Category Archives: Essays

Hut Systems in USA

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 

Hut Systems in USA
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.

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?

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.

Hut Systems in USA
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.

Hut Systems in USA
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.

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. 

Hut Systems in USA
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.

Hut Systems in USA
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. 

Field notes: Reflections on writing a guidebook to US Huts

Two researchers in the field at Rendezvous Huts

Doing it – the actual “research”: traveling the trails, talking with folks along the way, and cooking, sleeping and dreaming in the huts – was magical.  And while writing intensively to meet the manuscript deadlines was a welcome project during the pandemic, scribbling field notes daily in huts and on trail was more fun!  The book, tentatively titled Hut-to-hut in the USA: a guide for walkers, skiers, bikers and dreamers will be published by Mountaineers Books in fall 2021.

After 4 years of intensively studying huts and building a website, I shifted gears in 2018, putting the website on hold and focusing on filling in the blanks and organizing what I’d already learned.  I wanted to shape it into a substantive introduction for Americans to the idea and reality of hut to hut traverses.  Altogether, writing the book was a marvelous outdoors, logistical, social and intellectual adventure!  Now, with the manuscript submitted and copy-edited, the hardest parts are done. I’m indulging in some reflection on the process.  Here is an uncharacteristically personal account of the project that has been keeping me busy the past two years.

Proposing a partnership

The book idea germinated on a backpacking trip in Yellowstone in August 2017.  After the trauma of my Dad’s decline and death and mom’s sad move from Minnesota to be with my sister, my partner Laurel and I embarked on a six-week head-clearing trip out west.  While we spent days hiking, swimming, and relaxing in and around our backcountry camp at Heart Lake, I reflected on my immersion in hut studies.  I had visited most US hut systems, written dozens of articles, trip reports, and operational profiles.  Perhaps inevitably, after 45 years as an academic librarian – it became clear that I wanted to write a book! 

I’d never written a book.  Writing — though I do a lot of it –, is not my strongest suit.  But I happen to be married to a voracious reader, clear and efficient writer, and ace editor.  Could I persuade her to join me? 

Sam and Laurel in Rockies

After all, she was my eager, constant, and capable companion in planning and travelling hut-to-hut around the world.  One afternoon as we lounged in a hot spring infused, mineral-rich creek, I told her about the book idea.  I carefully proposed an equal partnership in writing the first book to paint a picture of huts in the USA.  Newly retired, did she have some big projects in mind?  If not, since she’d be coming on the trips anyway, why not enter into the “research”?  Ever the incrementalist, she responded, “You don’t even have a publisher yet.  Ask me again when you have one.”  That was enough.  On return home I sent out a query letter and developed a detailed book proposal; Laurel reviewed it and made suggestions.  I selected Mountaineers Books (Seattle) – a non-profit with author-friendly copyright policies, and the oldest US publisher of guidebooks.  Moreover, they were the best choice because I’d discovered — while spending a day in the stacks in the mountaineering section at Harvard’s Widener Library — that they have a history of publishing substantive books introducing new outdoor recreation forms to American audiences.  Laurel and I then took off for three months in New Zealand.  Emerging from a glorious week-long traverse among the historic huts of Kaharanghui National Park, there was an email saying the Mountaineers agreed a book on American huts was needed. 

By then Laurel had warmed to the idea and agreed to partner on the project with one proviso, “I won’t enter into your world as a hut nut.”  That was fine with me.  One fanatic is enough.

Two years of “research”

Our research protocol was simple: study maps, trek every system in the mode for which it is best known, talk with lots of people along the way, read everything relevant. Basically try to get a full sense of each hut system.

Visited lots of Anasazi ruins while on Sierra Club Service Trip at Bears Ears Monument

We hiked, skied and biked more than 620 miles, touring more than 20 hut systems in a dozen states.  The continuous planning and navigation of trips was occasionally intense, but what a great way to see the country and meet lots of interesting people!  Along the way we visited family and friends and occasionally participated in Sierra Club Service Trips, for which Laurel is camp cook.  We re-visited all the hut systems we’d previously experienced over the years; and in the end we visited half of the hut systems two or more times.  Except in the three largest systems, we were able to visit every hut and ski most of the trails.  Talking with the owners/operators was especially informative, and we have now personally met all of these great pioneers in American recreation!  We learned the stories of how these systems came to be and met many founders. We recruited friends and family to join us, benefitting from their unique perspectives. 

