Tag Archives: Hut systems

Hut-to-hut on Mt. Kenya: Maisha Mlima Huts Update

Inspiration

Three years ago my husband, Matt, and I hiked the Three Capes Trek in Tasmania. This is where it began. The idea of hut-to-hut on Mt. Kenya was born there.

The Three Capes Trek was a newly completed through-hike with huts along the coast of Tasmania. It was so thoughtfully designed that Matt and I couldn’t help but marvel at all the details as we went along. The huts were individually designed to match the aesthetic of their surroundings with stunning viewpoints and lots of outdoor spaces. Each hut separated bunk sleeping rooms that held about 10 people and a large kitchen and heated common space. At each cluster of huts, there was an experienced staff member who offered a briefing in the evening, highlighting the flora and fauna in the area along with the weather forecast for the next day and answering questions. Each common space had a bookshelf with the same books so that hikers could start reading something on the first night and continue it as they went along without the burden of carrying the book itself. There were indigenous art installations. Trailhead drop off and pick up was pre-arranged as part of the package. Whoever designed the experience had thought through every detail from the vantage point of the hiker and how to make the most wonderful experience possible from the moment we arrived all the way to the end. 

As we admired the thoughtful design, we kept wondering why there weren’t more hut systems like this in the US and other mountain ranges where we had spent time. Inspired by our experience in Tasmania, we started daydreaming about building hut systems in mountain ranges around the world.

Why Mount Kenya?

Matt and I are both American. He grew up in San Francisco, California, discovering the wonder of mountain hiking later in life. I grew up in Sun Valley, Idaho, and have mountains in my blood. We met while working for a non-profit called One Acre Fund in Kenya. That’s where we have lived and worked for the past 10 years and where we are raising our family today. 

Last year as we sat talking for the millionth time about building hut systems in the US, Matt suggested we could consider the project for Mt Kenya and… BOOM. That was it. Mt Kenya is the second highest peak on the African continent, after Kilimanjaro. Its summit is above 17,000 feet and requires a technical climb. However, hikers can also summit a non-technical point at 15,000 feet. Despite attracting only ~15000 visitors a year, compared to Kili’s ~50,000 or Mt Rainer’s 2M, Mt Kenya is widely considered to be more beautiful due its varied landscapes and different ecological zones. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. 

Photos by Hailey Tucker and Agoro Adhiambo

Mt Kenya is one of only a few Afro-alpine ecosystems in the world. It has an altitudinal gradient that leads to an unusual varied range of ecosystems in a relatively small area. According to the Mt Kenya Management Plan published in 2017, “The vast forest has large populations of several threatened animal species and the evolution and ecology of the Afro-alpine flora are outstanding for a wide range of rare and endemic species.” Wildlife includes the African elephant, black rhino, white rhino, mountain bongo, grevy’s zebra, primates, and is an Important Bird Area (IBA).” Mt Kenya is one of the five main water towers in Kenya and is a vital water source for several million people. The Mt Kenya Forest also acts as a carbon sink absorbing carbon dioxide that otherwise would contribute to climate change, regulates water cycles, maintains soil quality, and reduces risks of natural disasters such as floods. We need to protect this park.

According to Patrick Adams in an article published by the NY Times in February 2019, “The earth’s sixth mass extinction, scientists warn, is now well underway. Worldwide, wildlife populations are plummeting at astonishing rates, and the trend is perhaps most starkly evident in Africa’s protected areas — the parks, game reserves and sanctuaries home to many of the world’s most charismatic species. Between 1970 and 2005, national parks in Africa saw an average decline of 59 percent in the populations of dozens of large mammals, among them lions, zebras, elephants and giraffes. In at least a dozen parks, the losses exceeded 85 percent.” The Mt Kenya park is no exception and despite the hard work and dedication of several other NGOs and local organizations, there remains a tremendous amount of work to be done to protect the park and the wildlife that inhabits it.

Why Huts?

