Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-25-2018, 06:53 PM   #1
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,018
Boreas Ponds News

Announced early today, the APA recommends “Alternative 2B” for the Boreas Ponds Tract.
Didn’t Alternative 2B receive the least amount of public support during the public comment period?

https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 07:29 PM   #2
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
I'm actually not surprised at all they would favor that one.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 08:18 PM   #3
dundee
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,500
I don't follow. It sounds like the road will be kept open for public use?
dundee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 08:27 PM   #4
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Road will be open to public use, and motor vehicles, as I understand per WF designation.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 08:30 PM   #5
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
I don't follow. It sounds like the road will be kept open for public use?
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
Road will be open to public use, and motor vehicles, as I understand per WF designation.
That is certainly a possibility but will depend on the NYSDEC Unit Management Plan (UMP), which is still yet to be determined. Also, our Governor first needs to approve the APA recommendation.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 08:34 PM   #6
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Possibilities aside, I'm going with past history. There is no way they'd designate that area WF 1/8 mile north of the road unless they were going to keep the road open.

They mention the road from LaBier Dam to Boreas Dam will be for admin use only so they can maintain the upper dam.

I'm pretty sure you are going to be able to drive to LaBier Flow dam.

Cuomo will approve it. It's what all the towns want.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 08:58 PM   #7
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,018
For anyone interested & available, there are plans for another silent protest at the APA meeting in Ray Brook on February 1 & 2...9AM-5PM (when the APA will talk about this decision).
The address is 1133 NYS Route 86, Ray Brook, NY 12977
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 09:01 PM   #8
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
For anyone interested & available, there are plans for another silent protest at the APA meeting in Ray Brook on February 1 & 2...9AM-5PM (when the APA will talk about this decision).
The address is 1133 NYS Route 86, Ray Brook, NY 12977
Can't make that, but good luck.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 09:02 PM   #9
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
... It's what all the towns want.
If I recall correctly, many representatives of nearby towns favored Alternative 1, not 2B.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 09:43 PM   #10
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
If I recall correctly, many representatives of nearby towns favored Alternative 1, not 2B.
Fair enough. I'm sure they also wanted motor boats allowed and a casino. But they really wanted that road open to motor vehicles and that's what they'll get.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2018, 09:45 PM   #11
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,018
Some more info... https://www.adirondackexplorer.org/o...s/boreas-ponds
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 03:25 PM   #12
Bounder45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 366
All of the land north of the Gulf Brook Rd. gets classified as wilderness while the road itself and the land south gets classified as wild forest.....seems like a good compromise to me.

If the plan goes through, I'm certainly going to enjoy the additional High Peaks access that it provides.
Bounder45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 03:34 PM   #13
dundee
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder45 View Post
All of the land north of the Gulf Brook Rd. gets classified as wilderness while the road itself and the land south gets classified as wild forest.....seems like a good compromise to me.

If the plan goes through, I'm certainly going to enjoy the additional High Peaks access that it provides.
Will you still say this in a few years when there's a litter problem, a party problem, tree cutting and a ruined fishery?

It's not just the politicians of local towns who are to blame, ADK (Working for Wilderness!")and ADK Council wanted this.

TNC is to blame as well for not making a wilderness classification part of the deal.
dundee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 03:46 PM   #14
Bounder45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
Will you still say this in a few years when there's a litter problem, a party problem, tree cutting and a ruined fishery?
You're worried about problems that haven't even manifested themselves yet. There are plenty of other remote lakes with road access, and I've yet to see any of those problems.

By the way, the DEC was going to have to manage the fish in Boreas, regardless of the road access...so I don't know what you meant by "ruined fishery."

Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
It's not just the politicians of local towns who are to blame, ADK and ADK Council wanted this.

TNC is to blame as well for not making a wilderness classification part of the deal.
The politicians of local towns were representing their citizens. Most of the locals I know up there want balanced access plans. The people who advocate for all newly-acquired land to be classified as 100% wilderness tend to be non-residents or seasonal residents.

TNC is a not-for-profit organization that acquires public land on behalf of the general public, not just for people who vote and think a certain way.

