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

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > Hiking in the Adirondacks
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-01-2018, 02:53 PM   #21
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,668
Adequate safe parking is only one part of sustainable tourism. The other parts are adequate bathrooms, more rangers, full time trailhead educators, and redesigned and better maintained trails.

I have detailed all this here and in other places. (It's a straw man to pick one part of this and say "that won't work by itself.")

The people are continuing to come. The state is feverishly promoting the Adirondacks all over the eastern US. In Albany, one hand does not know what the other hand is doing.

A coordinated program is what would be in place if this situation were being managed professionally. It's apparent that that is not going to happen here in NY.

Based on the above, I argue that adequate safe parking is the highest priority. The other issues are not going to get someone killed by a car. Tourism is not very sustainable if the tourists get killed by cars. And that tragedy will happen sooner or later, if the state stays on the current reckless course.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 03:28 PM   #22
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 264
When they talk about alternative sites with equivalent views, I would suggest that they are saying there is only so much parking here, go somewhere else, the High Peaks , Giant Mt "Wilderness," etc, have reached their carrying capacity. But if you really want the "Disneyworld experience" of adequate bathrooms, more rangers, full time trailhead educators, and redesigned and better maintained trails, I am saying it is time to institute user fees to pay for all of it.

When Bob Bannister was first appointed to the Conservation Fund Advisory Council, he used to argue that if it is wilderness, there should be no trails.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 03:50 PM   #23
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,668
Lucky, I agree with a lot of this, but not all of it. Thanks for the opportunity to think about this.

The biggest problem is that this being incompetently "managed" by the state.

I agree that it would be nice for people to go to some other places. But that is not where the people are going. Competent managers recognize what the crowds are doing, and manage the resource for that.

The "carrying capacity" concept based purely on a "number of users" is a fallacy. The state of a trail is determined by several factors, including trail design, trail maintenance, number of users, and user education. To just pick one variable and say "this is cast in concrete" is incompetent.

The other places that state would send people are also poorly chosen. Review the DEC'S list posted at the trailheads and here:

https://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/9163.html

and you can see that these are all poorly chosen. The criteria that will get people to try these hikes are: a nearby trailhead; a medium sized or better hike to a great summit with views; and no "state created" parking problems.

Zero of these hikes satisfy this. The two hikes which do are Hurricane and Blueberry Mountain. But these are not on the list.

I certainly do not need any particular experience myself. (Most of my travel is bushwhacking. I almost never see another person, or park near another car). And the purpose of properly managing the trailheads is not to create "Disney" but to give the current visitor population what works for them, and to protect the resource. The idiocy happening right now at Giant is not accomplishing either of these goals. It's not a good argument to deride proper management practices by calling them "Disneyworld." And it's a fantasy, typical of arrogant government, to imagine that we can en masse change the current visitor population to something that it is not.

And I totally agree with Bob Bannister. I think there should be some areas where there are no trails, and further that no one is allowed into. (Only half jokingly, I have recommended Boreas for this classification.) One of the problems the state has created for itself is its insistence that trails, which by their nature are "permanent works of man" should look like an old 1940s definition of wilderness that says there are no "permanent works of man." They have created a contradiction for themselves, and you see the results every time you hike through a mud pit.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 04:15 PM   #24
ewthielking
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
When they talk about alternative sites with equivalent views, I would suggest that they are saying there is only so much parking here, go somewhere else, the High Peaks , Giant Mt "Wilderness," etc, have reached their carrying capacity. But if you really want the "Disneyworld experience" of adequate bathrooms, more rangers, full time trailhead educators, and redesigned and better maintained trails, I am saying it is time to institute user fees to pay for all of it.



When Bob Bannister was first appointed to the Conservation Fund Advisory Council, he used to argue that if it is wilderness, there should be no trails.


It hasn’t been ‘Wilderness’ since 1960. It’s a beautiful place for people to escape to. It has been that since 1900. Trying to make it into a place it isn’t, has annoyed the residents of the area, and sowed distrust.

Very few want ‘Disney’, but there is an easy to obtain middle ground which serves visitors. And honestly, residents of the park, generally want that (At least the residents of Hamilton, Essex & Clinton County, that I talk to).




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ewthielking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2018, 12:02 PM   #25
2505
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewthielking View Post
It hasn’t been ‘Wilderness’ since 1960. It’s a beautiful place for people to escape to. It has been that since 1900. Trying to make it into a place it isn’t, has annoyed the residents of the area, and sowed distrust.

Very few want ‘Disney’, but there is an easy to obtain middle ground which serves visitors. And honestly, residents of the park, generally want that (At least the residents of Hamilton, Essex & Clinton County, that I talk to).




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I doubt that adding safe parking will increase popularity. It will just make things safer before there is a tragedy. Popularity comes with promotion (as mentioned in thread).

Just like I don't shop on Black Friday or I go to the grocery store when I know the tourists are not there (I live in ski town in VT), I know to avoid certain places on the busy weekends, or get there when I know I can get a parking spot. But properly sized parking lots need to go in (or another system put in place) before someone is killed.
2505 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2018, 01:15 PM   #26
Hear the Footsteps
Member
 
Hear the Footsteps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2505 View Post
I doubt that adding safe parking will increase popularity. It will just make things safer before there is a tragedy. Popularity comes with promotion (as mentioned in thread).