Mt Kenya already has a few independently owned and operated huts on the mountain (Old Moses, Shiptons, Naro Moru River Huts, Chogoria and Austian Hut are the ones that receive the most traffic). Unfortunately, most were all built in the 1980’s and few have been actively maintained. As such, most hikers prefer to camp rather than stay in the huts, which can have damaging effects on the surrounding ecosystems. For example, there are few proper latrines at campsites and as a consequence popular areas, like the lakes, are now showing the effects.  This hypothesis has been evidenced by the work of Dr. Jeff Marion in proving the environmental footprint of huts is significantly less than distributed camping on parks. We believe that the installation of proper infrastructure and subsequent maintenance of that infrastructure will be essential to protecting the environment and the animals that live in the park, not to mention the experience of pristine nature for hikers.  

Matt and I both want to do something that will contribute to addressing the climate crisis. We know that our our kids will be the ones to inherit it. We believe that connecting more people in Kenya and other parts of the world will be important for developing future grassroots support for conservation and climate change prevention. Drawing a connection between national parks and people is where the conservation movement originated in countries like the US. In many emerging markets, the conservation movement is not yet mainstream nor is the deep connection to nature and national parks. We want to change this. We also want to work to protect the mountains and the parks we love as we bring more people into these precious spaces.

Progress to Date

That is where this journey began. I called a friend and colleague, Koome McCourt, who shares our passion for nature conservation and would join as a cofounder in our project. Matt and I each started to carve out an hour every morning to research and set up calls with people who worked on hut systems. With a two-year-old, a six-month-old and a full time job, this was no small feat, and yet I usually found it gave me energy for other activities. We began to learn everything we could about mountain huts. We contacted other organizations and individuals working in the Mt Kenya area. We met with the government bodies who manage the forest and the park on Mt Kenya. We read environmental reports about Mt Kenya and the threats facing the ecosystem there. We spoke to architects, trail experts, and waste management experts. Each conversation we had led to another one and the more that we researched the clearer it became we had surfaced not only a good idea but a necessary one for Mt Kenya. 

Maisha Mlima

All of this work led to the formation of our non-profit organization, Maisha Mlima. Maisha Mlima or ‘Mountain Life’ in Swahili is a social enterprise that develops trails and hut systems to promote conservation in some of the most beautiful and underused mountain ranges in the world. Our mission is to promote conservation by increasing eco-friendly access to the great outdoors, and to ensure parks and trails are foundational for local economies and that people everywhere are connected to nature. Mt Kenya will be our first project but hopefully not our last. Our concept pitch deck is here and our website is here.

During our initial round of conversations, we were fortunate enough to find partners in White Arkitectur and World Trails Network, who would help us shape the concept and develop initial renderings for what the huts might become. We also found the Kenya Forestry Service and Kenya Wildlife Service eager to see us implement this project. We worked with all of these partners to pull together the pitch deck and conservation plan that we’re now using to build a larger coalition of partners, advisors, and funders to see this dream through to completion. 

Renderings by White Arkitectur

I want to offer a tremendous thanks to everyone who has supported us up to now in this journey including: Honerable Peter Kinyua of Kenya Forestry Service, Susie Weeks of Mt Kenya Trust, Mike Watson of Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, Valentine Mwende and Kevin McCourt of Kairu & McCourt Advocates, Galeo Saintz of World Trails Network, Sam Demas of Hut2Hut, Greg Carr of Gorongoza Park, Joe and Francie St. Onge of SVTrekkers, Ben Dodge of the Colorado 10th Mtn Division, Christy Mahone of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies, and so many others. 

We’re still building our coalition. If you or anyone you know is interested in getting involved, please get in touch! 

Photo by Mollie Parker and rendering by White Arkitectur

History of Hut Systems in USA

Hut Systems in the US—Α Ηαlting History of Hut Systems in USA

By Sam Demas and Laurel Bradley, Fall 2020

Huts have never played a major role in sheltering backcountry travelers in the US. Yet since the 1980s, more huts have been developed and built as Americans embrace and adapt these shelter systems, which encourage and facilitate access to wild places by diverse user groups.  The slow, on again/off again history of hut development may reflect an American ambivalence about how to view and support overnighting in the backcountry. 

Yosemite High Sierra Camps still use mules to haul gear
and supplies to tent camps

Until the maturation of car camping in the 1920s & 30s and the backpacking revolution of the 1970s, spending the night in the US backcountry involved either very rugged camping excursions or guided hunting and fishing expeditions, usually supported by horses. After two successful efforts (in 1888 and 1916) to bring the European full-service hut model to America, hut development halted for nearly two generations. The story of US hut systems was revived in the 1980s with western ski huts. New experiments continue into the twenty-first century.

