Author Archives: sdemas@carleton.edu

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. 

How Huts Protect the Environment

By Sam Demas, www.hut2hut.info

Huts are highly effective in protecting the earth from the growing human impacts of overnight stays in the backcountry.  Traditionally, backpackers hold the cherished notion that by dispersed camping or using traditional campsites they tread lightly on the land and leave no trace. In contrast, the immediate reaction of many backpackers to the idea of huts is that buildings in the backcountry are a violation of the spirit of the wild, and people who use them are somehow “cheating” by not roughing it in tents.  It’s not that simple.  A recent recreation ecology study shows that huts are the most effective way of minimizing human impacts of overnight stays in the backcountry.  In addition, huts can help to create good environmental citizens by both expanding access to multi-day treks, and serving as infrastructure for a wide variety of education, conservation and recreation programs. How huts protect the environment:

LOWEST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR OVERNIGHT STAYS IN BACKCOUNTRY

Assiniboine Hut
One of the huts at Assiniboine Provincial Park, Canada (Photo by Jeff Marion)

A recent study conducted by Dr. Jeffrey Marion finally confirms empirically the common wisdom about huts: they are designed and operated to absorb human impacts and are thus highly effective in protecting the earth from overnight stays in the wild.  The data show that on a per capita basis hut sites show far less vegetation loss, exposed soil and social trails than backcountry lodges, traditional campsites and campsites with developed tent pads. Dr. Marion attributes the findings to “the spatial concentration and containment of visitor activity to the huts, decks, dining facility, and formal trails provided by the hut facilities.” In the September 2021 WTN Trails Talk Dr. Marion presented his results showing that huts are an exemplary way of minimizing human impacts of overnight stays in the backcountry. 

Hardened tent pad campsite Assiniboine Provincial Park (Photo by Jeff Marion)

CAREFUL SITING, CONSTRUCTION, DESIGN AND MATERIALS

Rather than each person sleeping in a non-recyclable, plastic tent that will slowly decay for generations in a landfill, trekkers can stay overnight in a purpose-built structure designed to minimize human impacts in both the short and long term. Site analysis is formalized in the US through an environmental impact statement, and the design, materials, and construction of huts are subject to local health, safety and environmental regulations.  The siting of huts is based on careful ecological analysis, suitability for human waste handling systems, ecological analysis (e.g. potential impacts on vegetation and wildlife habitat), access to potable water and many other factors.  Green materials are used along with backcountry construction techniques to minimize environmental disruption.  And huts include hardened surfaces absorbing human traffic around the hut, discouraging social trails, and decks for people to sit on. 

Yurts are durable, portable and inexpensive buildings for backcountry huts. American Prairie Reserve.

Rather than each person sleeping in a non-recyclable, plastic tent that will slowly decay for generations in a landfill, trekkers can stay overnight in a purpose-built structure designed to minimize human impacts in both the short and long term. Site analysis is formalized in the US through an environmental impact statement, and the design, materials, and construction of huts are subject to local health, safety and environmental regulations.  The siting of huts is based on careful ecological analysis, suitability for human waste handling systems, ecological analysis (e.g. potential impacts on vegetation and wildlife habitat), access to potable water and many other factors.  Green materials are used along with backcountry construction techniques to minimize environmental disruption.  And huts include hardened surfaces absorbing human traffic around the hut, discouraging social trails, and decks for people to sit on. 

BEST PRACTICES  

Nelson Lakes NZ
Many types of human waste disposal systems are used; all require some maintenance

The hut community has been working on green operational practices for years and consensus is emerging about best practices.  For example, in addition to practices for siting, design, construction and materials, the newly formed United States Hut Alliance (USHA) is working on a set of best practices (e.g. for potable water, human waste and gray water management, bedding, kitchen and cooking design, working with local communities, staffing, etc), and a statement of environmental values to guide hut operations.  By sharing their collective experience, hut operators strive to ensure they are using optimal practices for protecting the environment.  

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, OUTDOOR SKILLS, AND THERAPY

Logbook entry Walking Girls
Logbook entry for Walking Girls in Science hut trip – Tenth Mountain Division Huts.

