Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

Katahdin Blues

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Katahdin Blues

      Well, I found an article that represents things most people just cannot say in public without getting lambasted for being honest. However, this is seems like one of the few safe places to do so, so here it is.

      Over in that other sandbox I posted my concerns about all the crap that was going on with BSP (and with careless, discourteous, selfish hikers in general) and what was becoming of it along the trail. I posted my concerns about the effects that others preceding me were having on the trail. And I posted my concerns about having access to some amenities along the way that (while certainly not necessities) make extended trail life a tad more enjoyable.

      Of course, some of the hard-core came out of the wilderness long enough to enlighten me on the merits of ice-cold bathing, the advantages of clothing that can walk by itself, and the pure joy of treating yourself to some pine needles in your Ramen instead of a cheeseburger (I made that last one up, but I have a lurking suspicion that ol' Tipi wouldn't argue with it, lol.)

      I was told that I was "thinking too much" and "needed to get outside" as if implying that trail-concerns were only had by those who never leave the house or that NOT thinking about the few more places that closed to thru-hikers this year might NOT have really happened if only I were NOT thinking about them. Even worse, I dared to mention the heresy of wanting to visit some places along the way (some iconic hostels, the AT Museum, etc.) and really got my ass handed to me.

      I mention these things for context, not because any of it has changed any of my plans or my concerns about selfish-idiots. (And certainly nobody here will be surprised by any of the above!)

      But one thing that did seem to carry over to here is the attitude of, "Screw BSP, just move the damn Terminus somewhere else!" And more often than not, that sentiment comes from people that have already had the Katahdin experience. For the record, I doubt that anyone intends for it to sound very negative, but sometimes it comes across as, "Since I got do it already, it's no longer matters if it's important to others or not!" Again, I'm not declaring that to be the general consensus, but sometimes it appears that way when only a brief, disgruntled remark is offered.

      I'm not overly obsessed with Mt. Katahdin as a necessary experience as much as I am with it simply being a huge focal point - a milestone for the overall goal. Actually, my mind is currently obsessed with simply getting to the trail first, and then doing my best to pursue the goal of making everyday fun and memorable - how ever many days those might be. But, once I do set foot on the trail, Katahdin really is the end goal for this particular journey. It does not signify the end of hiking or the end of life or whatever. But it does provide a huge iconic milestone for this specific trip.

      I've considered flip-flopping and other types of journeys on the A.T., for a few different reasons, but always come back to starting in Georgia and finishing in Maine. It's just the way it's always been in my head, what I've always dreamed of, and exactly what I hope to do. Again, my daily goal for the trail is about the same as my daily goal anywhere else in life: to pursuit of making everyday fun and memorable. But Katahdin will always be a huge part of the dream.

      Anyway, it's 8 o'clock and time for wifey and I to enjoy our evening walk. But this article over on Appalachian Trials struck a chord within me because finally someone else said many of the things I've been trying (or wanting) to say all along.

      appalachiantrials.com/flipping…out-flip-flopping-part-1/
      *

      For once I'd just like to hear myself say, "Great job, self! Why don't you just take the day off."

    • Look man, they can move the terminus, but they can't move the mountain. If you want to finish on the mountain then finish on the mountain.

      Even if they do move the terminus they will not deny access to the mountain.

      ( that's the way kind watered down version of my thoughts on this, btw)
      If your Doctor is a tree, you're on acid.

    • I've never hiked the AT, nor been on the Katahdin. But I can do without going to Maine. Period.

      As for the atitudes you got from the other place, well, 'holier than thou' doesn't occur just in religion discussions.

      I'm rather rude to people who try that silliness on me. They may be a bit shocked to discover I'll laugh at them.
      --
      "What do you mean its sunrise already ?!", me.

    • JimBlue wrote:

      I've never hiked the AT, nor been on the Katahdin. But I can do without going to Maine. Period.

      As for the atitudes you got from the other place, well, 'holier than thou' doesn't occur just in religion discussions.

      I'm rather rude to people who try that silliness on me. They may be a bit shocked to discover I'll laugh at them.
      maine is beautiful.
      and theres plenty more attitude on line than on trail
      its all good

    • I found Katahdin to be special but part of that was that standing on Springer Katahdin was the goal.
      It is my hope that in the next few years I will climb Katahdin again with my wife. But if they were to turn around and say that from 1 January 2017 the AT terminus is say, Whitecap Mtn then people at Springer in March will have Whitecap as their goal. Many initially will say they will hike on to Katahdin but within a short time the vast majority will focus on Whitecap.
      I think the finish has to stay in Maine.
      There are many, many thousands of signs that say Georgia to Maine. The logistics of changing it to 13 states Georgia to New Hampshire would be enormous.
      PooFan
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.

