SummitPost.org

I live in Utah. The majority of my experience hiking on and off trails comes from hiking peaks on Forest Service and BLM in the Mountain West region. I recently started doing the state high points and took my first trip to the East Coast this last week. I hiked Katahdin in Maine and Washington in NH and spent some time on a few other trails in the region.

My question for everyone: Have you experienced a difference between East Coast and West Coast hiking: either the trails themselves or in the mentality of the locals?

Some of my thoughts about East Coast hiking as a West Coaster:

1. It is dang near impossible to lose the trail.
a. Trees and underbrush grow in so thick that you would need a machete or chainsaw to get off the trail. This was the case for the vast majority of the trails I was on below treeline.
b. The trails are all spray painted with color coded paint markings every 10-20 feet. On trees in the forest and on boulders above tree line.
c. Every trail intersection was signed with mileage.
d. There are ranger stations along the trail including stores where you can purchase equipment and food.

2. The Carins are ridiculously tall and close together.
3. The spray paint seems excessive and detracts from the experience.
4. Spray paint on a Carin seems even more ridiculous and excessive.
5. The locals all tried to convince me of how serious their mountains are and that having experience on other mountains doesn't really prepare you for their mountains.
6. The forest service land in the East is managed more like National Park Service Land.
7. There are a lot of cops in New Hampshire (especially for a state with a motto like "Live Free or Die").
8. It seems like the same problems you could get yourself into on a mountain in the West would get you into trouble on a mountain in the East - bad weather, ill preparation, lightning, dehydration, etc.
9. Hiking in the East is beautiful. Their forests are not all dying from bark beetle infestations/ fire suppression / drought / etc.
10. Timberline at 4000 feet is kinda cool.
11. They want you to "rock-hop" above timberline to not crush the wildflowers - but in doing so you are crushing all the poor little lichen species. Lichen have a tough time growing up there too >.<

Please share your thoughts.

And here I've been for the past few decades, thinking that Utah was land-locked!

I'll concede your comment about local pride. Lots of people actually believe that Mt Washington has the worst weather in the world, that Mt Monadnock is the world's second-most-climbed mountain, and all kinds of similar nonsense.

Those blazes are there for a reason: thousands of people who've never been on a trail before, and don't know what a trail looks like. (Seriously. Let a newbie take the lead on the descent, and watch how many times he follows a waterbar drainage instead of the trail. The forest actually makes it worse, because they can't see where they're going; if the way isn't blocked, it must be the trail!) There are designated wilderness areas where the trails are much less aggressively marked, but the highest peaks tend be outside those areas.

My impression of West coast mountains (California, Washington, Oregon):
- wow, these people really love building hairpins. The trails are un-steep, wide and smooth and great for running.
- oh, so THIS is what altitude feels like! Never mind about the running.
- The locals said this was a "bushwhack". I haven't seen a bush yet. There are trees here and there, but they don't even block the view.
-Can't say I noticed much difference in cairns or signage. Fewer blazes, obviously (fewer trees).

I will definitely be back to hike some of the less popular areas Catamount. Induction is not a logical fallacy. However, you are right, hiking 2 of the most popular mountains on some of the more popular routes is hardly enough for me to judge the entire region. Also, talking with probably 50ish people on trails for a few minutes and talking to about 10-20 different park employees during my few day visit is probably not enough to get a really good general consensus about overarching viewpoints for the several million people that live in the region.

Also, nartreb, I probably could/should have taken the coast out of the title. >.<

In addition to climbing Rainier, Whitney, and Elbert, I've had the opportunity to hike many trails out west. I've also enjoyed hundreds of hikes in the East ranging from Maine to North Carolina over the years.

My advice is to just get out, hike, and enjoy yourself!!!

Thoughts #1 through 7 are false.

FYI...the NE and SE are both in the east, and though I have unfortunately not hiked in the NE, I know well from TRs posted here that they two very different animals. Your descriptions don't much match the SE.

Ah, tuck's trail, and specifically HoJo's, might explain #1d) on the list. I couldn't figure out what Harbor was talking about; the summit of Mt Washington is not what I'd call a "ranger station". I suppose Chimney Pond is similar? (I've never visited the hut there, though I've walked past it a couple of times.)

