Page 2 of 2

Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 02 2011 8:42 am
by azbackpackr
I recently returned to Eagar for a few days, and hiked South Fork. I have to say, I still like the White Mountains better, just in general, for hiking and mountain biking, than I do the Flagstaff/Sedona area. It's true they are not super steep or spectacular, but they are far wilder. Here is a list of my reasons:

1. Surface water. The White Mountains, especially the Springerville and Alpine Districts of the forest, have a lot more surface water, year-round creeks, and lakes. There are marshes, three small rivers and their forks, (Black, Blue, Little Colorado) beaver dams, water birds, etc.
2. Crowds: There generally aren't any, except on Mt. Baldy. Even Baldy isn't all that crowded if you go up the East trail. On most other trails you can often be the only one hiking on any particular day. Escudilla used to get crowded, too, before it burned to a crisp. Now it's closed for awhile.
3. Views: The views from the tops of mountains do not include ostentatious McMansions (such as Sedona views would have) or cities or large towns. Mostly the views are wild--mountain range upon mountain range for as far as you can see.
4. Off-trail hiking: It's easy to hike off-trail in the White Mountains, and with a set of good maps you could probably backpack all the way to the Gila Wilderness without seeing a soul, and have plenty of water sources along the way.
5. Wildlife: It kind of goes without saying. In the White Mountains it is commonplace to see large herds of elk, small herds of deer or pronghorn, bald eagles, osprey, beavers, muskrats, etc. Less common but frequently seen are bears, mountain lions, bobcats, foxes, raccoons. I have lived and hiked in Flag for a year and have seen no pronghorn, and only a few elk and deer, and no bears or other animals.
6. Permits: What's a permit?
7. Highway driving: Not much traffic.
8. Dirt road driving: Not much traffic.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 04 2011 11:35 am
by azbackpackr
Oh, but they are a lot higher than Phoenix. That's all that matters.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 9:27 am
by Jim
Liz, you get bent out of shape about people calling that area northern Arizona, and by your logic the northern Arizona name fits for the White Mountains, since Eager is north of south and north of central, and certainly north of Phoenix (which is the only part of the state who's opinion matters, right?).

It is no where near alpine. Most people throw alpine around inappropriately all the time and seem to have no concept of the meaning of the word. True alpine is the area above treeline, not just being higher than Phoenix or being covered in mixed conifer forest.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 9:33 am
by hippiepunkpirate
Jim_H wrote:It is no where near alpine. Most people throw alpine around inappropriately all the time and seem to have no concept of the meaning of the word.
Such as Alpine, California along the I-8 outside of San Diego. I always laugh at their palm trees.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 9:39 am
by Jim
That is the specially developed -50 degree tolerant palm tree.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 1:41 pm
by azbackpackr
EagAr is south of the horizontal center line. Fold a map in half and you will see. That is, unless you factor in the Gadsden Purchase slanted-up part of the border. Which I don't. (I don't believe in the Gadsden Purchase. I think the line should have been straight, and then Arizona would not only have a seacoast, but California would have part of the Sierra San Pedro Martir, which would have been pretty cool. But that's off-topic.)

Anyway, my statement that it is higher than Phoenix was meant to be sarcastic. The Whites are mostly a high plateau, with a lot of bumps.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 4:08 pm
by big_load
azbackpackr wrote:Eagar is south of the horizontal center line
When people ask me where the White Mountains are, I say East Central AZ.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 4:23 pm
by Jim
I say, "which ones, the ones in California, Arizona, New Hampshire, or another one I haven't yet heard of?".

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 5:10 pm
by azbackpackr
Jim_H wrote:I say, "which ones, the ones in California, Arizona, New Hampshire, or another one I haven't yet heard of?".
I spent a few minutes googling it, but can't find any others. I suspect I'm not asking the right question.

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 9:54 pm
by hippiepunkpirate
azbackpackr wrote:I spent a few minutes googling it, but can't find any others. I suspect I'm not asking the right question.
I googled White Mountains and the New Hampshire ones were the first result

Re: Why I like White Mtns. hiking better than Flagstaff area

Posted: Dec 05 2011 10:32 pm
by Jim
Same here, but in Spanish, Sierra Blanca should be, "White Mountains". There are a few of those, too.