Just like I don't shop on Black Friday or I go to the grocery store when I know the tourists are not there (I live in ski town in VT), I know to avoid certain places on the busy weekends, or get there when I know I can get a parking spot. But properly sized parking lots need to go in (or another system put in place) before someone is killed.
Either that or encourage people to go to other trails. I.e. more no parking signs and parking citations for violations. I'm not an advocate of that just sense it may come to that.
Hear the Footsteps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2018, 09:55 AM   #27
Eddie Fournier
Member
 
Eddie Fournier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15
AMR parking (and Roaring Brook) was full before 7:30 am on Saturday.

We got there too late (I blame the 1 hour wait at customs), so instead of going to Indian Head as we had planned, we went to Poke-o-Moonshine for a very relaxed and enjoyable hike.

Note that there was still space at the Ridge Trail trailhead for Giant.

Did not check out the Cascades area but curious how that went.
Eddie Fournier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2018, 12:18 PM   #28
Hear the Footsteps
Member
 
Hear the Footsteps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 147
I heard from another hiker that HPIC was filled up at 0700 Saturday. He had to change schedule and decided to climb Hurricane instead along with a lot of other people. Me included.

At Roaring Brook cars lined the road up the hill filling the pull-off for the falls view and the parking area rock climbers use.

Last edited by Hear the Footsteps; 10-09-2018 at 07:13 PM..
Hear the Footsteps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 03:24 PM   #29
saabrian
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 73
"A *few* extra spots"??

Last weekend, I went down 73. I saw a sign saying New: No Parking on Rte 73. In the half mile or so after that sign, I counted 26 cars parked on the side of the road. And that's only the side of the road the sign was on. More were on the other side.
__________________
Successful ascents: 77 (53 different)
Adirondack/Catskill fire tower challenge: 10/23
Completed: Chester Challenge
saabrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 04:04 PM   #30
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewthielking View Post
It hasn’t been ‘Wilderness’ since 1960. It’s a beautiful place for people to escape to. It has been that since 1900. Trying to make it into a place it isn’t, has annoyed the residents of the area, and sowed distrust.

Very few want ‘Disney’, but there is an easy to obtain middle ground which serves visitors. And honestly, residents of the park, generally want that (At least the residents of Hamilton, Essex & Clinton County, that I talk to).




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/100750.html

I'm pretty sure this was done since 1960.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 04:39 PM   #31
Schultzz
Low Impact Skidder
 
Schultzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 739
Anyone see this?
https://dailygazette.com/article/201...he-adirondacks
__________________
Never Argue With An Idiot. They Will Drag You Down To Their Level And Beat You With Experience.
Schultzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 05:09 PM   #32
Hear the Footsteps
Member
 
Hear the Footsteps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schultzz View Post
No. However these are all current topics.

On a related note the weekly poll by NY Now (a program out of PBS WMHT Albany-Schenectady-Troy) is on

"Do you think the state should significantly increase the number of forest rangers?"

Link to the poll is here: http://nynow.wmht.org/poll/

Don
Hear the Footsteps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 05:52 PM   #33
JohnnyVirgil
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schultzz View Post

Interesting read. Have you guys seen the brewery’s new promo postcard?

JohnnyVirgil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 06:51 PM   #34
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 264
The deposit on growlers is likely high enough to ensure that they get carried back out!
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 08:00 PM   #35
MTVhike
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Elizabethtown
Posts: 150
Did the Spread Eagle - Hopkins loop on Saturday. Parking at Roostercomb was virtually full at 8:45 (people were still driving in and trying to squeeze in). By the time I got back, cars were parked along 73 far south of the PA, which was still pretty full. While I was waiting for my companions (at about 9:00), an Essex Co. DOT person came by to survey the situation.
MTVhike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 11:13 PM   #36
Schultzz
Low Impact Skidder
 
Schultzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 739
Maybe the answer is issuing passes with specific dates on them to visit areas with high traffic. I know the DEC is trying to encourage people to visit other beautiful and challenging areas. After all it is 6 million acres. Or it might be shuttle service from Frontier Land, my favorite place to visit as a kid. When too many people visit a wilderness area at one time is it still a wilderness area?
__________________
Never Argue With An Idiot. They Will Drag You Down To Their Level And Beat You With Experience.
Schultzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2018, 01:03 PM   #37
Eddie Fournier
Member
 
Eddie Fournier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15
Quote:
DEC, ORDA exploring alternative parking options for Adirondack visitors
Officials say shuttle service from Mt. Van Hoevenberg to trailheads over Columbus Day weekend was "a tremendous success."
https://www.mynbc5.com/article/dec-o...itors/23847399

In the middle of the article:
Quote:
"Department of Corrections had inmates preparing for this," he said. "It was definitely a collaborative effort."
How so? Are they planning to use prisoners to scare people out of the high peaks?
Eddie Fournier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2018, 01:08 PM   #38
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 264
Didn't they already try that a couple of years ago in Danemora? How'd that work?
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2018, 01:40 PM   #39
Hear the Footsteps
Member
 
Hear the Footsteps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Fournier View Post
How so? Are they planning to use prisoners to scare people out of the high peaks?
Maybe an error. This wasn't mentioned in the video.
Hear the Footsteps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2018, 01:06 PM   #40
saabrian
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 73
The weekend after they decreed no parking, I passed an electronic New: No Parking on Route 73 sign on my way to a trail elsewhere. In the half mile immediately after the sign, I counted 26 cars parked on the side of the road. And that was only on the side of the road the sign was on. The ban will be meaningless without enforcement.
__________________
Successful ascents: 77 (53 different)
Adirondack/Catskill fire tower challenge: 10/23
Completed: Chester Challenge
saabrian 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 10:22 PM.


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.