Great Adirondack Trail Run....

[jeclose]

No, I am NOT promoting it - quite the opposite. This event, a "trail run" through the Giant Mt. Wilderness over the beautiful, serene North Trail to Giant, is being held on June 25th, and involves 50-60 runners. The event is sponsored by The Mountaineer, with sponsorship assistance from Patagonia, and benefits a local river organization.

For those of you who are on the Adirondack 46R listserve, you know the controversy that this event has sparked over the last several weeks. If you are not famililar with these events, you should know that DEC issued something called a "Temporary Revocable Permit" to the Mountaineer to hold this unprecedented event. A careful review of the Giant Mountain Unit Management Plan on my part, and others, reveals a plan that clearly and unequivocably states that group events of this type are incompatible with the concept of wilderness, and incompatible with the Giant Mountain Wilderness in particular. Nevertheless, DEC inexplicably issued this permit, condoning the event.

As has been stated on the listserve, this sends DEC down a very, very slippery slope. A precedent for this type of event was established three years ago with the "Wakely Dam Ultra", a trail run through the most pristine part of the Northville Placid Trail. Having established that precedent, DEC now finds itself hamstrung from denying others permits for similar activities.

There is a lot more that can be said about this event and the arguments against it - but I will keep this short, and ask that you contact me outside this forum if you want more detailed information, including a copy of a letter that I sent to the DEC commissioner, and a radio interview that I did last week on WNBZ radio in Saranac Lake. If you feel that sanctiioning group events of this nature are incompatible with the wilderness, please make your opinion known to the DEC commissioner. Her name is Denise Sheehan, and her email address is: dmsheeha@gw.dec.state.ny.us

You can also write to her at:

Denise Sheehan
Acting Commissioner
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
625 Broadway
Albany, N.Y. 12233-1010

It's very, very important that you weigh in personally on this.

[Kevin]

Done!

Trail running events in the Giant Mt Wilderness

I cannot fathom how the DEC can condone a “trail running” event through such fragile wilderness. Shame on you AND the Mountaineer for promoting such a thing.

[BarbOrdell]

Of course we all know that opinions are like certain body parts... everyone has one. Fortunately, most of us keep them to themselves unless they're really really sore. It's obvious from this debate that some people need more fiber in their diet. But even if you think you're healthy, irritants can sneak in and mess you up. So a little preventive medicine is in order.

Group trail runs, even through wilderness areas is consistent with the Master Plan as well as the draft UMP for Giant Mt. Wilderness. Running is a primitive and unconfined recreational activity and is "encouraged" by the MP. Groups of 12 or less runners is a conforming activity even under the stringent terms of the draft UMP. Groups of 13 or more runners would require a TRP once the draft UMP is set into law. The DEC has the authority to approve this activity based on the physical, biological and and social capacity of the wilderness resource. The physical and biological capacity of these hard packed trails is easily determined through scientific and historical facts. The DEC is well suited to make this decision.

This leaves the difficult question of the social capacity of an area. The TRP process allows for a review of the facts on a case by case basis and in this case the decision of DEC to allow this activity. Not everyone will agree. In some circles, like this forum and the ADK 46r listserver, it might even seem as though a significant number of people do not agree that any wilderness area has the social capacity to withstand any group run regardless of the safeguards. But the vast majority of people who enjoy the Adirondacks would not be put out by the sight of a group of 60 runners spread out over many miles of trail. If you are one of these people you may wish to voice your opinion as well. The DEC has a regular list of squeaky wheels to deal with and they do their best to keep things well oiled. But if they are forced to treat the same wheels over and over, we'll be left with a nasty oil spill...and that's not good for our wilderness.

Love you Jim!

Barb

[Ned Kipperson]

Ever seen a trail run go through? A day later, it just looks like a hiking club did their token yearly "trail clearing" project, except for many miles. Some brush knocked down, and maybe a little more definition of a path.
The collective weight of the participants will equal a small Japanese car.

[Gandalf]

The physical and biological capacity of these hard packed trails

So I take it the DEC will be doing an anti-rain dance all week before the 25th?

I'll be sending in my protest promptly.