Huts, located in wild and beautiful settings, are ideal sites for educational and therapeutic programs centered around nature and the environment.  In 2018 a survey of U.S. hut operators revealed that 17%,(nearly 20,000) of the 115,000 annual hut visitors participated in some kind of guided activity, as described here.  Outdoor clubs, schools, military and veterans organizations, church and youth groups and corporations find that huts are conducive to environments for workshops, classes, and training systems.  Some hut systems have naturalists on staff offering daily nature walks and Junior Naturalist Programs.  Hut talks and interpretive materials cover natural history; cultural, military and native American history; mining and forestry; and green technology used in the huts.   Hut workshops focus on teaching outdoor skills (e.g. map and compass, wilderness first aid, avalanche safety), photography, writing, geology, natural history, etc. And some huts are used for wilderness therapy (e.g. recovery from PTSD), philosophical discussions, physical challenges and training, and/or career advice for veterans and active-duty service members. 

EXPANDING ACCESS TO THE BENEFITS OF MULTI-DAY TREKS AND SIMPLE LIVING 

Multi-day pilgrimages in the wild are a balm for the human spirit.  With 80% of humanity living in cities and suburbs, many folks simply do not have (and cannot afford) the equipment and do not have the skills to backpack.  But they too yearn for the psychological benefits of multi-day treks in nature, and having a cozy place to sleep at the end of each day.  Hut-to-hut trekking provides a more diverse range of people with the opportunity to escape from screens and from their day-to-day lives, establishing simpler routines; to enjoy the benefits of sustained exercise, offering the potential to retrain neural networks; and to experience a sense of adventure and accomplishment.  

Huts are hygge: cozy structures for convivial comfort and community building.  (Photo by Marco Volken)” 

Sharing living quarters harmoniously with others, including strangers, calls on our best behavior, requires common courtesy and good citizenship, and can inspire us to leave the hut (and the earth!) better than we found it.  Multiple days and nights of simple living, vigorous exercise, immersion in nature, and mingling with people across class, race and political divides can engender a sense of renewal.  And trekkers can take the lessons learned back home.  They will be inclined to conduct their lives with greater simplicity, and, we hope, to become citizens more connected to nature and more inclined to advocate/vote for measures to protect nature. 

HANDS-ON CONSERVATION WORK

Huts can serve as base camps for trail maintenance, habitat restoration, and citizen science projects.  I envision portable huts as infrastructure shelter for a global army mobilized to preserve biodiversity and ensure human survival.  Many such encampments will be temporary, relocated to new work sites in response to overuse and the changing effects of climate change. These hands-on volunteer work experiences will provide urban dwellers with respite from city life, and will connect people dedicated to the restoration and preservation of the earth. Finally, I predict that some hut systems will begin to require hands-on conservation work as part of the price of using huts in some areas. 

CONCLUSION

Land managers charged with protecting wild lands AND expanding access to nature will increasingly use huts as tools in their environmental stewardship kits.  As more and more trekkers seek overnight stays in wildlands, huts will be used to protect nature from the heavy footprint of humankind.  Simple, affordable huts are exemplary in minimizing the impacts of overnight stays, and they provide infrastructure for creative programming that develops good environmental citizens. Go forth and experiment with huts on your frequently used trails!

U.S. Hut Alliance: a new community of practice

A U.S. Hut Alliance is now being born! Over a year ago I invited a group of U.S. hut professionals to join a zoom call to introduce them to Mick Abbott, a creative landscape architect, tramper and hut nut. The group enjoyed talking together and decided to continue meeting via zoom. As folks got to know each other the conversation quickly evolved into planning to form a U.S. Hut Alliance. Following is a quick update on progress so far. Once the group has laid the foundation for a national huts organization we will reach out to recruit members and broaden the conversation to include more hut folks.

