and integrity of the very ecosystems that make the land so appealing; and

  • strains DoC’s ability to cater to a broad range of recreational uses of the conservation estate, while also pursuing its lofty conservation goals;

  • prompts the question: who benefits and what suffers from the seemingly inexorable growth in international tourism. Is it sustainable over time, and at what costs?

• Conservation conundrums: for example, use of the pesticide 1080 as a divisive issue; viewed as “correcting a blunder with a crime”.

Most of the items on this short list of major challenges certainly have analogs in other cultures.  While I can’t get lost in the deep weeds of these issues, I am fascinated by discussing with colleagues:

• How do these cultural particularities inform national environmental values and aspirations? and

• How do they condition attitudes and programs in environmental education, recreational culture and in the roles of huts in a particular culture, and across cultures?

In the end, the real fun will come in trying to look across what I learn about Ireland, New Zealand, USA (and eventually other nations such as Switzerland, Austria, France, Norway and Japan), to see if I can detect patterns, anomalies, unique features, trends, and interesting ideas.  To the extent this comparison of hut systems might be grounded in some level of cross-cultural comparison and understanding, the work may have greater meaning.  Ideas travel far and wide and find new meanings as they go……

This entry was posted in Case study, Environmental Attitudes, Environmental impacts/mitigations, Essays, Hut systems, New Zealand and tagged Country studies, cross cultural comparisons, New Zealand on December 24, 2018.

New Zealand Great Walks: user perceptions

New Zealand Huts Department of Conservation, Part D:

Great Walks user perceptions

in Great Walks Huts and Serviced Huts

by Sam Demas

(Note: this is part of the larger work New Zealand Huts: Notes towards a Country Study)

In operating the world’s largest hut system, DoC caters for trampers with vastly different experience and skill levels, from different parts of New Zealand society and from all over the world.  DoC is continually trying to balance these disparate needs, abilities, and preferences through an evolving suite of “visitor management” methods.  There appears to be widespread public recognition that DoC is continually walking a very difficult tightrope.

While Kiwis recognize that it is not possible to please everyone, DoC has learned that it can count on experienced local trampers to let them know when their visitor management methods are perceived as undermining traditional tramping.  So DoC is well aware of the perceptions summarized below, and doubtless much more.

See related post New Zealand Great Walks: tourism and policies for broader context for these summary perceptions and for discussion of policies designed to address them.

Sources of user perceptions and notes on methodology

There are currently 33 Great Walks Huts and 95 Serviced Huts in the DoC system.  This combined total of 128 huts constitutes 13.3% of total DoC huts (963). The user perceptions summarized below are from these two hut categories.  While a small percentage of the whole system, these two categories attract the most intensive use and controversy.

This summary of user perceptions is derived from two sources: 1. from discussions that I gathered in three months of interviews and travels in NZ, and 2. from the results of an academic survey reported in the article “Tramper Perspectives on New Zealand’s Great Walks in a time of transition” (in New Zealand Geographer, 2017, p. 1-15, by Joe Fagan and Robin Kearns). [Alas, the link to this article will only get you the full text if you have access through a library with a digital subscription or if you wish to pay.  Otherwise you can get a paper copy at your local library or request it on interlibrary loan.]

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Case study, Hut systems, New Zealand, Trails and tagged Great walks, New Zealand Huts, Serviced huts on October 22, 2018.

New Zealand Huts Country Study: introduction

NZ Huts Notes for a Country Study: Introduction

By Sam Demas, hut2hut.info

(Note: this is part of the larger work New Zealand Huts: Notes towards a Country Study)

What and why? (purpose, scope, and audiences)   

The immediate purpose of this series of web posts, which are knit together by an annotated Table of Contents, is to provide a substantive overview of the world’s largest hut system.  This is an invitation to learn more about the remarkable culture and system of huts and tracks in New Zealand. Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Case study, History, Hut operations, Hut systems, New Zealand, People and tagged Country study huts, Hut systems, New Zealand, New Zealand Huts, Walking in Ireland on October 17, 2018.

Shelters on the Appalachian Trail & Pacific Crest Trail

Shelter Influence on Trail Camaraderie, Socializing, Human Impact, Etiquette & More

by Laura Johnston 

(photos courtesy Laura Johnston; see related photo galleries for AT and PCT)

Backcountry on the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail

I thru-hiked the 2,189.1* mile Appalachian Trail (AT) in 2016 and the 2,650.1* mile Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) in 2017.  The AT and the PCT are two of the country’s oldest, longest and most well-known national scenic trails in the United States (US).

This piece explores the AT’s and PCT’s options for outdoor overnight infrastructure (shelters, huts, lean tos, etc.) on the trail. Included are my observations from walking and camping on both trails for a collective 10.5 months — six months on the AT and four and half months on the PCT. It also incorporates data and information from the Appalachian Trail Conservancy (ATC), the Pacific Crest Trail Association (PCTA), the National Park Service, and interviews I conducted with fellow hikers for Sounds of the Trail (SOT) podcast while hiking both trails.

Thru-hiking a long distance trail like the AT or PCT is a profound experience where nearly aspect of daily life is about and on the trail–your front yard, your backyard, your neighborhood, your job, your weekend plans and your community is on the trail (while keeping in touch with friends/family off trail, too). The day-in-day-out of life as a thru-hiker offers experience and learning about the history, community, structures and dynamics of these trails.