[Tom McG]

The not so great adirondack trail run

In her post Barb states; “Group trail runs, even through wilderness areas is consistent with the Master Plan as well as the draft UMP for Giant Mt. Wilderness. Running is a primitive and unconfined recreational activity and is "encouraged" by the MP.” It seems to me we have been reading different UMP’s or at least select sections.
Under the section Wilderness Management Principles the Giant Mountain Unit Management Plan state that not all recreational activities require a “Wilderness Area” setting, it also states tat a DEC management goal is to refer recreational activities such as “large group use, competitive and other organized events” to Wild Forest Areas. It seem to me that the Great Adirondack Trail Run falls under the heading of competitive and with 60 runners plus and unknown number race support staff and spectators this would under any definition of the term have to be considered a “large group”.
In the Objectives section of the GMUMP it states DEC will establish a maximum day use limit of 15 persons per day, the regulation also would require that larger groups be split into smaller groups and at all times maintain a distance of 1-mile. It further adds that day use groups not congregate into larger groups on trails or destination points. I’m curious as to just how DEC is going to ensure that that going to happen?

In the Adirondack Forest Preserve there are places for large groups and completive trail runs to take place, those are called WILD FOREST AREAS.
Tom

[Kevin]

Of course we all know that opinions are like certain body parts... everyone has one. Fortunately, most of us keep them to themselves unless they're really really sore. It's obvious from this debate that some people need more fiber in their diet. But even if you think you're healthy, irritants can sneak in and mess you up. So a little preventive medicine is in order.

Although all of us have been guilty of being intolerant and (gasp) opinionated, we like to keep the atmosphere at ADK Forum as open as possible to all those wishing to speak their flatulence (which is also why I'm not going to tear your post apart, I'll leave that to the more civil tongued members like Tom McGuire).

[Neil]

It's very easy to stomp all over this thing. I'm not in favour of using a designated wilderness area for an event of this size. However, I thought this was interesting...It was, of course, immediately torn to shreds by the race's opponents.


Kristofer A. Alberga, Supervising Forester
NYS, Dep't of Environmental Conservation
Division of Lands & Forests, Region 5
1115 NYS Route 86
PO Box 296
Ray Brook, NY 12977

(518) 897-1276
(518) 897-1370 FAX
kaalberg@gw.dec.state.ny.us




I have been asked by several individuals to comment and provide
background on how this Agency decided to permit the trail run sponsored
by The Mountaineer slated for June 25, 2005. This event was developed as
a non-competitive group recreational activity for the purpose of raising
funds for a local organization dedicated to enhancing the quality of
water and life in the Boquet River watershed (Boquet River Association).


At the outset I would like to apologize for not having the luxury of
time to provide this information earlier. I would hope that were this
information available on the Listserv earlier some of the assumptions
about how the event was, or was not regulated would have helped better
frame your discussion.

There has been quite a discussion thread on the 46-R Listserv regarding
this topic already. While I have not had the luxury of time to read all
the comments, it is clear that there is quite a range of viewpoints
within the organization with respect to the appropriateness of this
activity. Overall, this discussion is a healthy one; discussions of this
sort help further define the appropriate uses of wilderness and State
lands protected by Article 14 of the State Constitution. It is also
clear that a lot of the commentors may be somewhat misinformed with
respect to control measures which are being instituted, some through
initiation by The Mountaineer and others through specific requirements
of the Revocable Permit for the Temporary Use of State Lands (TRP).

Authority for issuance of TRPs is provided for in Articles 9 (State
Reforestation Areas and Forest Preserve), 11 (Wildlife Management
Areas), and 51 (Tidal Wetlands) of the Environmental Conservation Law
(ECL). Provisions in Article 3 of the ECL provide general authority to
issue permits for other lands. The Department has developed policy to
standardize and facilitate the issuance of TRPs. This policy was last
amended in 1986. Based on the 1986 document it is the policy of DEC to
issue permits for temporary use of State lands if in the opinion of the
Department, such use is within acceptable legal parameters, is
compatible with the existing resource and its management objectives and
is in accordance with stated guidelines and policy. The policy lists
examples of uses which may be permitted and also lists uses which may
not be permitted. One of the allowable uses for State lands listed is
"organized group recreational and/or sports activities."

The Department adopted a Unit Management Plan (UMP) for the Giant
Wilderness Area early in 2004. The plan covers State lands on the main
route proposed for The Mountaineer's event. The State lands on Baxter
Mountain are classified as part of the Hammond Pond Wild Forest and were
not addressed in the Giant Mtn Wilderness UMP. Also worthy of note is
that the trailhead and the first mile of trail accessing Giant Mountain
from Rte 9-N is not Forest Preserve, but rather private land on which
the State purchased an easement to allow public access to the Wilderness
Area. The remaining access points, the access to Baxter from Rte 73 and
the Beede Farm trailhead off of Route 73 are private lands where the
State holds no right of access for the public.