    • I'm not going, but for different reasons. (And for what it's worth, I've not 'had the Katahdin experience.'

      Jensen Bissell says that even were hiker behaviour exemplary - which it is not - that the hikers are simply too numerous to accommodate.

      Since I have nothing to bring of greater value than any other hiker who would visit, I have no claim on it. Moreover, I'm not one of the "people of Maine" to whom it belongs.

      I won't go as a trespasser, or even as the welcome guest that poor Aunt Millie lays out the groaning board for, even though it beggar her. If we are too many, all that I can do is make us one fewer.

      I'm only a little resentful. As a Boomer, I'm used to being one of a too-large group. At least this is a group that I'm not a member of by my very existence. I resent it a lot when that's the case.
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • OzJacko wrote:

      I found Katahdin to be special but part of that was that standing on Springer Katahdin was the goal.
      It is my hope that in the next few years I will climb Katahdin again with my wife. But if they were to turn around and say that from 1 January 2017 the AT terminus is say, Whitecap Mtn then people at Springer in March will have Whitecap as their goal. Many initially will say they will hike on to Katahdin but within a short time the vast majority will focus on Whitecap.
      I think the finish has to stay in Maine.
      There are many, many thousands of signs that say Georgia to Maine. The logistics of changing it to 13 states Georgia to New Hampshire would be enormous.
      PooFan
      GANH or NHGA just dont have a ring to them. still it would keep the best part of the trail fairly wild for a remote experience. i would think the hard core would continue on to the traditional terminus anyway
      its all good

    • AnotherKevin wrote:

      hikerboy wrote:

      still it would keep the best part of the trail fairly wild for a remote experience. i would think the hard core would continue on to the traditional terminus anyway
      I don't know. How many people do the hike (about half roadwalk) to Oglethorpe now that it's open to the public again?
      i imagine next to none.really, the trail is kinda fluid and changes routes and distance regularly. i wonder if it would even be possible to hike the trail on the route it was originally blazed.
      springer is an anticlimactic finish compared to katahdin
      its all good

    • Da Wolf wrote:

      i was upset when they moved the GA terminus from Oglethorpe. i got over it. you'll get over not finishing, IF you finish, at katahdin. it's just walkin'

      max.patch wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      i was upset when they moved the GA terminus from Oglethorpe. i got over it. you'll get over not finishing, IF you finish, at katahdin. it's just walkin'
      yeah, right. the terminus was moved in 1958; 57 years ago.
      dammit, you beat me to it! guess he heard it from the womb or he's been fast & loose with his age.

    • chief wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      i was upset when they moved the GA terminus from Oglethorpe. i got over it. you'll get over not finishing, IF you finish, at katahdin. it's just walkin'

      max.patch wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      i was upset when they moved the GA terminus from Oglethorpe. i got over it. you'll get over not finishing, IF you finish, at katahdin. it's just walkin'
      yeah, right. the terminus was moved in 1958; 57 years ago.
      dammit, you beat me to it! guess he heard it from the womb or he's been fast & loose with his age.
      it's a fulltime job being a fact checker around here.
      2,000 miler

    • Here's one for those of you who like to research.
      My searching shows Baxter bought 6000 acres "around" Katahdin from Great Northern Paper Mills in 1930. Looking at the Mills history I cannot see detail of how they got the land originally. Katahdin has no commercial value to a paper mill. Was there any limitation to their original title to Katahdin? This could have been a limitation on what they had a right to sell Baxter. Don't forget that with his political position such issues could have been glossed over at the time....
      PooFan
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.

    • Just speculating. They probably bought it as part of a huge block of land & sold it off after what had been commercially viable to cut. Many of the roads, including the one from Milinocket to Baxter were originally logging roads & privately owned but public is allowed to use. Most of 100 mile wilderness was logging property. for year the rivers up north were used to get logs to the mills. Many of the damns in the area were built to control river flow to run logs. This is true for a good part of ME & even the Whites. There are very few places in the Whites that weren't logged at some point. Many trails follow old railroad beds used to log & several present campsites were old logging camp locations. I can certaily see the logging company selling off what to them would be off limited commercial value to the Govenor to get a little influence with him.

    • But what I am querying is the details of the original title. As land worthless for a mill they may have got a reduction in price by not including Katahdin or having a disclaimer on the use of it. Any restriction on their title would have transferred to Baxter and perhaps (I'm hoping and clutching at straws I know) the area of Katahdin itself was not truly Baxter's to give....
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.