DATESYSTEM  STATE
1888Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) Huts*NH
1913Glacier National Park chalets (most no longer exist)MT
1916Yosemite High Sierra Camps*CA
1937Haleakala National ParkHI
1938Sierra Club Donner Pass area hutsCA
1945Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park cabins*MI
1953Alfred A. Braun Hut SystemCO
1964Eklutna TraverseAK
1964Delta Range mountaineering hutsAK
1968Pinnell Mountain National Recreational TrailAK
1971Bomber Traverse AK
1973Resurrection Pass Trail*AK
1981Rendezvous Huts* WA
1982Sun Valley Mountain Huts*ID
1982Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association*CO
1983Idaho State University Portneuf Range Yurt SystemID
1984Boundary Country Trekking* MN
1985Nancy Lake State Recreation AreaAK
1985White Mountains National Recreation AreaAK
1986Never Summer Nordic*CO
1987San Juan Huts*CO
1987Southwest Nordic Center*CO
1987Summit HutsCO
1989Bear River Outdoor Recreation AllianceWY
1990Mount Tahoma Trails Association*WA
1992Hinsdale Haute RouteCO
2003AMC Maine Wilderness LodgesME
2007Cascade Huts (no longer operational)OR
2007Maine Huts and Trails*ME
2008Stehekin Outfitters WA
2011San Juan Haute RouteCO
2012Alaska Huts AssociationAK
2014Three Sisters Backcountry*OR
2018American Prairie Reserve*MT
2020Adirondack Hamlets to Huts* NY
2020Vermont Huts AssociationVT
Chronology of US Hut Systems

There is no doubt that the extensive European hut system influenced the development of huts in the US. However, our vast countryside, patterns of land ownership, economic norms, and attitudes toward nature and personal freedom have all affected how US hut systems are developed, where they exist, and how they operate.

Appalachian Mountain Club’s Carter Notch Hut c. 1910, one of the oldest huts in USA,
photo courtesy AMC Archives

The Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC), established in 1876 in Boston and explicitly patterned on European alpine clubs, built the very first hut system in this country. Instead of the Alps, members gravitated to the White Mountains in New Hampshire. Madison Spring Hut, the AMC’s first, completed in 1888, was built as a safe and convenient base for both hikers and climbers. Other huts, some planned as emergency shelters in response to accidents, followed. By the late 1930s, seven of the current eight huts were in place, offering comfortable accommodations along the rugged trail through the Presidential Range. The AMC hut system was the first and last to be built by a US conservation organization until the American Prairie Reserve huts opened in 2018.

Various other organizations promoted hiking and skiing in early twentieth-century America and helped, directly or indirectly, create backcountry lodging opportunities. Among conservation and outdoor recreation organizations established around 1900 were the Sierra Club (1892), the Mazamas (1894), and The Mountaineers (1906); the Adirondack Mountain Club was founded in 1922. None of their lodgings, though, were built to support hut-to-hut. The traverse just wasn’t an American thing.

Two trail-related shelter systems did flourish in the early twentieth century. The Green Mountain Club of Vermont, established in 1910, promoted the vision of a long-distance trail, punctuated with shelters, traversing the entire north–south axis of the state. This project inspired the even more ambitious Appalachian Trail (AT).

In 1921, Benton MacKaye published “An Appalachian Trail: A Project in Regional Planning,” proposing that a trail with a network of shelter camps, “with proper facilities and protection, could be made to serve as the breath of a real life for the toilers in the bee-hive cities along the Atlantic seaboard and elsewhere.” His vision was of a series of communities along the trail designed to support social transformation.  His idea of shelter camps, providing both comfortable accommodations and educational and nature immersion opportunities, was ultimately deemed impractical; instead, three-sided rustic shelters were positioned every 8 to 12 miles along the trail.  Today overnights on the AT are supported by camp sites, more than 250 backpacking shelters, and 8 AMC huts in the White Mountains.