Mount Katahdin, pictured, in central Maine is the northern terminus of the Appalachian Trail (AT) and one of the most iconic spots of the trail. The Katahdin sign is one that nearly all hikers, especially thru-hikers, take a photo with when reaching the top of the mountain. On a clear day, hikers atop Katahdin enjoy views of the surrounding wilderness in Baxter State Park. Pictured are author Laura Johnston (center back) at the end of her AT thru-hike with fellow thru-hiking friends.

What Hut 2 Hut Wants to Know

Hut2hut.info explores options for people spending the night outdoors while hiking, walking, skiing, or biking (human powered travel) for extended periods. Hut2hut has two goals: 1) to paint a broad picture of what outdoor overnight infrastructure accommodations exists in the US (e.g. shelters, huts, camper cabins, platform tents, yurts, etc.) for long distance human-powered travelers (hike, bike, ski, etc.), and 2) to determine the optimal role(s) of each accommodation type. 

Staying overnight on the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) is possible by camping either in a tent/hammock or cowboy camping (sleeping without a tent/hammock but under the stars). There are no shelters or cabins on the PCT like those on the AT.

Outdoor Camping Options on the AT and PCT

The AT and PCT are choc full of areas for tenting or hammocking along the trail at established or designated sites, improvised “stealth” sites and shelters, cabins or huts in some cases.

In the 315 days (10.5 months) that I lived out of a backpack on the AT and PCT as a thru-hiker, I camped outdoors on trail 98% of the time, including at or in shelters on the AT. The other 2% of the time I stayed indoors in town at hostels, churches, hotels and homes of trail angels.

Camping on the AT is possible at established tent sites, stealth or improvised tent sites, near a shelter or in open space or at/in shelters along the trail. This site in Vermont is a shelter’s official tent site even though it is a quarter mile north of the shelter (due to limited open space around the shelter itself).

On the AT, which stretches from Georgia to Maine, there are 250+ shelters (sometimes called a “lean-to”), or three-sided stone or wood, open air structures with an overhanging roof, where hikers can camp, stop for a break or to socialize or find refuge from the weather. AT shelters occur every 8-15 miles along the trail (some are slightly off trail, but still considered “on trail”), most which were originally built in the 1930s and 40s by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and later by trail volunteers and trail crews.

The shelters are free** (no cost to camp), open to anyone and as many people as can fit inside. (There are also almost always tent sites around the shelter, too). Also, on the AT, two of the trail’s largest clubs — the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club (PATC) and The Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) — maintain cabins and huts that are rustic stone or wood structures available for cost or reservation; however, these are rarely used by thru-hikers whose daily schedule requires them to keep moving forward and making miles each day. Thru-hikers primarily camp outdoors at free tent sites or shelters along the trails (due to budget, timing and the trail experience itself).

On the (PCT), however, stretching from Mexico to Canada, there are no official shelters on the trail. Occasionally there are cabins or shelters accessible off the PCT down connecting or side trails. And there is at least one emergency shelter, Muir Hut, atop Muir Pass (11,000+ feet) in the Sierra.

Whether camping at an established or improvised campsite or in a shelter, backpackers/campers are always advised to follow Leave No Trace (LNT) principles on the AT and PCT.

The Muir Hut , pictured, atop Muir Pass (11,000+ feet) on the PCT (and John Muir Trail) in the Kings Canyon section of the Sierra was built by the Sierra Club as an emergency shelter and memorial to naturalist John Muir. It is an impressive architectural feat and can be visited while hiking but is only to be used for sleeping only in the event of emergencies, severe weather.

The Shelter Effect

Hiking the AT and PCT in back-to-back calendar years allowed me to consider similarities and differences of the influences and impacts of shelters on the AT vs. no shelters on the PCT. (Note: It is definitely possible to get to know the AT, the PCT or any trail very well, too, without thru-hiking).

The shelters on the AT, and lack thereof on the PCT, seem to play a role in influencing trails dynamics like trail camaraderie (socializing), daily hiking schedules, meal times, learning leave no trace (LNT) and trail etiquette (being a respectful, decent person) and even human impact on the trail. Shelters encourage socializing with a dedicated space and structure for hikers to collect; by encouraging them to break or slow down for a bit by popping in; and by encouraging hikers to chat, use the privy as a bathroom (rather than the woods), and as a destination to interact, camp or relax.

In 2106 the USFS posted signs near and at the Watauga Lake Shelter on the AT in Tennessee about bear activity. Signs near and at the shelters like this often serve to reinforce ideas about LNT or closures to AT hikers.

Living the Shelter Life

With 250+ physical shelters along the trail they offer a physical place and structure to do all of these things and in doing so foster learning, lessons and nurturing community. It’s common to structure a day’s schedule or increments of a hike based on where a shelter is — “See you at the shelter.” “Let’s stop for lunch at the shelter.” “I’m going to push onto the next shelter.”

AT shelters can be a friendly social or meeting point — for meals, filtering water, a short break, camping, checking the trail registers (or logbooks), taking a pit stop at the privy (pit toilet), finding/making friends at a likely/probable point. In the event of a missing person, sickness, safety or an uncomfortable situation, the shelters can come to one’s aid where others at the shelter can mobilize or bring comfort as opposed to being alone in the woods.