This being said, the guiding documents the Department considered in
granting a permit to hold this event included, ECL Articles 3 and 9,
Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan, existing policies, State
Regulations for the Use of State Lands (6 NYCRR 190), and existing UMPs
where available. Mr. Woodworth's April 12 email carbon copied to the
46-R Listserv and myself identifies several locations in the approved
GMWA where referenced to appropriateness of activities is identified.

Department staff have reviewed these documents as part of the evaluation
of the merits of the permit application. In making our decision to
permit this event we identified several factors that staff felt allowed
the event to be permitted. First, is that trail running is not an
activity that was identified as non compatible with wilderness, either
under the APSLMP or in the UMP in question. As this activity is not
addressed specifically in the UMP, Department staff looked at other
allowed and disallowed activities in Wilderness. Generally activities of
a non-mechanized nature are allowable in wilderness. Motorized vehicles
(with very few exceptions) and mountain biking are disallowed by
regulation and APSLMP guidance. Department staff could not find one
example of human powered locomotion (with the exception of mountain
bikes, where the equipment develops a artificial mechanical advantage)
to be precluded by the guiding documents listed above. Department staff
therefore believe that the activity of trail running is appropriate in
wilderness.

After determining that the activity was allowable on the State lands in
question the Department staff then looked at the organized group
component of the event. The APSLMP discusses, among other issues, the
concepts protection of the resource in a natural state, solitude,
pristineness, and the transient nature of human activities. UMPs are
documents that implement the guidelines of the APSLMP with respect to
specific land areas (units). The historic lack of UMPs for a number of
units has been a concern, in part, because the guidelines of the APSLMP
are not codified into regulation for that land management unit and are
not explicitly applied to the individual management units (this is not
to say that the APSLMP guidelines do not apply outside of a UMP, but
that guidance regarding how those guidelines will be applied to the
resource are not as well defined). In the case of the GMWA UMP the plan
addresses concerns about over use and the need for protection of
solitude by restricting the form that group activities take. In this
unit the plan specifies that 1) overnight groups not exceed 8 persons,
2) day use groups not exceed 15 persons, and 3) rock climbing groups not
exceed 10 persons. The UMP also specified that affiliated groups that
are larger than the limits specified above will be separated at all
times by a distance of at least 1 mile. The UMP does not limit the
number of such groupings of affiliated groups, only the size of the
smaller groups. It should also be noted that these restrictions must be
codified into regulations to be enforceable. Codification involves a
lengthy process and has not been completed for the GMWA at this time.
Hence the groups size restrictions identified in the UMP are not
presently enforceable by Forest Rangers or other law enforcement
personnel. The Department took note of these impending group size
restrictions and included conditions in the permit to ensure that these
spacing conditions (and hence the general guidelines of the APSLMP) were
met. The beginning and end of the course is located on private lands, so
by staggering the start of the event the only likely congregations of
large groups would be on private land, sites not subject to APSLMP or
UMP management guidelines. It should also be noted that there is no
legal means to restrict this activity were the event organizers to hold
this activity without first obtaining a TRP. There are no existing group
size regulations on the books which could restrict any day use group
sizes in this area. The fact that the organizer approached DEC and DEC
required a permit allows for a dialogue between the event organizer and
the DEC where we have the ability to work with the event organizer to
modify their activity to minimize resource impacts, however the
Department has no regulatory authority to ticket participants or
otherwise halt a group run were it to take place outside a TRP .

Department staff reviewed several proposed routes with Mountaineer staff
and concluded that the physical properties of the resource (slope, soil
type, elevation, aspect, and others) on the North Trail would be able to
withstand the magnitude of impact which the permitted activity would
create. Conditions were included to protect this resource and ensure
that any garbage created by the event is contained. An overall
participant cap was identified which the Department felt would be
consistent with carrying capacity levels, based on expected level of use
of the area trails at the time the proposed event was to be held . The
Mountaineer graciously donated funds to be earmarked for trail work in
this area. The donation was directed at the ADK trails program. The
State does not have a mechanism for taking donations of this sort (any
donation would enter the State's General Fund and be allocated through
the annual State budget process). Thus the donation to the Trails
Program could be applied to further protection of the resources of the
GMWA. This donation was not a condition of the permit and was not
discussed with the Mountaineer prior to issuance of the permit.

Another factor in the decision to permit this event was past experience
with the Wakley Dam Run (West Canada Wilderness Area). The event has
been permitted, in a similar fashion, by the Department for three years
now. The Department has yet to receive any complaints regarding this
event. Department staff concluded a similar event would have a similar
impact on other users of the unit.

