high peaks traffic

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • adk-46r
    IT'S GRACE & CARSON PEAKS
    • Nov 2003
    • 179

    #1

    high peaks traffic

    8/4/05
    Fewer people tramping through High Peaks
    By MICHAEL HILL, Associated Press Writer

    ALBANY — Foot traffic through the Adirondack High Peaks has dropped sharply in recent years — a period when recreational regulations were tightened in the wilderness area and fewer backpackers hit the trails nationally.

    A tally from trailhead registers show 94,051 people visiting the High Peaks last year, roughly on par with 2003. But visits were down from the first three years of this decade, when the number of registered users never dipped below 106,000. Figures are also down dramatically from historic highs in the late ‘90s, according to state Department of Environmental Conservation figures

    ADVERTISEMENT


    Rugged and beautiful, the High Peaks are considered a jewel of the 6 million acre forest preserve and encompass some of the most popular Adirondack attractions.

    Anything from the weather to the economy can create year-to-year fluctuations in visitors. But state environmental officials attribute much of the multi-year dip to the phasing in of tighter land-use restrictions in the High Peaks beginning in 1999. The rules, among other things, banned camping in the highest regions and instituted a limit of 15 people for day-use parties.

    While advocates once feared that busloads of tourists were trampling the ecologically sensitive area, DEC spokeswoman Maureen Wren said visits are now being kept to a manageable level under the land-use restrictions.

    "That was among the intentions of DEC’s management efforts — to distribute visitors to the Adirondacks more evenly throughout areas of the forest preserve, which all offer great, unique recreational opportunities," Wren wrote in an e-mail.

    Wren noted trail registration figures show steady or increasing visits in recent years at other wilderness areas, including the Sentinel Range and Hurricane Mountain. The state could not provide trail registrations for the entire Adirondack Park.

    Trailhead registrations are not an absolute measure of land use — a portion of the hikers and campers fail to sign them. But Wren said state officials see them as a useful management tool to keep track of trends.

    Adirondack advocates agreed that limits on group sizes and other High Peaks restrictions contributed to the drop. But they suggested other reasons as well.

    Phil Corell of the Adirondack 46er’s added some hikers and campers recently have been spooked by black bear incidents in the area.

    Neil Woodworth of the Adirondack Mountain Club believes other factors behind the drop-off are demographic — from younger people with competing demands on their time to the popularity of kayaking and mountain biking, which would draw enthusiasts to other wilderness areas.

    He cited a recent report from the Outdoor Industry Association, which found a 23 percent decline in backpacking between 1998 and 2004, despite an overall increase in outdoor activities over the period.

    "I think part of it is changes in American leisure time," Woodworth said.

    Corell noted there has been no drop in the number of people climbing all 46 major peaks in the Adirondacks. There were 210 climbers who bagged all their peaks last year, a higher-than-average number.

    Woodworth added many of the High Peaks visitors during the boom years of the late ‘90s were Canadians. He noted it’s not as convenient to travel down from Montreal as it was before the Sept. 11 attacks.

    "Frankly," he said, "it is harder to get across the international border."
    IT IS NOT A PARK
    IT IS THE ADIRONDACKS
    I WAS BORN HERE
    IT IS MY HOME
    IT IS WHERE I WORK
  • redhawk
    Senior Resident Curmudgeon
    • Jan 2004
    • 10929

    #2
    Originally posted by adk-46r
    Woodworth added many of the High Peaks visitors during the boom years of the late ‘90s were Canadians. He noted it’s not as convenient to travel down from Montreal as it was before the Sept. 11 attacks.

    "Frankly," he said, "it is harder to get across the international border."
    Evidently no one told our token Canadian (or is that toking Canadian?), Neil
    "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

    Comment

    • qam1
      Member
      • Jul 2005
      • 265

      #3
      It’s the stupid dogs must be on a leash in the High Peaks rule

      Since I always hiked with my dog, I for one haven’t set foot in the High Peaks since that law went into effect.

      This stupid rule hurts the locals who live in the area more than the non-residents, I bet if they checked the non-residents vs. the residents they would find the non-resident visitor numbers are about the same while the resident numbers are way down. This law has negligible positive impact on the environment as the loss in numbers is probably mostly due to the locals cutting back on their quick little hikes with their dog during the week. Often whenever I wasn’t in the mood (i.e. in the summer when it’s too hot) for a big hike or even just after work I would just take my dog on short little hikes to places like Marcy Dam, Deer Brook Falls, John’s Brook, etc. Once this went into effect I stopped and I’m sure many other locals did to.