Big cairns are visible all over Mt Washington, and the northern Presis, and also Mt Moosilauke. Katahdin has a few too. They were mostly built by the CCC but maintaining and enlarging them has become a local tradition. They come in handy on foggy days (especially in winter), which are frequent (ditto), but some of them are so big they're really just phallic substitutes.

http://www.summitpost.org/hard-to-get-l ... 5/c-172561

Of course, other parts of the world build oversize cairns too:
http://www.summitpost.org/cairns/225354

Are you limiting your comparison to the US only?

Torngat Mountains National park in northern Labrador on the east coast:



Closest you can get by road is 400 miles away so the approach might take a little time. Also home to the only glaciers in continental N. America east of the Rockies. Parks gets a whopping 15-20 visitors a year.


Mount Thor on Baffin Island also on the eastern seaboard of N. America:



This one's on an island and features the earth's largest vertical drop. Approach is also an issue unless you can afford the boat/plane/helicopter.

Needless to say the trail system in either of these east coast locations (and these are just 2 of many like this on the eastern seaboard of N. America) is pretty limited and facilities are non-existent.

Enkidu. Those places both look amazing. I did take Tucks up and Lion Head down. We were told that Huntington was really wet still from some rain the night before. The cairns on most of Tucks aren't overly huge. They are quite a few really big ones once you get up above treeline. There is a huge line of them going off to the south from once you hit the ridge that can be seen from the top of the mountain. They were also very prevalent going off down Lions head until you hit the trees. I can see how they would be nice to have if it gets very socked in with weather. Are they tall enough to reach above the snowdrifts in winter up there? It makes sense that they were built back during the CCC days. Also, if they are trying to minimize impact from all the hikers to a certain pathway it makes sense to try and make it as obvious as possible.

I'm was really hoping to get some responses like nartreb's first response. I'm sure people from one region are going to notice some things on mountains in different areas. I probably would have been better off just asking the question without my own thoughts first.

nartreb wrote:My impression of West coast mountains (California, Washington, Oregon):
- wow, these people really love building hairpins. The trails are un-steep, wide and smooth and great for running.

When you do the easy stuff. We have plenty of steep trails.

nartreb wrote:- The locals said this was a "bushwhack". I haven't seen a bush yet. There are trees here and there, but they don't even block the view.

The views get blocked all the time from the trees for me where I go. I guess you haven't been to the North Cascades "Bushwhack City".

>Are [the cairns] tall enough to reach above the snowdrifts in winter up there?

The trails mostly follow the tops of the ridges, which don't accumulate much snow; the wind scrapes it off (and dumps it in the ravines). (In winter, the Tuckerman and Huntington hiking trails are closed and the Lion's Head trail is re-routed. Tuck ravine is used for skiing, and Huntington for ice climbing, avvy conditions permitting.)

This is near Boott Spur, on the south rim of Tuckerman ravine:
http://www.davidalbeck.com/photos/2012/ ... e/i041.jpg
The rocks poking through the snow in the foreground are probably only about a foot high.

And a few minutes later, visibility down to one-and-a-half cairn's-distance:
http://www.davidalbeck.com/photos/2012/ ... e/i044.jpg

I've hiked/climbed in the Sierra, Colorado and New Mexico Rockies, North Cascades, Mexico, Whites and the Swiss Alps. Every environment is different: weather, flora, fauna and culture.

My first "east coast" peak was Mount Madison. I was struck by the dense forests and steep, rocky trails. The next day I hiked Mount Washington via Tuckerman Ravine. I got an early start and was happy to see the giant cairns at the top of the ravine. At one point, the fog was so thick that I thought I lost the trail until I was almost hit by a car and realized I was at the back of the curb at the top of the road.

My general impressions of east vs. west:
1. East trails are people trails: steep, rocky, and direct. West trails are generally longer, more gradual and maintained for stock.
2. East forests are much denser due to the wetter climate and the west is a desert. I recall descending Madison and being struck by how green everything was.
3. East trails are generally better signed with directions and mileages than west trails, with the exception of sections of the PCT and HST I've hiked.

I've luckily never bushwacked in the east but have had more than my fair share of time in willows, manzanita, and snowbush.