Blame whoever you want. Just don't kid yourself into thinking that everyone is disappointed with this proposal.
Bounder45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 04:42 PM   #15
dundee
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,500
I guess I poke around more than you do. I see these problems all the time, even when there is no road access.

Ruined fishery: bass, pike, perch, goldfish, carp etc., all released into the lake.

These things will happen.

I know all about TNC and motorless is what they do.

I also know plenty of residents who want Wilderness.
dundee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 05:11 PM   #16
Trail Boss
Member
 
Trail Boss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder45 View Post
All of the land north of the Gulf Brook Rd. gets classified as wilderness while the road itself and the land south gets classified as wild forest.....seems like a good compromise to me.
100% in agreement. Like all compromises, it's 'not all good but not all bad either'. Just over 50% of the land becomes Wilderness and it encompasses all the water frontage and adjoins the High Peaks Wilderness Area. That's a win for preserving small-W wilderness for the enjoyment of future generations.

2B designates just under 50% of the land to become Wild Forest (almost 10K acres). Plenty of rolling country to construct a challenging network of single-track trails. From what I understand, that's vastly more interesting to mountain-bikers than flat logging roads. A win for them too (if such a network is ever constructed).

I concur with Dundee that being able to drive to a remote location sometimes attracts people who, to put it politely, aren't always aware of their impact. I've witnessed some dumb-a$$ behavior along Meadows Lane and other car-accessible areas. However, I've also seen $hit-heel stuff from "fellow" hikers so no one has a monopoly on destructive behavior. Let's see how an accessible Gulf Brook Road plays out before assuming the worst.
__________________
Looking for views!
Trail Boss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 05:22 PM   #17
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trail Boss View Post
2B designates just under 50% of the land to become Wild Forest (almost 10K acres). Plenty of rolling country to construct a challenging network of single-track trails. From what I understand, that's vastly more interesting to mountain-bikers than flat logging roads. A win for them too (if such a network is ever constructed).
This is true, but when has the state showed any kind of initiative toward bikers (or skiers for that matter)?

BETA is largely run by volunteers and getting something like that going in a remote area where not many people live is pretty whimsical. Mountain biking trail networks are either professionally built or hand built and maintained by community. If NY doesn't put the budget forward to have trails professionally built, which I can't see ever happening, and there is no mountain bike community to support trail building, then how will it ever happen?

I'm not trying to be a stinker, but I'm an avid mountain biker and I see how things happen. The Adirondacks have the potential to be some of the best mountain biking in the Northeast (I mean look as Pisgah, it's nothing special but it has community) but no one wants to actually do the work and the state doesn't really want the trails to be built, even in WF units where crappy old muddy lowland logging roads and snowmobile trails dominate. Mountain bikers can and would build dry, sustainable trails with little impact to the forest. I've seen it all over.

Last edited by montcalm; 01-26-2018 at 05:32 PM..
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 05:25 PM   #18
Dave Bourque
Member
 
Dave Bourque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 24
A map can be found here;
https://apa.ny.gov/Mailing/2018/02/S...ernative2B.pdf
Dave Bourque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 05:55 PM   #19
Trail Boss
Member
 
Trail Boss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 883
@Montcalm

I fumbled in presenting my point which was that 2B offers the *potential* for other activities, like mountain-biking. From a mountain-bikers perspective, 2B provides room for hope compared to zoning the entire tract Wilderness. However, based on your description of the status quo, I guess 2B dangles a carrot that the MTB crowd may never be able to reach.
__________________
Looking for views!
Trail Boss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2018, 06:17 PM   #20
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 906
Didn't mean to single you out TB, just expressing a frustration.

I feel like WF waters down our "Great NY Wilderness" quite a lot. Designating a whole area WF to keep one road open is silly IMO, and little really ever comes from it unless you are a snowmobiler or hunter. For everyone else who's interested in recreation it often makes matters worse. Skiers are run off by snowmobiles. Bikes are relegated to muddy, terribly built snowmobile trails whose warm month functions have never been thought through. Waters are open to motor boats.

It's become a giant sham. It's not wilderness at all. It's a lot of noise and seasonal motorized activity. Or a large portion of land that is relatively wasted to save a legacy feature i.e. a dam, a road, a building, whatever...
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.