Hikers on the AT can stay inside the physical shelter, hang out there or camp in the adjacent area for tenting/hammocks usually next to or near to a shelter. Usually the area around shelters includes space for tent and hammock camping, a fire pit, a water source and a privy (pit toilet) that can be used during the day or for camping. If sleeping in a shelter, hikers lay out their sleeping pad and sleeping bag on the shelter’s wooden floor.

Camping at but not in a shelter is a good option for company, convenience (close to water source, privy, company, space) or camaraderie. Whether in or around the shelter, campers are expected to follow LNT, exercise respectful behavior and properly store food at night so not to attract bears, mice or other rodents, too.

An unofficial rule of sleeping in a shelter is, “There’s always room for one more.” This idea is a foundation of shelter etiquette which the ATC encourages to be respect, kindness, LNT and flexibility whether visiting, sleeping or camping hear a shelter, especially during inclement weather like rain, sleet, snow or strong winds. It is not a requirement to socialize at a shelter, but anyone at a shelter is expected to be polite, moderate and kind of the shelter itself but also the people there.

The PCT, however is completely devoid of official shelters on trail. There are a handful of cabins, pavilions and shelters down a side or adjoining trail, but these are not considered officially part of the PCT. Instead hikers on the PCT stay overnight on trail camp in established campgrounds on or near the trail or improvised sites found near the trail. One reason (in addition to terrain) that hikers may hiker more miles each day because they are not stopping to break or camp at a shelter. Even without shelters, the PCTA encourages hikers to follow LNT always when camping.

The AT’s 250+ shelters, like Ethan Pond Shelter in the White Mountains of NH, pictured, are each unique in their design while having some similarities — an overhanging roof, a wooden floor and three walls, elevated floor off the ground. Most (but not all) shelters also have a privy (pit toilet) adjacent to the shelter, space for tenting and are near a creek or spring. Shelters attract hikers for breaks, water, meal times, camping, to socialize with fellow hikers or sign a logbook.

Indoor Accommodations Along the AT and PCT 

Hikers on the AT and PCT who prefer not to sleep/camp on trail can do so by car camping, camping at trailheads, in RV parks and other options off trail and in trail towns. If RV or car camping, hikers need to stay aware of the rules/regulations of the surrounding area or land.

Sleeping indoors on the AT or PCT is possible but is usually difficult for multiple, consecutive days on trail unless slackpacking (possible on many sections of the AT) or devising a clever route. Doing so requires a good review of trail maps or trail guides to understand mileage, trailheads, connecting trails and town accommodations, etc. Hikers can also leave a car at either end of a hike or do an out and back hike.

If hiking for multiple days but not wanting to sleep outdoors, the trails cross roads that will lead you into, near or with access (via a car or hitchhike) to towns (roughly) every 3-5 days on the AT and 4-8 days on the PCT where hikers can resupply for food or find indoor accommodations.  Some hikers even looks for Airbnbs in trail towns.

Most trail towns on the AT and PCT include at least one hostel or hotel or basic resort available for a bed and shower, and some include multiple options. Often churches and community centers in town open their doors to thru-hikers, too. It’s important for hikers planning for indoor accommodations on the AT and PCT to know that accommodations may be basic as trail towns are relatively small towns, too.

Shelters along the AT, like the Partnership Shelter, pictured, outside of Marion, VA bring together hikers to camp in or around the shelter and socializing at a collective place.

The AT and PCT: A Great American Experience

Like other national scenic trails, the PCT and AT are long distance hiking trails but also an idea, a chapter of American history, a community and a legacy of a vision that was developed, spearheaded and built by (and is maintained by) people across the country– volunteers, federal and state employees, private land and business owners. [Note: The first half of Vermont’s Long Trail (LT) parallels the AT for 100 miles; and a large section of the Sierra in central California parallels the John Muir Trail (JMT)].

Both the AT and PCT are free places to hike, camp and backpack twelve months of the year (with occasional weather and trail condition closures in mind). They are used by thru-hikers, sections hikers, weekend hikers and day hikers with the most users between March and October of the year.

The PCTA’s website says, “The trail symbolizes everything there is to love–and protect–in the Western United States.” And the ATC’s website calls the AT “…a place of life-changing discovery.” As someone who hiked both of these trails I experienced the reality of those statements on trail.

The AT and PCT bring together people of all ages, backgrounds, religions and political backgrounds to see and experience some of the most stunning landscapes in the country and the most interesting community of people attracted to them. Thousands of people simply volunteer for the trails (building, maintaining, fundraising or other needed work) and don’t hike them. 

Before, during and after my thru-hikes I learned how the AT and the PCT nurture purpose, employment, friendships, economy, personal development, outdoor skills and stewardship among hikers, volunteers, locals and employees that support them. By bringing together people from across the country and the world of various backgrounds, ages, abilities and ideologies, the trails encourage perseverance, self reliance, community and connection with the outdoors and a chapter of American history. If hiking on them, one often finds like I did that trails restore their “..faith in humanity” with the kindness of the hiking community, trail towns and trail angels. 

Meal times on the PCT occur at campsites or spontaneous areas on trail, like this spot south of Muir Pass in the Sierra. On the AT, hikers often choose to eat on at similarly spontaneous spots but they often eat at a shelter where there might be fellow hikers to socialize with, water and a roof to sit under or a logbook to sign or read.

Hikers by the Millions and Counting

With each of the five decades since becoming national scenic trails, the AT and PCT grow longer, more well-known and traveled. The ATC and PCTA estimate that a collective 4+ million (and rising) people access some part of both trails annually.