      Unfortunately this rule has increased resentment among the locals and has given the Anti-Hiker activist (i.e. Dale “All hikers bring to Adirondacks are granola bars & lettuce sandwiches” French) around here more ammunition
      :
      :

      Qam1

      http://www.lowerwolfjaw.com/qam1 - Everything & Anything on the Adirondacks
      :
      :

      Comment

      • percious
        Transplanted
        • Jun 2004
        • 734

        #4
        Originally posted by redhawk
        Evidently no one told our token Canadian (or is that toking Canadian?), Neil
        I thought for sure you were talking about bodiak there...

        -percious
        http://www.percious.com

        Comment

        • Boreal Chickadee
          Member
          • Jul 2004
          • 1648

          #5
          Hey, what about Pete? Or does biking across the border not qualify?
          Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
          It's about learning to dance in the rain.

          Comment

          • redhawk
            Senior Resident Curmudgeon
            • Jan 2004
            • 10929

            #6
            Originally posted by Peanut Butter
            Hey, what about Pete? Or does biking across the border not qualify?
            The border patrol has the plains indian attitude.

            We look upon the mentally impaired as "special", so they give him a coupld of PB&J's and let him continue on his merry way....
            "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

            Comment

            • redhawk
              Senior Resident Curmudgeon
              • Jan 2004
              • 10929

              #7
              Originally posted by qam1
              It’s the stupid dogs must be on a leash in the High Peaks rule

              Since I always hiked with my dog, I for one haven’t set foot in the High Peaks since that law went into effect.

              This stupid rule hurts the locals who live in the area more than the non-residents, I bet if they checked the non-residents vs. the residents they would find the non-resident visitor numbers are about the same while the resident numbers are way down. This law has negligible positive impact on the environment as the loss in numbers is probably mostly due to the locals cutting back on their quick little hikes with their dog during the week. Often whenever I wasn’t in the mood (i.e. in the summer when it’s too hot) for a big hike or even just after work I would just take my dog on short little hikes to places like Marcy Dam, Deer Brook Falls, John’s Brook, etc. Once this went into effect I stopped and I’m sure many other locals did to.

              Unfortunately this rule has increased resentment among the locals and has given the Anti-Hiker activist (i.e. Dale “All hikers bring to Adirondacks are granola bars & lettuce sandwiches” French) around here more ammunition
              I don't really thin that's the case...

              Let me preclude this by stating that i have a dog I hike with as much as possible and I hike with Fvrwld and Gerard the peak Bagging Poodle often.
              So I am PRO DOG!

              However, I do believe that if the dog cannot be made to "heel" and stay close when called if other people are approcahing then it needs to be leashed. Just because I am comfortable with dogs and hike with mine all the time, doesn't give me the right to make other people uncomfortable or fearful.

              I hike with my dog and an electronic collar, he returns to my side as soon as he hears the tone, and I have a leash attached that I can just pull out from the leash retainer on his pack.

              I would be more inclined to think that dogs on the trail would keep more people away then the reverse.

              Again, it's regulations that became necessary because many people would not restrain their dogs when others were approaching.

              I personally think that the threat of bears and the ( how do i say this delicately? Hmm, the Hell with it, this is redhawk) degrading quality of many people coming to the peaks is keeping many others today.

              Personally I can go to town and see Macdonald wrappers, empty beer and aquafina bottles strewn all over without having to hike into the Wilderness to find it.

              As much as I may sympathize with what you are saying, It's a big reach to blame the leashing of dogs as a reason for the dropoff.
              "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

              Comment

              • Neil
                Admin

                • May 2004
                • 6129

                #8
                Originally posted by adk-46r
                "Frankly," he said, "it is harder to get across the international border."
                My average border wait is somewhere between 15 and 30...seconds. Average number of questions is about 3. I pull off the main drag (#15 in Can. I-87 in NYS) and detour about 3 miles to a quiet little backwater border crossing.
                In winter I use the main crossing and its just as fast.
                But I don't mind it one little bit if people thinking it's "frankly harder" to get across. Maybe we should also talk about the rough guy with the rubber glove...
                The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