The initial steering committee and officers currently working to establish the organization includes:

This steering committee conducted a survey of all US hut owners to identify the most important services a U.S. Hut Alliance could provide. The topics identified by respondents, in order of priority were:

  • Operations forums
  • Best practices
  • Studying economic impacts of huts
  • Lobbying and acting as the public voice of huts
  • Education and outreach
  • Job board
  • Getting together in person to discuss collaborations
  • Joint services such as marketing, advertising, insurance policies, etc.
  • Reservations platform(s)
  • Linkage with international hut organizations

The overall purposes of the emerging U.S. Hut Alliance are to connect hut operators, support them on working on common interests, allow them to speak with one voice on key issues, and provide useful information and services. Based on these results and discussions in our monthly zoom conversations, the steering committee is currently working on:

  • Bylaws (based on Colorado Alliance of Huts and Yurts);
  • Established a Facebook page for members only;
  • Mission, vision, and values statements;
  • A strategic plan;
  • Secure fiscal sponsorship (Summit Institute, Utah);
  • Beginning a process for identifying and sharing best practices;
  • Establish membership procedures and mechanisms for paying and playing; and
  • Developing a web site to include the above (and more).

We hope to complete this scope of work in the coming months and be ready to expand the conversation. There will be many more issues to discuss over time as the organization grows, but we are confident we will be up and running in the year ahead. The timing is perfect as huts continue to increase in popularity and are attracting more attention from the outdoor recreation community, educators, conservationists and other land managers. Stay tuned!

Trail towns: Deciding on Trails by Amy Camp

Book review by Sam Demas

Photos by Amy Camp

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

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

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

Deciding on trails

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

7 practices of healthy trail communities

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

1. Adopt a shared vision

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

2. Physically connect trail to town

Trail town signs

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

3. Extend an invitation to your trail town

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

4. Cultivate a trail culture

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

5. Know your trail towns market

Equestrian trails

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

6. Share your trail towns story

Bike shops in  town

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

7. Commit to quality trails

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


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

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

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

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

Environmental impact of huts: finally a scientific study!

Finally! A scientific study comparing the environmental impact of huts with that of overnight stays in campsites and lodges. This is an early peek at the results of what seems to be the first ever recreational ecology study of huts. The data will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, but the authors kindly gave me permission to announce the general thrust of his findings in advance. Thank you Dr. Marion and Johanna Arredondo!

Until now there has been no definitive research either proving or disproving the common wisdom: that huts concentrate use, thereby reducing the impact of backcountry travelers on the places they visit. When I have advocated for such research in wide-ranging discussions with hut folks, many shrugged, suggesting there was no need to study the obvious. But Jeff Marion of Virginia Tech and US Geological Survey immediately agreed that its worth studying.

I’m delighted to report that Dr. Jeffery Marion, a leading recreation ecologist an author of Leave No Trace in the Outdoors, is the first scientist in the U.S. (and perhaps in the world) to conduct research on the environmental impact of huts. His 2019–2020 investigation confirms that well-designed, properly sited huts are highly effective environmental stewardship tools when compared with several forms of camping and lodging options.

Dr. Marion and doctoral student Johanna Arredondo found Mount Assiniboine Provincial Park and Banff National Park in Canada to be ideal sites for their study. Assiniboine is a roadless backcountry park offering rustic one-room huts, a lodge with associated cabins, and campsites. Banff National Park is a neighboring park with traditional back-packing campsites and a new type of campsite featuring constructed, well-defined tent pads. Accurate usage data is available for both parks and each form of overnight accommodation, allowing Dr. Marion’s team to analyze environmental impacts on a per capita basis over time.

Dr. Marion summarized the results for us in personal correspondence: To gauge adverse visitor impact, the researchers evaluated the total area of vegetation and soils trampled by visitors at each overnight site, measuring indicators such as area of intensive trampling, vegetation loss, and exposed soil. With the huts, Dr. Marion and his team found “exceptionally little trampling-related impact beyond their ‘design foot-print’ which was reasonable and small.” As he explained, “We saw exceptionally few informal ‘visitor-created’ trails or trampled spots—most visitors were using the formal trails provided.” By contrast, both the traditional and constructed tent-pad campsites showed greater signs of human impact, larger affected areas, and more vegetation loss and exposed soil. A much larger area was affected around the lodge complex, including its cabins, than around the huts. The data demonstrates that huts are remarkably effective in minimizing the extent of visitor impacts (the design footprint and additional visitor use impact).