In recent years, best-selling books made into films like A Walk in the Woods by Bill Bryson about the AT and Wild by Cheryl Strayed about the PCT have popularized the trails with the masses. Along with the success of these books, films and social media’s reach, the knowledge and users of AT and PCT are rising dramatically.

The PCTA’s 2016 visitor use report noted “…long-distance hikers and horseback riders came from all 50 states and 41 countries and territories…” and 5,657 permits were issued for section and thru-hikers. Those numbers do not include day hikers or weekend hikers. And in 2017, the ATC’s Interesting Facts report estimated that 2-3 million people per year hike a portion, section or the entire trail, including 950 reported completed thru-hikes for 2017.

In 2016 Laura Johnston, author (right in pink jacket) completed a thru-hike of the AT and met hundreds of people on trail, including three friends, pictured, who she finished the trail with at the northern terminus, Mount Katahdin in Maine. The night before summiting the Katahdin, she camped at The Birches, a campground with two shelters and tent sites in Baxter State Park reserved for long distance hikers on the AT.

More Than Just Shelter

While there are many similarities between the AT and PCT, one of the most obvious differences is where this article began–the AT’s shelters and the PCT’s lack of shelters on trail. Opportunities and choices for socializing, camping, eating, sharing trail stories, learning trail etiquette and LNT, even learning history of the trail happens differently on each trail because of shelters (or lack thereof).

On trail I found the AT’s shelters embodied a phrase made famous in the 1980s film Field of Dreams:  “If you build it, they will come.” Thru-hikers, day or section hikers on trail often develop a rhythm or curiosity to stop or stay at shelters because they are a reliabily welcome, friendly, necessary or even interesting touch point of the day.

By stopping and camping at shelters during my own AT thru-hike, I saw the differences in each structure, learned about the shelters themselves and saw a greater good mindset at shelters — how you act, eat and sleep at a shelter (or in the outdoors) influences others and the trail’s condition, protection, image and relationship with wildlife.

People at shelters often learn from one another of how to model behaviors at a shelter as responsible or friendly trail behavior. They may even pick up a trick or two from how fellow hikers set up camp, store their food, or make a meal. New thru-hikers and novice backpackers can connect at the shelters and can meet, talk and learn from the collective experience on trail.

Because shelters attract people (and people have and eat food there), shelters can attract wildlife so following LNT for eating and storing food is critical to keep wildlife, hikers and shelrers safe. It is important to ensure shelters are a safe place to attract people on trail but not to attract bears or rodents. Eating, food storage, dirty water disposal all impact the presence of wildlife or not.

In fact the southernmost states on the AT – Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia – often have bear cables, bear boxes or bear poles at shelters encouraging hikers to store food away from shelters and out of tents or campsite. Seeing available food storage options and hikers practicing  (or even pressuring) good practices can facilitate LNT-friendly behavior and learning from one another.

Even if not camping overnight at a shelter, hikers often pass through to say “hello,” fill up and filter water, use the privy, check the logbook or ask about a fellow hiker. The day may even unfold differently because of a happening at the shelter — collecting food that someone offers, making a plan at the shelter with fellow hikers, or getting an idea of a good/fun place to camp because of conversation at the shelter, or slowing down or speeding up because of  conversation at the shelter.

Many of the AT’s shelters encourage hikers to store food away from  wildlife either on bear cables, hung from a tree away from the shelter or in bear boxes, as pictured. The constant reinforcement of this practice at the shelters and influence of groups at the shelters are repeated opportunities to educate and remind hikers about leave no trace (LNT) and invite conversation about such practices.

Trail Etiquette

Trail etiquette is a combination of LNT and overall trail manners. Anyone at a shelter is expected to be polite with language, friendly to others and respectful of LNT and a certain etiquette.

Like a workplace, a school or another public shared space, there are a variety of ages, languages, schedules (wake and sleep time), abilities and personalities on trail and the shelters attract them all. So the shelters facilitate a common place to share a space, stories, knowledge and etiquette (or pass it on).

Shelters can even be main destinations for day, weekend, section or thru-hikers for a meal, a break or to camp, so they are opportunistic places for conversation, resources (water, shelter, space around shelter, campfire), intel (e.g. trail magic ahead or where a friend may be) or examples of good trail etiquette.

I found stopping at or staying at shelters along the AT as a place to find friends, camaraderie and to learn or reinforce LNT and trail etiquette (polite language, open mindedness, kindness and respect for quiet hours after dark), community, expertise and experience unique to the trail.

Even in what can be a solitary activity–hiking–staying at shelters encourages a greater good mindset, being face-to-face with others on trail and practicing responsible behavior with the trail, fellow hikers and to stay separate from wildlife.

Shelters are often a meeting place for meal times. Even hikers that don’t sleep in or camp at the shelters often stop in for breakfast, lunch, dinner or a snack. It’s important to be mindful of LNT practices, a polite and respectful trail etiquette when using shelters. Hikers also use shelters to find water, use the privy, check the trail registers or socialize.

Logbooks

Shelters on the AT almost always have a trail registry or logbook, a spiral or composition notebook where hikers can voluntarily sign their names and/or write funny, informative or serious notes to fellow hikers. Hikers will write notes for themselves, the trail community, the shelter caretaker or for hiking partners — “Stayed at the shelter last night!” “Will camp tonight at the next shelter. Hope to see you there.”