The AT offers day hikers and section hikers opportunities to commune with nature and, for the really adventurous, the grand structure of a rugged, long pilgrimage. But without the comfort and convenience of huts, the AT is not accessible to the full spectrum of Americans envisioned by MacKaye. Subsequent US long-distance trails, such as the Pacific Crest Trail, the Continental Divide Trail, and the North Country Trail, were designed for backpackers and have not, for the most part, included shelters or huts.

While Europe gave rise to alpine clubs and built a system of recreational mountain huts, America was leading the world in preserving wild natural lands. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, conservationists articulated the positive value of wilderness for humanity. They lobbied for protecting wildlands, some pristine and some already spoiled by logging and mining. Clubs, including the AMC and the Sierra Club, joined the campaign to save wildlands and to prevent further devastation through uncontrolled resource extraction. The National Park System grew out of these efforts. Early conservationists, including John Muir and President Theodore Roosevelt, foregrounded the concept of “wilderness,” that is, areas of the earth untouched by man. The distinctive American celebration of wilderness has dramatically shaped the international conservation discourse and US values related to the outdoors—and it has conditioned attitudes about manmade structures in the backcountry.

Yosemite High Sierra Camp – Tent Cabins

In 1916, the National Park Service established the Yosemite High Sierra Camps, the second US hut system, to promote use of the park and access to the sublime high country. The High Sierra Camps (initially three, now five) were based on the Sierra Club tradition of an annual high trip. Members, invited to spend a month each summer in Yosemite’s high meadows, were treated to comfortable overnight lodgings and hot meals in tent encampments, with supplies hauled up by mule train. Today, Yosemite is the only US national park with a fully operational hut system.

Two other national parks—Montana’s Glacier and Haleakala in Hawaii—also created backcountry lodging early in the twentieth century. Between 1910 and 1915, the Great Northern Railway set up nine chalet encampments, spaced a day’s horseback ride apart, in Glacier National Park to offer comfortable overnight accommodations to visitors traveling by horse. These chalets flourished until the Great Depression. After World War II, with the private automobile having replaced the train for most long-distance travel and with roads penetrating the park’s interior, all but two of the chalets were decommissioned. The two still in operation—Sperry and Granite Park Chalets—attracted hikers beginning in the 1950s; the chalets are now so popular that reservations are awarded via a lottery. Sperry Chalet dormitory was destroyed by fire in 2017 and has been rebuilt.

In 1916 in Hawaii, long before statehood, Haleakala Crater was designated part of Hawaii National Park. In the mid-1930s, the Civilian Conservation Corps embarked on extensive trail-building projects and constructed three backcountry cabins, which may be linked on a multiday journey.

In Michigan, an extensive backcountry cabin system in the Porcupine Mountains showed that hut-to-hut travel could take root on state as well as federal lands. In 1945, what is now called Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park was established to conserve the largest stand of old-growth northern hardwood forest in the Upper Midwest. Twelve backcountry cabins offered rustic shelter to hikers and skiers seeking either single-destination getaways or hut-to-hut opportunities. The Porkies, arguably the most expansive network of its day, remains one of the oldest and largest hut systems.

Ostrander Ski Hut, March 2017

Yosemite National Park almost became home to a hut-to-hut ski system. In the 1930s, Yosemite developed a ski resort at Badger Pass and drew up plans for at least two backcountry huts to shelter ski touring enthusiasts overnight. Only Ostrander Ski Hut, which opened in 1941, was built. Initially run by a National Park Service concessionaire, it is now managed by a private foundation.

Skiing was gaining momentum in America across the 1920s and 1930s. While
downhill skiing ultimately came to dominate, ski touring drew an enthusiastic following. Here and there, in the 1930s and early 1940s, infrastructure was created to shelter backcountry skiers—for example, ski school cabins associated with the Sun Valley Resort in Idaho and the first of several Sierra Club huts near Donner Pass in California.

Publications affiliated with the National Ski Association of America advocated for better ski mountaineering skills and for European-style huts in the US. In the 1942 American Ski Annual, James Laughlin’s “A Plea for Huts in America” called out to the association to get involved in setting up a chain of huts, enabling “the cream of skiing,” that is, multiday ski tours. Also in 1942, David Brower, who later became the executive director of the Sierra Club (1952–69), compiled the Manual of Ski Mountaineering in collaboration with other Sierra Club ski mountaineers from the San Francisco Bay region at the request of the association. The slim book proved useful as a training manual for the Tenth Mountain Division, the Colorado-based World War II army division (which included Brower) that specialized in mountain warfare and is now memorialized in the largest US hut system!