Table 1: Sites studied

Site NameSite TypeCapacityPark
Howard Douglas Lake CampgroundCampsites w/tent pads5 sitesBanff NP
Og Lake CampgroundCampsites w/tent pads10 sitesMt. Assiniboine PP
Magog Lake CampgroundCampsites w/tent pads40 sitesMt. Assiniboine PP
Assiniboine LodgeLodge/Cabins7 cabinsMt. Assiniboine PP
Naiset HutsHuts5 cabinsMt. Assiniboine PP
Marvel Lake CampgroundTraditional campsites9 sitesBanff NP
McBride’s CampgroundTraditional campsites10 sitesBanff NP
Table 2 (below): Summary of areal extent of visitor impact (total area of vegetation and soils trampled); note final column shows square foot of trampled area per person
Totals for all overnight site types
LocationNVisitors (#)Sum (ft2)ft2 per siteft2 per person
McBride Camp107765,2425246.76
Marvel Lake91,4475,5576173.84
Totals (traditional)192,22310,7995684.86
Howard Douglas Lake96813,6644075.38
Og Lake101,0685,5325535.18
Magog Lake404,27121,0295264.92
Totals (with tentpads)596,02030,2255125.02
Lodge163,96824,9531,5606.29
Naiset Huts53,9863,3746750.85

Dr. Marion attributes the findings to “the spatial concentration and containment of visitor activity to the huts, decks, dining facility, and formal trails provided by the hut facilities.” In evaluating the study findings, he went on to proclaim, “As a recreation ecologist I have essentially no comments or suggestions for further improvement of their hut operations (this is exceedingly rare!).”

The final published report will contain more detailed discussion of the findings. I’ll write a notice on this website when the full study with methodology and data is published in a scientific journal. Meanwhile, we now have confirmation of the common wisdom that huts do indeed do what they are designed for: reducing human impacts of spending nights in the backcountry!

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.

Unique Cabin Designs That Can Make A Great Getaway

by Mattea Jacobs

[Editors note: While these structures are not part of hut systems, they may offer inspiration for hut folks. See also similar pieces on unique cabin designs, such as Danish cabin designs and pre-fab huts by Backcountry Hut Company]

Photo by Ryan Stone on Unsplash

Anyone, who enjoys the feeling of staying in a cozy cabin somewhere in an isolated area close to nature, is most certainly a nature lover and understands the importance of sustainability. So for those who follow this concept, here is a question. What is better than retreating to a small remote cabin in the heart of nature? That’s right, an eco-friendly cabin! Unique cabin designs.

In general, most cabins are designed to be smaller than the average house, which already gives them a green factor. Then there are those cabins that are tiny but specially built to keep the carbon footprint in check. These small and sustainable retreats are not only excellent for a great getaway, but they are designed to be environmentally conscious as well.

Sustainable construction has become more popular over the years, and therefore finding an eco-friendly cabin to rent in your surrounding area is less challenging nowadays. So, if you find yourself escaping to the cabin lifestyle often, maybe it is time to consider investing in a little sustainable cabin in your favorite nature spot. Not only is it a good investment, but it spares you from packing and unpacking a suitcase every time you want to go on a getaway.

If you want to get away from city life and embrace a minimalist lifestyle, whether it’s for the long run or just a short trip, here are some fascinating eco-friendly cabin designs to get you inspired.

The Wave Eco Cabin Design by Echo Living

https://www.echoliving.co.uk/wave-cabin

You can choose several portable micro cabins designs from Robin Falck if you have ever dreamed of building a cabin for yourself. The micro cabin design from Robin Falck is incredibly unique as it is designed to maximize natural light and livable space within a hyper compact footprint.