There are a number of other large group events, held on Forest Preserve
lands, which cause cumulative impacts of similar magnitude to those
expected from this event. Organized group gatherings are held in the
High Peaks region annually by Adirondack 46-Rs, Adirondack Mountain Club
(main club as well as chapters) and other organizations (46-Rs Spring
Gathering and ADK Fall Outings). These events bring large groups of
members to geographic areas for short term events. The activities of
these groups are generally spread over a number of trails, however the
cumulative impact on the physical and biological resource is not
significantly different than if the activity were to take place on a
single trail. In recent years ADK has held such activities in the High
Peaks region in 1999, 2000 and 2003; with the annual event being held in
Keene Valley or years preceding the adoption of the UMP. The 46-Rs hold
annual meetings in the High Peaks region every spring. In the future,
the Department should review the cumulative impact of these large group
events to see if they might require review under the TRP process.

For the sake of clearing the air with respect to what conditions were
imposed on The Mountaineer to hold this event, the following are
conditions listed in the permit:


This permit shall at all times be subject to the approval of the
Regional Land Manager and may be suspended or revoked at any time with
due cause.

The permittee shall notify the Regional Land Manager at least 48 hours
prior to commencing use and upon completion of use.

The activities authorized under this permit shall not interfere with
normal administration of the area by the Department.

No damage will be done to State land, State facilities or boundary or
survey markers.

The permittee hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless the
Department and the State of New York from and against all losses from
claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, recoveries and judgements of
every nature and description brought or recovered against it by reason
of the permittees use of the State lands which are the subject of this
permit.

No trees or other vegetation shall be cut, disturbed or removed unless
specifically authorized by the Regional Land Manager.

The State land covered by this permit shall be kept free of litter and
debris and be left in a condition satisfactory to the Regional Land
Manager at the expiration of the permit or on completion of activities
authorized by the permit.

Upon completion of the activity, applicant must meet with the Regional
Land Manager, or his or her designee, to inspect the area used to ensure
that the permittee complied with the requirements of the permit and to
close out the permit.

Effective date of permit is June 25, 2005.

No commercial use of State lands will be permitted, including, but not
limited to the sale of food, beverages, and/or souvenir items.

No banners or advertizing signage shall be displayed on State lands.

This permit does not confer any permission for the use of any
privately owned lands.

Use of facilities by the permittee shall not interfere with normal
public use.

For each increment of 50 people in excess of 50 participants and
officials, the permittee shall provide at their expense one port-a-john
to supplement the facilities available.

Permittee is responsible for removing from site all refuse generated
by tournament participants and officials.

No overnight camping allowed.

For portions of the event occurring in the Giant Mountain Wilderness
Area, the permittee shall stagger the start of the event to ensure that
at no point shall groups of more than 15 of participants officials,
and/or observers exist at any single location.

Where multiple groups identified in Special Condition 9 above may
exist in the Giant Mountain Wilderness Area at any given time, the
permittee shall take steps to ensure that such groups are separated by a
distance of at least one (1) mile at all times.

This permit allows only the trails and roads identified on the
attached map to be used in conjunction with the permitted activity.


I hope this has clarified this issue and provided a better understanding
of the process DEC staff used to determine the appropriateness of this
activity.

[Rik]

Interesting. Thanks Neil.

[Mavs00]

Blaaa, blaaa, blaaa..............

I read a typical bureaucratic response in which he say “We read the UMP this way and we granted the permit, provided certain conditions are met”. I suppose I can live with that, not agree with it per say, but he outlines well his reasoning. We can certainly debate whether he should have issued the permit in the first place, but not that it was done abitrarily

I really have no problem with this response. You failed however to post his two follow-up responses. The first of which compares those who complete the very individual achievement of hiking the 46 (i.e. all us 46ers) with all those competitive racers that will show up with numbered bibs, race for prizes and against a clock. The response was very defensive and basically said “those who live in glass houses”. His distain for the 46ers was apparent and I honestly I took offense….

When several reasonable replies shot back that stated it was unfair to compare an individual, non-timed, unplanned and unscheduled achievement with an event, advertised as and described by the very host of it as a “racing event”., he basically replied (in quotes) “I honestly don't have the luxury of time to debate this issue on line further.” Basically stating, I’m done with this.

I’ve never met Mr. Alberga, and I’m told by people I respect, that he is a reasonable and nice guy so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. But, I must say, based on his second two replies (not the one posted here), I have to say as a taxpayer listening to a public servant, I would say he certainly did not represent NY very well in this instance. I know as a fellow public servant, had I treated customer (i.e. the public) in this manner, I would get called out on this one 10 times out of 10.

You can certainly say, We made the decision and we stand by it, but you certainly should not respond – “well you guys are just as bad, so there” followed quickly thereafter by “yeah whatever, I’m done listening now”. It just doesn’t work that way in public service, shouldn't anyway.