The Alfred A. Braun Huts were the third US system and the nation’s first ski hut system. In 1953, under the auspices of the National Ski Association, Aspen-based ski enthusiasts rebuilt an old miners’ cabin for overnights in the backcountry and called it Tagert Hut. Additional huts were added in the late 1950s and early 1960s. In 1967, Alfred A. Braun was designated manager of the system and oversaw the construction of three additional huts, bringing the total to seven. This hut system, now managed by a nonprofit, is named for the charismatic and opinionated Braun. The huts, for winter use only, cater to expert skiers trained to navigate in avalanche-prone terrain mostly above tree line. The Braun huts are simple, low-amenity structures situated on government land—in this case, US Forest Service (USFS) holdings. The small size, reminiscent of mountaineering bivvies, is best suited to a single party.

One of the Braun Huts

Alpine clubs organized shelter systems for mountaineers in Alaska. Beginning in the 1960s, not long after the Braun huts were established for expert backcountry skiers in Colorado, the Mountaineering Club of Alaska (MCA) and the Alaska Alpine Club (AAC) got to work. Over successive decades, the AAC built three huts in the glacier-rich Delta Range, not far from Wrangell–St. Elias National Park and Preserve. The MCA also put together a trio of huts across the Eklutna Traverse northeast of Anchorage in the Chugach Mountains. This organization also orchestrated a chain of huts across the Bomber Traverse in the Talkeetna Mountains between 1971 and 2018, one of which is operated by the American Alpine Club. All these club huts are aimed at expert hikers and skiers primed to cross glaciers and navigate rough, unmarked terrain.

With the construction of an extensive Interstate Highway System in the 1950s and 1960s, car camping became the American way to experience nature. Campsites on county, state, federal, and private lands, with picnic tables, fire rings, and toilet facilities, provided modest comforts and safety for families seeking inexpensive overnights in the great American outdoors. In the 1970s, the backpacking boom emerged as a complement and corrective to car camping. Backpacking, fueled by the environmental movement, youth culture, and innovations in lightweight and waterproof gear, offered young people and wilderness seekers opportunities to journey far from roads and crowded campgrounds. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, increasing numbers aspired to take multiday journeys in wild natural areas. The backpacker’s ethos is straight out of the American rugged individualism playbook, celebrating solitude in nature, making do with little, and stoic survival rather than comfort. Huts, with associations of comfort and conviviality, were alien to the hard-core backpacker mindset. Even so, huts figured in conversations about how to best accommodate new waves of walkers and nature enthusiasts in the backcountry.

William E. Reifsnyder, a Yale professor and member of the AMC’s hut committee, had extensive experience with European huts. He advised the American Youth Hostel Association to consider huts in relation to hostel development in the US. And in the late 1970s, he wrote High Mountain Huts: A Planning Guide for the Colorado Mountain Trails Foundation in cooperation with the USFS (see Resources). In this substantial pamphlet, Reifsnyder presented detailed guidelines for a hypothetical hut and trail system in the mountain West, catering to both walkers and skiers. His closing sentence, “Huts are an idea whose time has come,” was prescient.

During the 1980s, ten new hut systems—all catering to Nordic skiers—came into being in the American West. These systems define a distinctly American approach to huts. New operations in Colorado, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, and Minnesota were each locally driven by small private businesses, nonprofits, and one university outdoor program; the huts—all self-service—are situated on public land. Even though a hut operation may claim to be a backcountry adventure without the weight, clients must carry their own food in almost all cases.

All these hut-to-hut ski systems take advantage of public lands through special use permits. Technically they are all concessionaires and pay a percentage of revenue to their government “landlords.” Eight are on USFS land and two are on state parks property. Every new hut system targeting USFS land, whether a for-profit or a nonprofit initiative, must negotiate with the district office and go through mandated assessment and review. In most of these early cases, permits were initially granted for seasonal structures only. Huts, built to be removed in the late spring and reassembled in the fall, tended to be small and relatively portable. Yurts proved a popular solution to this design challenge.