    • Mountain-Mike wrote:

      Just speculating. They probably bought it as part of a huge block of land & sold it off after what had been commercially viable to cut. Many of the roads, including the one from Milinocket to Baxter were originally logging roads & privately owned but public is allowed to use. Most of 100 mile wilderness was logging property. for year the rivers up north were used to get logs to the mills. Many of the damns in the area were built to control river flow to run logs. This is true for a good part of ME & even the Whites. There are very few places in the Whites that weren't logged at some point. Many trails follow old railroad beds used to log & several present campsites were old logging camp locations. I can certaily see the logging company selling off what to them would be off limited commercial value to the Govenor to get a little influence with him.
      Same story with the Catskills and Adirondacks. A lot of the state's property there came into state hands because the business model of the loggers was to buy the land, cut and sell the timber, pay off the shareholders, wait a couple of years, and declare bankruptcy without ever having paid the property taxes. The state got the land, but the timber was gone.

      Since a lot of the clearcutting happened around the time of the Civil War, some of the second growth is starting to look like old growth. You don't have 400-year-old stands of hemlock, but it's really looking like forest again and not wasteland.

      Most of the trails, in the Whites and Maine as well as NY, were also logging 'roads'. On many of them, no wheel ever rolled. The trees were felled, limbed and peeled in the summer, and then the logs were sledded out once the snow was deep enough. There could be huge rocks and tangles of brush on the 'road' without affecting operations much. There's a trail junction in the southern ADK's called Sled Harbor because that's where several lumber companies stored their sleds in the summertime. It was never more than a clearing with a few buildings, and now it's hard to find even the ruins (except for some broken glass and rusted iron fittings).
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • OzJacko wrote:

      Here's one for those of you who like to research.
      My searching shows Baxter bought 6000 acres "around" Katahdin from Great Northern Paper Mills in 1930. Looking at the Mills history I cannot see detail of how they got the land originally. Katahdin has no commercial value to a paper mill. Was there any limitation to their original title to Katahdin? This could have been a limitation on what they had a right to sell Baxter. Don't forget that with his political position such issues could have been glossed over at the time....
      PooFan
      He started buying land in the 30's. It grew to over 200.000 acres that he deeded to the state with the restriction.

    • Display Spoiler

      Mountain-Mike wrote:

      OzJacko wrote:

      Here's one for those of you who like to research.
      My searching shows Baxter bought 6000 acres "around" Katahdin from Great Northern Paper Mills in 1930. Looking at the Mills history I cannot see detail of how they got the land originally. Katahdin has no commercial value to a paper mill. Was there any limitation to their original title to Katahdin? This could have been a limitation on what they had a right to sell Baxter. Don't forget that with his political position such issues could have been glossed over at the time....
      PooFan
      He started buying land in the 30's. It grew to over 200.000 acres that he deeded to the state with the restriction.
      Yes BUT...
      Did the text of the title the mill had in the first place have any restrictions on them using Katahdin itself?
      Someone (presumably in Maine) would need to dig into archives but it would not have been unusual for the title for the parcel of land that included Katahdin to have included restrictions on activity on Katahdin itself. Because of his position and his magnamity in gifting the land to Maine Baxter probably would have effectively had any restrictions ignored but if they existed then that portion of the land would probably be able to be legally excepted from his mandate.
      I am just speculating but wouldn't it be ironic if a restriction originally intended to stop exploitation of the mountain could make it open to more exploitation than the land around it.
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.

    • OzJacko wrote:

      Display Spoiler

      Mountain-Mike wrote:

      OzJacko wrote:

      Here's one for those of you who like to research.
      My searching shows Baxter bought 6000 acres "around" Katahdin from Great Northern Paper Mills in 1930. Looking at the Mills history I cannot see detail of how they got the land originally. Katahdin has no commercial value to a paper mill. Was there any limitation to their original title to Katahdin? This could have been a limitation on what they had a right to sell Baxter. Don't forget that with his political position such issues could have been glossed over at the time....
      PooFan
      He started buying land in the 30's. It grew to over 200.000 acres that he deeded to the state with the restriction.
      Yes BUT...Did the text of the title the mill had in the first place have any restrictions on them using Katahdin itself?
      Someone (presumably in Maine) would need to dig into archives but it would not have been unusual for the title for the parcel of land that included Katahdin to have included restrictions on activity on Katahdin itself. Because of his position and his magnamity in gifting the land to Maine Baxter probably would have effectively had any restrictions ignored but if they existed then that portion of the land would probably be able to be legally excepted from his mandate.


      Like I said I doubt there is any restrictions on the land back then. Loggers & paper companies were the robber barons of the northest. Baxter was the one that put the conservation restriction on the land he donated. Before him, & after timber was the prime resource in the area. Even up into current day but lesser extent. As for Maine exploring it further.


      Don't see it happening




      Opps accidently truncated some of OP. Sorry OZ.