This is just my two cents. I’m not in real favor of this event, but I’m not gonna “march on Albany" either. I will tell you, I’ve got a bad taste in my mouth for the DEC though based on this one very brief representation, I hope it's just situational frustration, which we are all guilty of.

[Neil]

Excellent points, I couldn't find the other e-mails from Mr. Alberga on my computer but you have captured their essence quite nicely. Maybe I mis-read the beureaucrate-ease but from the sound of it the Mountaineer or anyone else can go ahead and organize this type of event in this particular location and there isn't a darn thing anyone, the DEC included, can do about it.

ie.
The beginning and end of the course is located on private lands, so
by staggering the start of the event the only likely congregations of
large groups would be on private land, sites not subject to APSLMP or
UMP management guidelines. It should also be noted that there is no
legal means to restrict this activity were the event organizers to hold
this activity without first obtaining a TRP. There are no existing group
size regulations on the books which could restrict any day use group
sizes in this area. The fact that the organizer approached DEC and DEC
required a permit allows for a dialogue between the event organizer and
the DEC where we have the ability to work with the event organizer to
modify their activity to minimize resource impacts, however the
Department has no regulatory authority to ticket participants or
otherwise halt a group run were it to take place outside a TRP .

Actually, the running of this race, while infringing on what I consider to be the spirit of wilderness dosn't bug me anywhere near as much as those obnoxious airplanes that buzz the summits of Marcy and Algonquin. Now THEY spoil my wilderness experience way more than a single passing of 60 pairs of running shoes well spaced out on the North Giant Trail ever will.

[Woodspirit]

I think that Tom McG nailed it. With all due respect to the organizers of a worthwhile event, DEC and Mr. Alberga this is simply a well intended but inappropriate event to be held in a Wilderness area. This is the Forest Preserve and designated as a very special classification - basically wild, the most protected land in the State. Notwithstanding any language in the APSLMP and the UMP, the objective of DEC should be to give this land ultra protection and not to look for an out to sanction such events. Mr. Alberga makes a good point in that there are other well intended events in the Forest Preserve that do not give rise to such complaints. Perhaps the sponsors of those events should reexamine the appropriateness of their activities in view of the very healthy discussion that is taking place in this forum.

[Kevin]

I really have no problem with this response. You failed however to post his two follow-up responses. The first of which compares those who complete the very individual achievement of hiking the 46 (i.e. all us 46ers) with all those competitive racers that will show up with numbered bibs, race for prizes and against a clock. The response was very defensive and basically said “those who live in glass houses”. His distain for the 46ers was apparent and I honestly I took offense….

When several reasonable replies shot back that stated it was unfair to compare an individual, non-timed, unplanned and unscheduled achievement with an event, advertised as and described by the very host of it as a “racing event”., he basically replied (in quotes) “I honestly don't have the luxury of time to debate this issue on line further.” Basically stating, I’m done with this.

I’ve never met Mr. Alberga, and I’m told by people I respect, that he is a reasonable and nice guy so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. But, I must say, based on his second two replies (not the one posted here), I have to say as a taxpayer listening to a public servant, I would say he certainly did not represent NY very well in this instance. I know as a fellow public servant, had I treated customer (i.e. the public) in this manner, I would get called out on this one 10 times out of 10.

You can certainly say, We made the decision and we stand by it, but you certainly should not respond – “well you guys are just as bad, so there” followed quickly thereafter by “yeah whatever, I’m done listening now”. It just doesn’t work that way in public service, shouldn't anyway.

Thanks Tim and Woodspirit.

I really could care less who approved this and what borrowed title they hide behind, this race in this particular area is unacceptible and serves as a prime example of how little the DEC seems to really care about its own rules and regulations. If they don't care, why should I - right?

[Pete_Hickey]

His distain for the 46ers was apparent and I honestly I took offense….

Interesting that Kris came across that way. He actually is a good friend of the 46ers, and we work with him quite a bit. It was through him that we got together to re-install the cables on Gothics last year:

http://newmud.comm.uottawa.ca/~pete/trailwork/Gothics/cables.html

To me, there is a lot more behind this which is not coming out. Maybe locals vs downstate people? Maybe a couple friends? Local politics that we don't know about?

I understand Kris saying the he doesn't have time to debate on the list. It could easily consume several hours a day. It isn't his job, either. It's hard being one person to justify an organization's decision against a bunch of others. I know. I did that once.

I think, the way to deal with this, is complaining to the higher-ups at the DEC.

[Rick]

Sooooo......
Is it safe to get back on the normally sleepy docile list again????