Fishook Yurt, now part of Sun Valley Mountain Huts, originally built by Kirk Bachman for Joe Leonard, of Leonard Expeditions, is likely the first ski yurt in USA. Rodney Ley started Never Summer Nordic in 1986 with three yurts, including one built by Bachman.

 As USFS district officials developed confidence in individual concessionaires over time, permission to leave the huts up year-round was usually granted. In a unique partnership, the USFS (along with the Colorado Historical Society) operates two historic railroad structures—Ken’s Cabin and the Section House—as an interpretive center in summer and through a special use permit allows Summit Huts to welcome backcountry skiers in winter. The two systems on state lands, Never Summer Nordic in Colorado and the Mount Tahoma Trails Association in Washington, must also periodically renegotiate their permits.

The Mount Tahoma Trails Association and Colorado’s Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association and Summit Huts were created by local outdoor enthusiasts committed to creating systems to support their own recreational pursuits, and also to invite others to enjoy the same pleasures. They are run by nonprofits with a relatively narrow focus, in contrast to the much broader missions of the AMC and the Sierra Club, who established some of America’s very first backcountry huts. The exemplary Tenth Mountain Division Hut Association is notable for its scale, the design and structural integrity of its huts, and professionalism in management and operations. This is due in part to the standards of its founders, its premier ski country location, and the deep pockets of its patrons.

Private business drove the creation of most new hut systems in the 1980s. From Washington to Idaho, Colorado to Minnesota, energetic individuals and couples saw opportunity in the Nordic skiing boom. The Rendezvous Huts may have been the first of this wave of huts to open. Huts were a vehicle for making a living and pursuing a labor of love. These small enterprises developed organically over time, sometimes in conjunction with related enterprises. The Boundary Country Trekking folks were also in the guiding, dogsledding, and lodging business; huts were an outgrowth of Sun Valley Trekking guiding activities. As local entrepreneurs, hut system owners could get things done without fuss and react to emerging trends. The Southwest Nordic Center founder, after observing the Never Summer Nordic yurts, collaborated with a carpenter friend to design and build the system’s yurts. In 1987, San Juan Huts developed a ski—and then hike—hut system, and later responded to new recreational trends with the nation’s first hut-to-hut routes exclusively for mountain bikers.

Ten hut systems have emerged so far in the twenty-first century. In addition, most of the nation’s hut systems have expanded operations, embracing more travel modes and seasons; on top of hiking, skiing, and biking, a few have also added paddling options.

In 2003, the AMC embarked on a multipronged Maine Woods Initiative in the 100-Mile Wilderness near Mount Katahdin. The AMC purchased 70,000 acres and established 120 miles of trails in service to land conservation. Lodges and cabins included in the purchase draw people to the reserve; programs support hiking and lodge-to-lodge recreational skiing as low-impact ways of enjoying the Maine woods.

Four years after the launch of that initiative, a new nonprofit inaugurated an ambitious huts and trails system in another economically depressed region of the state. Maine Huts and Trails built four high-end huts, and a trail system, to welcome hikers, bikers, and skiers. Despite energetic programming, the full-service offerings proved unsustainable; in 2019, Maine Huts and Trails shifted to a self-service model with greater reliance on volunteer staff.

In Oregon, local entrepreneurs created a couple of new hut systems near well-
established downhill ski areas. Cascade Huts opened in 2007 in the shadow of Mount Hood with three small plywood cabins. Unfortunately, this operation has gone dormant since 2018. Farther south, not far from Mount Bachelor, Three Sisters Backcountry offers a two-night Nordic traverse. This family business, opened in 2014, operates on an enhanced self-service model, with a fully stocked pantry of ingredients ready to inspire visitors to cook tasty meals. They modeled this practice on the San Juan Hut Systems bike huts in Colorado.

In 2018, American Prairie Reserve, a private landscape-scale project in Montana, opened the first of three huts in a projected ten-hut system. The organization aims to become the largest nature reserve in the continental US. This is the second US hut system not located in the mountains (the other is in Minnesota). Hut manager Mike Kautz, a veteran of the AMC’s White Mountains hut system, introduced huts as a means to welcome visitors to the area.