Logbooks or trail registers on the AT, as pictured, are located in the shelters and a traditional opportunity or place for any hiker to write their name, a generic note, or even information to friends or fellow hikers. They-hikers often stop at the shelters simply to read or sign the notebook as a part of their day and journey along the trail.

The logbooks are an invitation to contribute one’s name, personality and even helpful information to a book at each shelter for that season. Hikers may even write to someone behind them as a means to reconnect, “Sorry we missed each other. Hope to see you in town or down the trail.” And sometimes the logbook has fun or useful information like, “Free pizza in town for all thru-hikers!” Many hikers simply sign their trail name and the day’s date.

Shelters, also often, have signs or flyers posted near/in a shelters (in case of problems bears, extra reinforcement to be diligent, etc.) that encourage LNT responsible behavior and encourage conversation or awareness. 

Thru-hikers on the AT pack up for the morning from the Cooper Brook shelter in central Maine in the famed 100 mile wilderness. Cold, damp days like this one in September 2016 bring hikers together at a shelter for warmth, camaraderie and temporary or overnight shelter from precipitation.

Protection from Elements/Weather

The AT is located in the eastern US along the Appalachian mountain range where the climate can be damp and precipitous nearly any time of year — humidity in the summer and snow and sleet in the winter and rain anytime of year. If and when a hiker prefers not to camp (too cold/dangerous) on wet or frozen ground, shelters are ideal places to provide relief to stay dry.

The AT’s shelters can provide temporary or an overnight break from rain, sleet, snow, a dry place to sleep or enjoy a break.

The Appalachian Mountain Club AMC), a trail club in the northeast, maintains a series of fully-enclosed huts with meals, bunks, water and indoor pit toilets. Some of these huts are in the White Mountains of NH on the AT, including Zealand Falls Hut, pictures. Section or weekend hikers can pay to reserve a bunk for cost; thru-hikers often stop through for water, a meal or to offer to “work for stay,” doing chores in exchange for food. In the event of serious weather, certain AMC huts in the White Mountains must allow thru-hikers to stay inside the huts.

In times of tough, cold or dangerous weather the AT shelters may become a place to go for cheering up one’s spirits among fellow hikers waiting out a storm or commiserating Ina covered place together.

In the most serious of weather, shelters can be a safe place to go (or bring) fellow hikers that may need help or the company of fellow hikers can provide help, warmth or advise rather than being alone in the woods. 

PCT hikers can stay at the Mountaineers Lodge, puctured, at Steven’s Pass, WA which is a small walk from the PCT. This three story A-frame cabin houses skiiers in the winter and is open to thru-hikers in the hiking season. A small fee allows hikers to sleep, shower, use a drying room and lounge on couches.

Camaraderie  

Because camaraderie (or socializing) on the AT and PCT are facilitated by many factors–the persoanlities, the trail itself, the landscapes, water sources, weather, terrain, the pace, the number of people on trail and a characteristically friendly nature of hikers–there is no doubt that the shelters on the AT add to socializing.

Additionally shelters on the AT may enable certain hikers to stay overnight who may not feel comfortable or capable sleeping in a tent or a hammock. They also encourage socializing or a welcome place to walk into socializing when some might be nervous or shy otherwise.

Granite peaks of the Sierra in central and northern California on the PCT leave one inspired each and everyday.

History

The AT shelters are also a tool in telling the history and culture of the trail. Seeing or staying at the shelters can inspire awareness of the CCC, trail crews and volunteers who built and maintain them by hand; materials and tools for construction brought in on someone’s back or via forest roads. It also is a obvious and tangible way to recognize the trail craftsmanship  as opposed to equally important but often overlooked trail construction, like stone or rock work or a clear trail.

With 250+ physical structures, each designed and built differently, the AT’s shelters are a window and awareness into trail history and construction. The materials and design of each shelter is different; when they were built differs; who maintains them varies by regional trail club; and the number of people who can and do choose to sleep in them varies.

My hiking partner on the AT was a skilled carpenter and stopping or staying at shelters inspired a greater appreciation in me of their craftsmanship and overall condition.

The PCT does not have shelters. The absence of them and nearly any human-made structure makes structures obscure and strange.

Overmountain Shelter, the red barn pictured in the distance, is an iconic shelter in the Roan Highlands of Tennessee on the AT. Hikers can camp in the large two-story barn or in the vast grassy area, pictured, which is adjacent to the shelter. This is perhaps the largest shelter along the AT and could easily sleep 40+ people.

Where There Are No Shelters

Without shelters on the PCT, the dynamics of camaraderie, camping and more on trail are facilitated otherwise. Hikers on the PCT are equally friendly, kind and LNT/trail etiquette aware, but these behaviors manifest differently and often occur at spontaneous sites, at improvised sites or in different sized groups than on the AT.

There are not physical structures on the PCT; there are not bear cables or bear poles to hang food; there are not privies (expect a couple open air pit toilets in Washington); there are not logbooks in a shelter; there are not consistent buildings on the trail that invite/encourage a host of people-centered activities — meals, socializing, signing a logbook learning LNT and trail etiquette or taking cover from the weather.

Instead of socializing or certain activities at shelters on the AT — camping, filtering water, chatting, meal times, signing a logbook, talking about LNT or trail etiquette or taking cover from the weather — these dynamics happen differently on the PCT. Instead, they might occur on the trail itself while walking (or taking a break), at water sources, streams/lakes, campsites, trees or rocks or other improvised points on the trail.