Ben Nelson of Rendezvous Huts, right, with a few of the crowd who gathered at coffee shop, including former owner John…..

Along the way we met lots of folks in huts, on trail, on the road, in coffee shops and bookstores, etc.  Many asked, “Have you hiked this trail or seen this cabin, or have you met so-and-so?”.  These chance meetings, suggestions and introductions created a rich trail of bread crumbs.  We happily followed these to some really cool people and places, and got a peek into many interesting subcultures around the country.  The mountain communities in particular were woven with tight knit connections. These led to gatherings in coffee shops and over meals to talk about how these towns had forged trail systems, trail networks, and hut systems.  We learned that backcountry ski hut systems were often developed as alternatives to the overwhelming commercialism of destination ski resorts. And gratifying to see how much support they had from locals. 

Leyton Jump and the Tetrahedron Huts volunteer family who shared Heifer Hut with us, at Rendezvous Huts in Washington

US huts offer both “by-the-bunk” and “exclusive use” reservations.  We generally prefer by-the-bunk systems because we happen to like the unique “communal living” aspect of sharing space with fellow travelers that we’ve never met.   We frequently end up sharing meals, playing games, and trading stories.  And we almost always learn about something about why people trek, why they like (or occasionally don’t like) huts, and about other huts, trails, parks and places to visit.  Many folks expressed interest in our research, and occasionally invited us to give impromptu talks or lead a discussion about huts.  But mostly it was just informal, mealtime or after-dinner conversation.  Reservations are hard to get in the Rendezvous Huts, but a family kindly agreed to share their hut with us. This made our traverse much easier.  We were traveling with Leyton Jump, who works with the USA’s only all-volunteer hut system (Mt. Tahoma Trails Association).  It turned out this sweet family helps operate an all-volunteer hut system, Tetrahedron Huts, in British Columbia, and we had lots to talk about.  In the AMC huts a trekker urged us to develop a code of ethics for hut operators and publish it in the book.  Talking with staff in the full service huts, mostly young people, was another great way to learn about how people use and respond to huts.

Our favorite AirBnB for writing, with Blanca Peak in background.
Between trips, a highlight was meeting up with hut folks at International Trails Symposium: Jame Wrigley (AMC), Joe and Jack (Adirondacks Hamlets to Huts), Sam, and Mike Kautz (American Prairie Reserve)

After each trek — or after several in a row — we usually treated ourselves to a few days (or more!) in an AirBNB or hostel to wash clothes (and ourselves), rest, and write up our notes.  At the foot of Blanca Peak in SW Colorado we stayed in a remote, rambling old farmhouse for three days, sharing some meals with the owner, and working all day at the big round kitchen table, surrounded by magical light and views of the peak.  Our favorite AirBNB ever!  In less remote rest stops, we visited local libraries, historical societies, chambers of commerce, bookstores, coffee shops and bars as part of our research.  Salida and Breckenridge Colorado, and Winthrop, Washington in the Methow Valley stand out among our rest stops!  One great pleasure was getting to know more of the remarkable folks who operate US hut systems. They are a talented and inspirational group!

Trials and tribulations, learning curves and lotteries

We fit the profile of our audience, “folks of above average fitness, possessing a spirit of adventure, and solid backcountry skills.”  We are strong hikers and love to ski; but not experienced long distance bikers.  So I borrowed a mountain bike and spent a summer getting into shape for a wonderful five day, 165 mile ride with my brother on the San Juan Huts Telluride to Moab gravel ride.  Alas, due to my inexperience I took only some of the awesome single-track options offered by this route. 

Above: San Juan Huts bike route: well stocked pantry, a hut on wheels (in case of forest fire), and our bunk mates who joined us on the ride.

Skiing was the biggest challenge.  We quickly realized we were in for more skiing than expected and some on quite steep terrain.  Our many years of cross-country skiing had been mostly on small hills and fairly flat terrain in the Northeast and Midwest.  Preparing for a trip on intermediate level traverses in the Tenth Mountain Division Hut System it became clear that our skiing skills (and especially Laurel’s) were barely up to some of the more challenging backcountry skiing in the Rockies.  Wisely we hired a guiding service for the first time in our lives.  Donny and Jimbo of Paragon Guides helped us navigate a four-day version of the Tenth Mountain’s Haute Route.  Laurel bailed halfway through the third day, but I managed to make it up the final 3,000’ climb to Jackal Hut and complete the traverse.  It was an exhausting thrill!