The Vermont Huts Association inaugurated a four-hut traverse in 2020, linking existing huts to support skiing from Camels Hump to the Bolton Valley. This organization coordinates eight dispersed huts throughout the state, and aims to create an extensive network of backcountry accommodations as a means of stitching together Vermont’s myriad trail systems.

Adirondack Hamlets to Huts (AHH) also opened in 2020, using the hut-to-hut idea to organize nature-based travel in Adirondack Park, encompassing six million acres of wildlands and 102 towns and villages. This nonprofit orchestrates routes combining hiking and paddling, or other travel modes, with overnights in existing hostelries. Hut-to-hut, in this case, is close to the European experience of village-to-village travel. To drive economic development, and to serve recreational and conservation goals, AHH has identified, analyzed, and prioritized twenty-six routes in the region. New huts may be constructed in the future to fill in gaps between existing accommodations.

In 2021 The Aquarius Trail opened in SW Utah, providing a hut-to-hut gravel bike route modeled on the very successful San Juan Huts bike routes in Colorado.

Until very recently there was really no coherent approach to or understanding of huts and their role in the American outdoor recreation spectrum. Americans knew very little about huts.  Most hut operators didn’t know each other and most had only a sketchy understanding of what other systems existed and how they operate.  But this has changed as a critical mass of hut systems has been developed, and particularly as the US Hut Alliance was formed in 2021 to bring together the nation’s hut community. Americans are now beginning to embrace huts as outdoor recreation infrastructure, and hut operators are learning from each other. The halting history of huts in the USA points to a period of creativity and greater continuity of effort in the years ahead.

****

This brief history sets the stage for our overview of U.S. huts today “Hut Systems in the USA: situation and outlook 2020, and for my Vision for huts in the future.

You can supplement our history of huts in USA with a well-researched piece by Tom Hallberg on the history of US backcountry ski huts published in issue 144 of Backcountry Magazine February 2022, p. 80-97.

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. 

New Hut-to-Hut Biking System in Utah – Aquarius Trail

by Sam Demas May 2021

This new 190-mile bike trail passes through some of Utah’s most beautiful high desert country, starting at Brian Head Ski Resort and ending at Escalante. The trail (which includes some single track and lots of double track gravel road) wends through the Dixie National Forest, passing by the towns of Panguitch, Hatch and Bryce (apparently close enough for a side trip to Bryce Canyon National Park) and ends in town of Escalante in the region of the Grand Escalante Staircase. Along the way you stay at five huts on a trip described by the owners as a “luxury bikepacking experience”. I haven’t visited this system yet, so what follows is based on what I’ve read.

This enterprise — operated by Escape Adventures, a Las Vegas, NV tour operator that

Aquarius Trail Hut Shipping Containers
Container huts under construction. All photos courtesy Escape Adventures.

offers a wide range of bike tours for folks of all abilities — started operations in Fall 2020. This six day, five night hut-to-hut tour operates July – October. 3-6 day tour options are available. Each of the five hut locations has two 6-bunk units. You can rent one or both units at each site depending on the size of your group. See the Aquarius Trail website for prices and reservation information.

In terrain and amenities this hut system resembles the two original biking systems operated by San Juan Huts of Ridgeway Colorado. However, the Aquarius huts are made of 9′ high shipping containers cut into 20′ long sections, each converted into what appear to be well appointed rustic huts. Like San Juan Huts, the huts are self service plus, i.e. stocked with water, snacks, food and, on request, beer; and they provide cooking/eating implements and stove, a propane heater for cold nights, sleep sheets and sleeping bags. In addition they provide an amenity rare in most hut systems: hammocks, showers (foot pedal powered), a towel for each person

Aquarius Trail Hatch Hut from above
One hut site with two huts

, and a free pillowcase (which is the map for the hut system in addition to GPS tracks provided). Apparently gear shuttle is available for a fee. The huts are apparently ADA accessible. Guided or self-guided tours are available. At $889/person for the 6 day/5 night version of the experience, this is one of the most expensive hut systems in the USA; but if offers a higher level of amenities than most.

Editorial note: This latest in a series of new hut systems under development, the Aquarius Trail, looks way cool, but is leaning towards the luxury/glamping territory that I personally hope will not come to dominate hut-to-hut travel in USA.