Additionally the lack of shelters or physical structures on the PCT nurtures an increased feeling of complete wilderness. A lack of physical structures (less trail signs and the occasional cistern or trailhead, or wind turbine) makes for a deep connection to the natural world.

It’s important to note that like hikers on the PCT, those on the AT will also socialize, exchange information, learn or seek protection at other points on trail (not just shelters) like lakes/streams, viewpoints, trees/rocks or other improvised sites on trail.

Thru-hikers on the PCT break for a rest in the desert in southern California. Without shelters on the PCT, unlike the AT, breaks like this often happen on the trail, under a tree or at a water source.

Table Summary

Below is a table with a side-by-side comparison of the text above and the key features that shelters provide on the AT and how trail dynamics occur on the PCT without them.  The ATC’s website provides more details about shelter life here.

Key FeaturesAppalachian Trail (AT)Pacific Crest Trail (PCT)Number of Shelters /Lean-tos on trail

• 250+ shelter/huts along the Appalachian Trail (AT), at an average of 8-15 miles apart with variation in some sections, even up to 30 miles apart.

• Hikers can also on trail in tents, hammocks or cowboy/girl camp (camp under the stars) on trail.

• 0 physical shelters/huts on trail.

• Hikers sleep on trail in tents, hammocks or cowboy/girl camp (camp under the stars) on trail.

Meal time

• Hikers often eat at shelters for meals, breaks or camping.

• Hikers also eat at individual campsites or arbitrary points on trail.

• Hikers eat at established campsites or any other undesignated open space on trail.

• Hikers also eat at individual campsites or arbitrary points on trail.

Water

• Shelters almost always include a water source–may be up to ¼ or ¾ miles from the actual shelter. (Water should always be filtered for safety).

• Water is found along the trail in cisterns, caches, rivers or springs. (Water should always be filtered for safety).

Camaraderie/Social

• Shelters attract hikers to a physical structure for their protection (from weather), utility (good for breaks, eating or camping) and socializing or camaraderie (where other people will probably be), similar to a town hall.

• Shelters are a known place to sleep, eat and take cover from bad or dangerous weather.

• Where there are people and where there is shelter, there is socializing.

• Shelters are a probable and even routine place to stop and meet fellow hikers.

• Hikers socialize without a physical shelter to invite such–while walking, stopping at a water source, taking a break or setting up camp on trail.

• Hikers may use trees, rocks, water sources, view points or campsites as an arbitrary point for socializing with fellow hikers.

Leave No Trace (LNT)/Trail Etiquette

• The ATC encourages an etiquette at shelters including, but not limited to:

• Make room for other hikers.

• Keep the grounds litter-free.

• Make phone calls and smoke away from the shelter.

• Don’t cut down trees.

• Dispose of waste liquids (graywater) at least 100 feet from the shelter and 200 feet from water sources.

• If a shelter has a privy, use it.

• If you have a dog, consider tenting.

• If you snore, sleep in your tent.

• Don’t tag (graffiti) the shelter.

• Avoid eating in the shelter if at all possible.

• Do not leave or burn trash or garbage in the fire pit.

• Sweep out the shelter when you arrive and leave as even the smallest crumbs can attract rodents.

• Be considerate of others hikers. All shelter etiquette boils down to common courtesy in a very small shared space. See the ATC’s Leave No Trace page to learn more.

• Without shelters as a routine and group spot for camping, eating and use, there are different ways to share and reinforce trail etiquette on trail.

• Sharing LNT and trail etiquette is possible on the PCT while walking, camping, etc.

Protection from Elements/Weather

• Hikers have on-trail reprieve from the elements and the weather—a dry or wind-protected spot to camp and a roof over their heads.

• Shelters are dry places in wet weather (they fill up fast when it rains).

• Hikers do not have on-trail places to find shelter or reprieve from the elements or weather—e.g. the punishing heat and sun exposure of the desert; the rain, mist and snow in the Oregon and Washington.

Physical Camping

• Shelters provide a place to sleep in or camp near at the adjacent tent sites or forested area for hammocks.

• Camping on the PCT is done by tent or hammock at established or improvised sites.

Daily Schedule

• Shelters may become a basis for how or where to get to in a day’s schedule–“let’s meet for lunch at the shelter”; “let’s stop for water at the shelter”; “let’s camp at the shelter tonight.”

• Stopping at the shelter for a break or to camp may also change the flow of the rest of the day because of a friend, a lesson, a conversation or the amount of time spent at the shelter.

• A day’s hike may be oriented around stopping, breaking or camping at landmarks or milestones on trail like water sources, campsites, or other points of interest, but never a shelter itself or the time, conversation or information obtained at one.

History

• The shelters give hikers a connection to the history of the trail and its volunteers, as all shelters were either built by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) of the 1940s or those of trail volunteers and trail clubs.

• Many point of the trail also include signage about local trail clubs that maintain a shelter.

• Evidence of the trail’s history can be noted in occasional signage on trail or a knowledge of the trail itself. There are almost no physical structures on trail to invite awareness into the history of the trail. (The PCTA website, however, has loads of information).

Construction

• Shelters can encourage appreciation and awareness for craftsmanship and labor to build and design shelters along the trail.