                Comment

                • RC
                  Woods Runner
                  • Mar 2005
                  • 333

                  #9
                  I have to agree with Redhawk on this. I love dogs and have hiked with Redhawk and his dog. That dog is VERY well behaved, but just this past weekend I was coming back from Silver Lake when I ran into a couple with a dog. The dog was very agressive acting as I came up near ( 100ft). The owner was calling the dog, but the dog was still coming towards me. I stopped to give the owner time to get his dog. The owner did get control of the dog ( by the collar and tail) because he didn't seem to have a leash. I mentioned he should lease the dog. The dog was maybe 15ft away and growling when the owner finally get control of him. If I was at all afraid of dogs this encounter would have soured the trip for me.


                  RC
                  "Lead by Example, Follow by Choice"

                  Comment

                  • Kevin
                    **BANNED**
                    • Nov 2003
                    • 5857

                    #10
                    Originally posted by RC
                    I have to agree with Redhawk on this. I love dogs and have hiked with Redhawk and his dog. That dog is VERY well behaved, but just this past weekend I was coming back from Silver Lake when I ran into a couple with a dog. The dog was very agressive acting as I came up near ( 100ft). The owner was calling the dog, but the dog was still coming towards me. I stopped to give the owner time to get his dog. The owner did get control of the dog ( by the collar and tail) because he didn't seem to have a leash. I mentioned he should lease the dog. The dog was maybe 15ft away and growling when the owner finally get control of him. If I was at all afraid of dogs this encounter would have soured the trip for me.
                    I've had similar experiences. The worse is when someone is convinced their dog is "sweet and innocent", but snaps at me just the same.

                    "Gee, he NEVER does that..." Sure, he never acts like a dog protecting their owner.

                    So I guess the regulation is there to aid in the protection of people like me who neither like nor hate canines, butr have a healthy respect for their potentially random aggression.

                    Now, the leash law is definitely NOT a major reason people aren't going. Based on the number of dogs I see on the high peaks trails leashed and unleashed, the regulation is not stopping people from bringing them (as it shouldn't). One thing to note is that most rangers with an IQ above 50 (which is to say most of them) won't bother you on steep sections. They understand that the leash could be a detriment to safe climbing. That doesn't mean they won't ask to see a leash, so they know the dog could be restrained once on even ground. The regulation isn't being used as a hiker tax, it's being used to protect people (and in the end protect the dog should it get the notion to bite someone).

                    Why did this have to turn into a hiking with dogs thread? Hasn't there been enough of them already?

                    Comment

                    • Pete_Hickey
                      Member
                      • Jul 2004
                      • 245

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Peanut Butter
                      Hey, what about Pete? Or does biking across the border not qualify?
                      I'm not Canadian. I just live there.

                      But biking across the border does confuse them. They just don't know how to handle it.
                      Senility is a terrible thing. I blame society. That and years of substance abuse.

                      Comment

                      • Boreal Chickadee
                        Member
                        • Jul 2004
                        • 1648

                        #12
                        Pete- mea culpa

                        How'd you end up living in the great land to the north?
                        Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
                        It's about learning to dance in the rain.

                        Comment

                        • Rivet
                          Likes to hike
                          • Feb 2004
                          • 626

                          #13
                          I think the lower numbers just reflect the trend in this country toward a more sedentary life style.

                          The parks near me are virtually deserted. The kids are either inside playing video games, watching TV, surfing the web. Going out means hanging out at the mall.
                          My hiking blog

                          Comment

                          • Creekwader
                            Snag Locator
                            • Nov 2003
                            • 965

                            #14
                            Originally posted by qam1
                            It’s the stupid dogs must be on a leash in the High Peaks rule

                            This is the craziest thing I've heard all week. Not all month or all year, but definitely this week.

                            Since I always hiked with my dog, I for one haven’t set foot in the High Peaks since that law went into effect.
                            Why? Does your dog forbid you to hike without it? Are you dog-whipped (as opposed to cat-whipped)?
                            Last edited by Kevin; 08-04-2005, 05:35 PM. Reason: cleaned up quote tag so quote text appeared properly

                            Comment

                            • redhawk
                              Senior Resident Curmudgeon
                              • Jan 2004
                              • 10929

                              #15
                              Guess he showed THEM!!!!!!!
                              "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                              Comment

                              Working...