The plan for this cabin can be bought for €260.00 online. The result of such a cabin will provide you with a modest living space, a micro-kitchen and an elevated sleeping loft that fits a full-size bed. It also includes a sizable deck where you can spend some time in nature.

Natural light can get in due to the off-grid primary window’s size and angle, and if you make use of light-untreated wood, it will even further illuminate the cabin.

Just like the original Falck cabin, one can also choose to use recycled materials or locally purchased materials to reduce the environmental impact.

Portable Micro Cabins from Robin Falck

http://robinflack.com/

You can choose several portable micro cabins designs from Robin Falck if you have ever dreamed of building a cabin for yourself. The micro cabin design from Robin Falck is incredibly unique as it is designed to maximize natural light and livable space within a hyper compact footprint.

The plan for this cabin can be bought for €260.00 online. The result of such a cabin will provide you with a modest living space, a micro-kitchen and an elevated sleeping loft that fits a full-size bed. It also includes a sizable deck where you can spend some time in nature.

Natural light can get in due to the off-grid primary window’s size and angle, and if you make use of light-untreated wood, it will even further illuminate the cabin.

Just like the original Falck cabin, one can also choose to use recycled materials or locally purchased materials to reduce the environmental impact.

Tiny Cabin Space from Getaway

https://getaway.house/booking

If you want a break from work and the city life in the USA, then you have the opportunity to book a tiny cabin space online that can be moved to a secret location in a selected area of your choice. These particular cabins are the Millennial Housing Lab’s innovation, Getaway, that is bringing tiny houses to the masses.

This startup designs small accommodations that emphasize living simply, eco-conscious, and self-sufficiency while benefiting from financial security. The tiny cabins are rustic and mobile and can easily be categorized under the Tiny House Movement.

Cabins like these are low in cost, reduce environmental impact, and provide a healthier lifestyle, making them an excellent option for either getting out of the city for a short break or the long run.

This German Robin’s Nest Hotel

https://www.robins-nest.de/

Retreating to a cabin up in the mountains is great, but imagine staying in a cabin up in the trees in a forest. This is precisely the reality one can experience when visiting Robin’s Nest Hotel. This getaway in Hesse, Germany, offers a unique experience away from civilization.

The Robins Nest Hotel consists of three cabins that are each designed uniquely. One consists of a green, geometrical-orb that suspends like an ornament from the tree branches, while another is in the form of a square hut situated on poles with a rope bridge access. The third cabin is wrapped around a tree trunk and contains a leafy plant that sprouts up through its center.

These dwellings provide a nest-like feel and contain small, peaceful sleeping pods with many different aspects and fascinating interior design.

Treehouse cabins can undoubtedly bring out the child in anyone and, therefore, is an exciting experience that one has to try. However, treehouse cabins have been around for a while, and if you are lucky, you might find a treehouse getaway cabin in an area near you. Cabins like these are unique and can even become a DIY project if you are up for a challenge.

About Mattea Jacobs

Mattea Jacobs is a freelance writer at Resume Edge who mostly writes about interior and exterior home design and environmentally-friendly ways to improve homes. She is also a green activist and a mother of two beautiful sons. You can reach her on Facebook and Instagram

Book Review: Walks of a Lifetime in America’s National Parks

Review by Sam Demas, hut2hut.info

By Robert and Martha Manning, 349 pages, Falcon Press, 2020

Published by Falcon Press (2020), this book presents a selection of premier walks in national parks. The first two books in the Robert and Martha Manning’s Walks of a Lifetime series  –Walking Distance: Extraordinary Hikes for Ordinary Peopleand Walks of a Lifetime: Extraordinary Hikes from Around the World– each describe 30 fabulous multi-day hikes around the world.  This third guidebook focuses primarily on extraordinary day hikes in America’s most exceptional places: our 62 National Parks.  These landscapes — the crown jewels among the 419 units of the US National Park Service — are held in trust for the nation, and people are visiting them in record numbers.  The Mannings recommend a selection of their own favorite walks in each national park.  As is their hallmark, this invitation to walk is imbued with enthusiasm for the unique and powerful perspective that walking provides, expert advice, and a deeply informed and engaging outlook on what you are actually seeing when you walk these landscapes. 