While most of our treks were super fun and satisfying, a few must be classified as adventures or even misadventures!  Skiing yurt-to-yurt through a three-day blizzard (24 inches in one 24 hour period!) in the Never Summer Mountains of Colorado was certainly a test of our mettle (and our trail-breaking ability!).  We learned afterwards that the storm, called “Snowmageddon” by the media, had paralyzed traffic on the interstate between Denver and Fort Collins.  But we were mostly cozy in the yurts.  But on the last night it dropped to 10 below zero and even feeding the fire all night didn’t keep the yurt warm enough for me to sleep (I need a warmer bag!).  When we reached trails end and dug out our rental car, one of the rear windows shattered from the cold.  We sealed it with cardboard and duct tape and carried on to the SW Nordic Center in the San Juan mountains.  We got lost several times and Laurel couldn’t handle the crusty snow conditions.  So we bailed and I went back the next year to do the whole traverse with my brother. 

Doug clearing snow from yurt at Southwest Nordic Center

The project required that I become more adept in using a variety of GPS apps and learn to use the amazing CalTopo site to make map scraps.  This learning curve was alternately fascinating and frustrating.  Honestly, figuring out how best to take detailed notes on trail, and then later write clear and concise turn-by-turn navigation descriptions was not my favorite part of the project.  But now I know how to do it! 

Reservations can be hard to come by.  Even with two years to plan, we had to confront the scarcity of reservations available for some hut-to-hut traverses!  We learned that most hut systems are so popular that one has to book far in advance, get lucky, be very flexible, and/or rely on the kindness of hut operators and other hut guests to piece together an itinerary.  Even this combination of strategies failed us for the High Sierra Camps in Yosemite.  Twice we didn’t get reservations in the highly competitive lottery.  While we did manage twice to get reservations by constantly phoning to check for cancellations, in both years the season was cancelled due to depth of snowpack in the Sierra.  Finally, with our deadline looming, we decided our only remaining option to experience the High Sierra Loop was to backpack it.  While we couldn’t stay in the backcountry tent camps, we camped there; and we were able to stay in the front country tent camp (the tents are very similar) both before and after our glorious six day backpacking trip.

And finally, the pandemic interfered with our research.   It derailed our second trip to Alaska, planned for March/April 2020, to do two cabin-to-cabin ski traverses: Nancy Lakes (Alaska DNR) and White Mountains National Recreation Area (BLM).  Alas, while we had visited both areas on our first Alaska trip, we really wanted to ski the routes and write about them in detail.  Now they are short entries in the “Bonus Hut-to-Hut Traverses” chapter.  And our trip to Adirondacks Hamlets to Huts was twice cancelled due to NY state’s pandemic travel restrictions.  Fortunately, I had participated their first pilot trip in 2018, and used this experience and help from the owners to write about this new remarkable new “hut” system. 

In the end it all worked out! 

cross cultural comparisons

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……

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

A rough history of bach legalities

A rough history of bach legalities

by Janet Abbott, art historian and bach historian

Local and central government authorities have attempted to regulate and/or remove the informally-built baches at Taylor’s Mistake since 1911.  They succeeded in removing all of the cave baches between Boulder Bay and Taylors Mistake in the clearances of 1979.  Now 45 out of the 72 baches remain and are currently facing a new round of Council public consultation and decisions.

https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/consultations-and-submissions/haveyoursay/show/182

An article in the Press on the third of January 1911 entitled ‘The Cave Dwellers, Charms of Taylor’s Mistake, Leading the Simple Life’ sets the scene for these baches. It describes the pioneer cave dwellers Messrs Kennedy and Bickerton who had settled in caves twenty years ago [1891], followed by Mr Archbold fourteen years ago [1897] and states that there were now more than ‘thirty dwellings, no less than a dozen new ones having been started last year’.

Baches

Baches at Taylor’s Mistake, courtesy NZStuff

The article goes on to summarise the land ownership issues at the time which must have been seen as favourable enough for at least twelve families to invest in building huts.

Continue reading

Alaska Huts

Alaska huts and trails and economic development

“Could the lure of trails salvage Alaska’s economy?”

article by Krista Langlois in High Country News (June 26,2017):

Summary  below with link to full article

 

This article is highly recommended to anyone interested in huts and trails and their potential for economic development.  Following is a brief summary:

The subtitle of this piece summarizes Langlois’ arena of exploration: A trial along the Trans-Alaska pipeline could be the start of a booming recreation economy. Krista interviews people on all sides of this question, but is clearly interested in the potential of Alaska’s greatest asset — its sublime landscape and huge tracts of magnificent wilderness — as a desperately needed driver of economic development.  