For more details see the Aquarius Trail web site and a collection of articles available on the site: Two of these articles include: one by Tess Weaver and one by Dan Meyer.

New Zealand Hut Wardens – roles and responsibilities

New Zealand Hut Wardens —

paid and volunteer, roles and responsibilities

by Sam Demas

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

Hut Wardens are present in Great Walks and Serviced Huts.  Such huts are heavily used and often host less experienced trampers, in particular international visitors and beginners.  The purpose is to help ensure a safe and enjoyable experience; and they work to minimize environmental impacts in areas of high tramper traffic.  The presence of Hut Wardens in busy huts can deter vandalism. and help to set and maintain a positive overall tone within a group of people sharing living space, particularly if guests do not have experience with hut etiquette and sharing space with others.

Paid hut wardens clean the toilets and keep the hut tidy, among many other duties.  They are very often quite cheerful and friendly.

Paid hut warden positions are financed directly from the revenues collected.  An important role is to ensure guests have reservations when needed, and to check compliance in payment of fees and/or use of hut tickets. At Backcountry Comfort huts wardens are present “only where the revenue gained (from increased hut fee compliance) is greater than the full cost of providing the warden and running the warden’s quarters”.  At Standard Huts, (i.e. catering to Backcountry Adventurers), “wardens shall be provided only at times of year when the revenue gained (from increased hut fee compliance) is greater than the full cost of providing the warden and running the warden’s quarters” (quotes from DoC Hut Service Standards, p. 20).

Huts challenged due to growing use (e.g. degradation of water quality in nearby lakes or streams, vandalism, or other misuses of the hut) are assigned Hut Wardens as needed.  An example is Blue Lake Hut in Nelson Lakes National Park, where a volunteer Hut Warden was fairly recently assigned.  This hut has become a bottle-neck due to increase in use due to traffic on the Te Araroa Track, and overuse of campsites at Blue Lake threatens  water quality in its famously clear lake.

Continue reading

New Zealand Huts

New Zealand Huts Country Study: introduction

NZ Huts Notes for a Country Study: Introduction

By Sam Demas, hut2hut.info

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

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

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

New Zealand Huts – How Many and What Kinds?

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

A Tally and Taxonomy 

This is an attempt by an outsider to convey to other outsiders a quick visual, numeric and organizational overview of the wild and wonderful range of New Zealand huts.  Most, but not all, are available for recreational tramping.

The count, or “Tally”, attempts to enumerate “huts” (broadly construed) in categories corresponding to how they are discussed by hut folks in NZ.  The description, or “Taxonomy”,  briefly defines these same categories and illustrates them with some examples that give a sense of the variety of hut designs. Continue reading

“Vermont Huts Association” Launched!

Vermont Huts Association Launched!

by Sam Demas, October 10, 2016

Vermont is now the second state in the USA to establish an association of hut owners.  The mission of the Vermont Huts Association is:

“To enhance the backcountry experience in Vermont by connecting the year-round recreation community with the evolving network of hut, cabin, yurt and lodge operators.”

Continue reading

Adirondack Hamlets to Huts: a founders’ profile

Adirondack Hamlets to Huts

Duane Gould, Joe Dadey, and Jack Drury – The Adirondacks Hamlets to Huts Team

Joe and Jack: pioneers in a culture awakening to the environmental benefits of huts

In 2013 Joe Dadey and Jack Drury came up with the idea of a lodging and trails system connecting Adirondack hamlets to huts.  I’ve been following their quest as something of a model planning process for hut systems.

Continue reading

Grand Huts Association: $100,000 expansion grant

Congratulations!  According to an article in the SkyHiDaily News,  a major grant from private donors will help fund the second hut in The Grand Huts Association.

Their first hut (the Broome Hut pictured here), which took 15 years to get permitted and built, was completed in 2012 at a cost of $400,000.  Located in a remote location with excellent back country skiing, materials were delivered to the site by helicopter.  The hut is very popular and operates close to full capacity in winter and at about half-capacity in summer.  Located on US Forest Service Land near Winter Park Colorado, the Grand Huts association hopes to eventually grow to 5-7 huts, creating a hut-to-hut system from Berthoud Pass to Grand Lake in Grand County.

Continue reading