• Hikers and trail volunteers can also participate in rebuilding or maintaining shelters as a volunteer for the AT and one of its trail clubs or trail crews.

• Hikers can note trail construction by noticing signage, physical trail, rock work or trail conditions but not shelters for a clue to trail history.

Structure

• Shelters are three-sided structures with bunks, with either one or two levels, they generally fit 8-20 people.

Time & Cost

• 250+ shelters require the ATC and trail clubs to find volunteers and funding to maintain, upkeep the construction, caretaking, and reconstruction (when necessary) of shelters and their tent sites and privies.

• Volunteer hours and funding can be reserved for other expenses and projects, rather than building or maintaining shelters.

Human/Environmental Impact

• Sleeping in shelter is shown to minimize soil compaction, vegetation trampling, and habitat disruption. +

• Following LNT principles, especially at/around shelters, can minimize impact on nearby water sources and maintain positive relationship with wildlife.

• Protecting and respecting the water sources and surrounding area at shelters and otherwise on trail is critical to minimizing human impact on the environment.

• Respecting water sources at shelters or otherwise is important for overall health and safety of the water source.

• Following LNT at shelters is critical because the structures and their surrounding area see so much visitation and use.

• Shelters usually have a privy (pit toilet) which lessens the disposal/burying of human waste and toilet paper in wilderness.

+ The ATC is currently funding a study on the environmental impacts of thru-hikers on the trail and at the shelters.

• Dispersed camping can have greater human and negative environmental impact due to more widespread (i.e. not concentrated) vegetation trampling, habitat disruption soil compaction, and unregulated fire pits.

• Hikers should be aware of crowding a campsite or creating their own in areas that may be damaged.

• Camping in the southern California (700 miles) is often influenced by proximity to infrequent water sources (some as far as 40 miles apart) so it is critical to respect those areas for overall health and safety of the water source.

• Following LNT practices at campsites helps protect the trail and water safety and a positive relationship with wildlife.

• Protecting and respecting the water sources and surrounding area at shelters and otherwise on trail is critical to minimizing human impact on the environment.

• There are very few pit toilets on the PCT so hikers must be diligent to properly dispose of human waste on trail.

*Note: Official mileage of the AT and PCT varies slightly from year due to ongoing land acquisition or trail construction.

**Note: In areas with the heaviest foot traffic, the use of some AT shelters may require the payment of a fee smell dee. Fee sites are mostly found in New England and are usually $10 or less. Free sites are interspersed between the fee sites. See more on ATC website.

The impacts of how and where hikers socialize, camp, sleep, eat, and commune on the AT and PCT are detailed further in this article by Zach Davis, founder of TheTrek.co.

The ski hut atop Bromley Mountain in Vermont belongs to the Bromley Mountain Ski Resort, but is open for thru-hikers to rest at or camp inside during the summer months, in the off season.

This entry was posted in Case study, Trails and tagged Appalachian Trail, Appalachian trail shelters, AT vs. PCT, community on Appalachian trail, Pacific Crest Trail on October 3, 2018.

Featured Yurts: Tennessee Pass Sleep Yurts, Cookhouse, & Nordic Center

Featured Yurts: Tennessee Pass Sleep Yurts and Cookhouse

by Sam Demas and Laurel Bradley

Most photos courtesy Tennessee Pass Nordic Center and Cookhouse

Imagine a mile-long ski or hike into the woods to enjoy a fine meal with fabulous mountain views.  After the delicious repast with fine wine, spend the night in a nearby well appointed yurt.  This will be glamping at its best, hosted by and authentic backcountry operation far outside the realm of mass tourism.

We enjoyed the Tennessee Pass Sleep Yurts and Cookhouse at the end of a week-long exploration of some of the dozen or so Tenth Mountain Division Huts nestled in the Rockies between Vail, Leadville, and Frisco.  This Featured Yurt post is a ringing recommendation of this experience – which can become a comfy climax, a cushy reward after days and nights immersed in the more rustic pleasures of hut life.  We highly recommend you splurge and add the Tennessee Pass venue to your Colorado hut-to-hut bucket list.

TN Pass Nordic Center

TN Pass Cookhouse

And one of the Sleep Yurts

HUT-TO-HUT AND THE HIGH-END YURT EXPERIENCE

Sleep Yurts

A common lament found in hut logbooks is simply that folks are not ready to return to “civilization” after days of mountain highs.  Off the grid, the Cookhouse and Ski Yurts are a unique half-way house between hut life and ordinary life with its full catastrophe of conveniences and complexities.  This unique version of mountain hospitality, especially for families and friend groups, is special because:

• It offers a (mild) physical challenge, along with the act of leaving behind the car and all it represents, which unites the group;

• The short journey by foot or skis are rewarded by the fine food and restaurant amenities ;

• This mom and pop operation is distinctly NOT corporate; and

• Cookhouse and Ski Yurts is nestled within a network of trails and offers amazing views of the Sawatch mountains.

FINE DINING IN THE BACKWOODS

The Tennessee Pass Cookhouse evolved from a simple picnic table with a view.  The owners recognized that a popular lunch spot enjoying spectacular views of the Sawatch Mountains could become much more.  The Cookhouse is the result.  Housed in a 30-foot diameter yurt, this fine dining establishment offers four-course, “bounty of the woods” meals.  Fish, meat and vegetarian entrees go down easily with a choice from the fine wine and beer list.  Candle-lit service is friendly and efficient.  Lunch is served Saturday and Sunday during winter.  This popular dining spot attracts friend and family groups, as well as couples from the local area and from as far away as Denver.  Reservations are required as all the meal fixings must be prepared in advance.