The economy of Alaska is on the ropes: timber jobs have decreased by 80%, oils production has dropped by 76% since 1989, the state is doing everything it can to prop up fishing and mining, but is now facing a $4 billion budget deficit.  Governor Bill Walker said in 2016 “We have reached a point in our state’s history that we need to be looking beyond oil.”  

The specific proposal Langlois explores is the development of an 800 mile trail that parallels the Trans-Pacific pipeline.  She outlines the arguments pro and con, provides interesting character sketches some of the advocates and opponents of the trail, and provides valuable context in comparing the state of trail development in Alaska compared with that in the lower 48 states.  The bottom line is that while Alaska has unsurpassed wilderness beauty, it has relatively little infrastructure to attract outdoor enthusiasts.

She hones in on the fact that the rugged wilderness of Alaska is beyond the capabilities of most people, and that the development of hut systems is one way of making these wonders accessible to the vast majority of “people in the middle” who appreciate and long for contact with wild but are simply  not up to the job of backpacking in Alaska.  She interviews Tom Callahan of Alaska Huts Association, and cites relevant economic development studies and initiatives including the New Zealand hut system and Great Walks, the AMC Hut System, and Adventure Cycling, and Fruita Colorado to name a few.  

But don’t settle for my summary: its well worth reading the entire article.

Public Access to Private Land: gratitude for the kindness of strangers

Public access to private land is taken for granted. For several days along the Superior Hiking Trail in Minnesota prompted a strong sensation of enjoying the kindness of strangers.  Trail signs reminded me to respect the property rights of those permitting the trail corridor to traverse their land, and other signs clearly marked the NO TRESPASSING boundaries. With one exception this permissive access was granted anonymously.  The land owners likely live nearby, but we walkers don’t know who the are.  The one exception was a tribute to landowner Sarah Ellen Jaeger, who not only granted permissive access, but put her land in a trust.

While we in the USA are blessed with lots of public lands for trails, we are also often dependent on the kindness of private land owners who grant rights of way for trails.  Musing on this, Thomas Jefferson’s metaphor came to mind:

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. 

As I reflected on our founding father’s notions about sharing intellectual property, I also realized the limits of the metaphor.  When a few hikers or bikers damage a trail, access to private land is compromised by their offensive footprints.

 

When landowners get fed up with ongoing disrespectful behaviors on the trail (e.g. littering, trespassing, camping, and lighting fires), they sometimes rescind the permissive access to the  trail corridor.

As a result, trails must be re-routed at great effort and expense.  Fortunately rescinding of access happens very infrequently.

In the USA under “permissive access” to private property: all the private land owner has to do to bar others is to post a NO TRESPASSING sign.  In some other nations traditional rights of way across private land are protected and “right to roam” legislation guarantees free trail access for the public.

It is easy to bemoan what we don’t have in terms of access rights to private land, and I agree with these arguments.  But as I walked the SHT I was overcome with gratitude for what we do have: thousands of anonymous land owners who willingly grant public access to their land because they believe in the importance of trails and in sharing their woods, rocks, trees and vistas.

It was a special pleasure to see one special land owner memorialized on the trail.  Thank you Sarah Ellen Jaeger and all the other generous owners of private land who allow us to walk.

 

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

“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

Five Long Distance Walks in UK: Trip Report

Preview of Long Distance Walks

By Brian Tyler, AFIChemE, Cheshire, England

{Editors note: This 47 page report of five walks is from a family memoir by Brian Tyler, father of my friend Simon Tyler.  Brian – a truly peripatetic professor and chemist – estimates he has walked some 75,000 miles over his more than 80 years on earth, cycled at least 50,000 miles, and run about 4,600 miles. This chatty and informative chapter from his memoir details five walks taken between 1975 and 1999.  It gives a feel for each walk, provides useful information (though some is doubtless out-of-date)  and reveals his sharp eye for historical detail.  His photographs have a family album feel and add greatly to the text.  When I read this report I was enchanted by how it compellingly tells the story of one man’s long walks over time.  Brian kindly agreed to my request to include it on hut2hut.info as a unique example of how walking fits into a life well lived. – Sam Demas, October 2016}

Continue reading