Martha and Bob Manning on trail

Uniquely qualified for this ambitious undertaking, Bob and Martha have been hiking together and with family and friends for many years; they take pride in providing first-hand knowledge, having personally walked all the walks described in their books.  Martha is a fiber artist and an articulate advocate for walking.  Bob is retired from a career as a leading academic expert on the history, philosophy and management of national parks.  Over the years they have visited, and lived and worked in, many national parks.  In addition to knowing the trails, they know park personnel, issues and challenges, politics and policies, and history and natural history.  In presenting this carefully curated selection of walks these two indefatigable walkers have painted a rich and fascinating picture of the wonders of America’s National Parks. 

As you plan a national parks trip — armchair and/or real-life – you can first consult the book’s U.S. map and peruse the table of contents to concentrate on specific regions and parks, and then check out the Appendix Table of Trails.  The heart of the book is in the 62 chapters, one for each park, each of which begins with a beautiful full-page photograph and a lucid explanation of the geological, natural history and historical, cultural and other factors and features that caused these lands to rise to the top of the list in creating “America’s best idea”. 

Each chapter is illustrated with 6-8 color photographs, nearly all by the authors, and spotlights a set of day hikes recommended to give the visitor a vibrant sense of the park as a whole.  In these trail descriptions, rather than rehashing detailed turn-by-turn navigation and trail maps (this essential information is already easily available online, on apps, in park brochures and websites, etc.), they briefly describe the level of challenge and terrain, suggest choices where options exist to shorten or lengthen the walk, recommend scenic views, and point out features to be alert for along the way. 

The audience for this book ranges from folks looking for walks in national parks, ranging from short walks near the visitor center/trailhead, to more challenging half or full day treks into the interior of a park.  While a few classic multi-day walks are mentioned, these are not the focus of the book.  Of the 223 trails listed in the Table of Trails, 82 are 3 miles or less in length, and a dozen are 12 miles or more. 

Of course, some of the 62 parks do not really have trails for significant day hikes, and these chapters are short.  These include: water-based parks such as Biscayne National Park, Congaree NP, Voyageurs NP, and Virgin Islands NP;  some very small parks such as Hot Springs NP; and immense parks that are hard to reach and suitable primarily for backpacking and other multi-day adventures, such as Wrangell-St. Elias NP and Lake Clark NP in Alaska. 

The brief Logistics section of each chapter provides practical information on seasons in which to visit, crowds, lodging options, campgrounds, visitor centers, modes of travel and opportunities for backpacking.  And finally, each chapter ends with “The Last Word”.  This is a brief sendoff — or really an invitation — highlights reasons or ways you should visit this park, what really stands out to the authors, or some unique or significant policy, ecological, or conservation aspect of the park.  For example, the entry on Yellowstone NP outlines the vision and promise of landscape scale conservation, a concept animating park management and a range of conservation partnerships. 

Finally, the Mannings have distilled from their years of experience walking our national parks a set of ten principles to use in planning a visit.  These outline how to plan and prepare, where to stay, what to bring, how to avoid crowds, and how to minimize your ecological impact and maximize your enjoyment and contributions to these parks. 

Perusing this book is a terrific way to discover lesser known and visited national parks, such as Pinnacles, Black Canyon, Capitol Reef, Great Basin, Lassen Volcanic, and Isle Royale, to name a few.  As the authors say in the introduction, it is a labor of love.  I’d say they have composed an elegant, inspiring, and intelligent love song to the idea and the reality of National Parks, and to some of the best hikes in the nation.  The Mannings “walk the walk” and they sure can “talk the talk”, with pleasurable prose that enlivens the experience of walking. 

Of the dozens of books about NP published around its 2016 Centennial, this one stands out for its effectiveness in telling the story of each national park in a way that prepares the reader for the best way to visit it: walking the trails.  This guidebook is recommended for hikers interested in visiting the nation’s iconic landscapes, and should certainly be in public and academic libraries serving folks who love the outdoors.