Fine dining at Cookhouse

From the deck…

Dining room in daytime

Executive Chef Dylan Brody, who grew up in Minnesota hunting and fishing, learned early in life to prepare fish and game.  As a young man he worked two summers at Bristol Bay Lodge, Alaska, leading fly-fishing trips and working in the kitchen. There he learned the fine dining side of things and yearned to cook fulltime in a “taste of the wild” themed backwoods restaurant.  An ad in the Leadville newspaper led him to the Tennessee Pass Cookhouse and the fulfillment of a dream.

THE SLEEP YURTS

Sleep Yurts

Over the years, Cookhouse diners often joked that their dining experience would be perfect “if we could just stay the night”.  And indeed, four sleep yurts now offer a delightful overnight experience.  The rustic and elegant 20’ diameter ski yurts each sleep up to six people. The heavy timber queen-size bunk bed and a separate queen size bed are outfitted with flannel sheets and luxurious down comforters.  The wood stove quickly warms up the hut.  There is a small kitchen area with cold running water in the sink.  The outhouse is close by.  Altogether this is a cozy atmosphere, with the “oculus” of the yurt ceiling always reminding you that you are in the woods and under mountain stars and skies.  The wood stove quickly warms up the hut and its fun to relax with a glass of wine in the warmth of the fire before the 6:00 dinner, a very short ski away in the Cookhouse.

FOUNDERS STORY

This Cookhouse and Yurt complex is a unique act of imagination by owners Ty and Roxanne

Ty and Roxanne on the move

Hall.  The couple, who met and married in college, were resolved to make a life in Leadville, Roxanne’s hometown. Despite limited job prospects for college graduates, Ty found work at Ski Cooper while Roxanne signed on as a school teacher.  Ty noticed a struggling Nordic ski center across the parking lot from Ski Cooper.  The Halls bought the outfit in 1993 as it was about to go out of business.

As the Halls expanded the trail system and enhanced the Nordic Center’s capacity, they also moved ahead to realize their vision for a backcountry dining establishment.  They managed to get a special use permit from the Forest Service for a temporary structure, and put up a 30’ diameter yurt, with attached kitchen in 1995.  They struggled for the first eight to ten years, but eventually the Cookhouse proved a viable and valuable addition to the Nordic Ski Center offerings.

In this same period Ty and a friend built and operated the Belvedere Hut near Leadville; this hut – now the 10MD’s Sangree-Froelicher Hut – was sold to Tenth Mountain Division in 1999.  They used the profits to construct a new building for the Nordic Center in 2002.  They have expanded their cross-country ski rentals and trails business, rent fat tire bikes, sell gear, and provide delicious snacks and lunches at the cafe/warming center.  With the Cookhouse and Nordic Center doing well, the Halls looked for ways to construct sleeping quarters. The Forest Service would not issue a permit for sleep yurts next to the cookhouse, so the Halls bought mining claims nearby and put up four yurts on private land, two in 2011 and two in 2013.  They have rights to construct two more sleep yurts.

Cookhouse glows at night

Yurts nestled on slopes

Painting of Cookhouse

Twenty-three years in the making, business at the Cookhouse and Sleep Yurts is good although Ty admits that, “it’s not exactly a cash cow”.  Indeed, this enterprise represents a lifestyle commitment as much as a business endeavor. Roxanne has retired from teaching and bakes cookies and brownies for the cafe, teaches ski lessons, works with reservations and otherwise works with Ty in managing this family business.

This entry was posted in Case study, Featured hut and tagged Colorado yurts, Featured yurt, Fine dining in backwoods, Tennessee Pass Cookhouse on December 30, 2017.

Wicklow Way Case Study

Case Study: Wicklow Way, Ireland

by Sam Demas, January 2016

Purpose, methodology, and notes

These case studies are building blocks towards a broader “Country Study” examining long distance walking in Ireland. The intent of the case studies is to paint a picture of the most salient features of each walk and to delve somewhat into operational details. The idea is that from these case studies a broader national picture will emerge.  Wicklow Way Case Study….

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Case study, Trails and tagged Case study, Ireland, walking, Walking in Ireland, Wicklow Way on August 10, 2016.

Burren Way Case Study

Case Study: Burren Way, Ireland

By Sam Demas, April 2016

Purpose, methodology, and notes
These case studies are building blocks towards a broader “Country Study” examining long distance walking in Ireland. The intent of the case studies is to paint a picture of the most salient features of each walk and to delve somewhat into operational details. The idea is that from these case studies a broader national picture will emerge.

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Case study, Trails and tagged Burren Way, Ireland, Trails, walking, Walking in Ireland on August 10, 2016.

Kerry Way Case Study

Case Study: Kerry Way, Ireland

July 2016

By Sam Demas with advice from Patricia Deane, Rural Recreation Officer

Purpose, methodology, and notes
These case studies are building blocks towards a broader “Country Study” examining long distance walking in Ireland. The intent of the case studies is to paint a picture of the most salient features of each walk and to delve somewhat into operational details. The idea is that in looking across these case studies a broader national picture will emerge.

Continue reading →

This entry was posted in Case study, Trails and tagged Ireland, Kerry Way, Trail operations on August 10, 2016.