Big Jay :: Man arrested for cutting down trees on state land

Too bad for them? Too bad for us! The cut they made on Big Jay is horrendous. They took things too far and got what they deserved in being arrested. Major difference between thinning out some saplings versus cutting your own open trail and dropping hundreds of fully grown trees. This could potentially reflect poorly on all woods maintainers even though most do things proper and leave the power tools at home. I have suggested this on other forums but it can not be said enough: I am encouraging a complete ban on this area for all backcountry skiers. Besides, if I am heading out that way, I want to ski in natural tree any ways, not a terrible man made gash that ruined good tree skiing.
 
riverc0il":17ad20c9 said:
Too bad for them? Too bad for us! The cut they made on Big Jay is horrendous. They took things too far and got what they deserved in being arrested. Major difference between thinning out some saplings versus cutting your own open trail and dropping hundreds of fully grown trees. This could potentially reflect poorly on all woods maintainers even though most do things proper and leave the power tools at home. I have suggested this on other forums but it can not be said enough: I am encouraging a complete ban on this area for all backcountry skiers. Besides, if I am heading out that way, I want to ski in natural tree any ways, not a terrible man made gash that ruined good tree skiing.
Click to expand...

Sorry about your friend Big Jay, but after all I've read and seen...I'm siding with River on this. :x

Here is another news story that should up on TGR a few days ago.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll ... N/70803001

From what I've read on TGR, some people might hope for more than the maximum penalty of $5000 fine ET 5 years jail. :shock:

Discussions on TGR et TT.

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/show ... hp?t=91292

http://www.telemarktalk.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=36293

Quote from teletips

chadh":17ad20c9 said:
I was up on jay for the jay challenge cheering a friend on and saw the carnage - its absolutely ridiculous, you will have no problem finding, in fact you will likely be able to drive a car down it, these goofs have likely f'ed up the drainage now and I wouldn't be surprised if in heavy rain over the years this ends up totally shitting up big jay

they (state forest dept) did hike it to assess the carnage, they also did the investigation, and it isn't to hard in these parts to find two knuckle heads bragging in a bar about destroying state land

the sad part is it didn't need to be done - if it can't be cleared with shears and a bow saw there is no need to ski it
Click to expand...
 
A $5,000 fine isn't much of a deterrence for what they did.

Should be $5,000 per tree + the five years.
 
I'd like to hear everyone's interpretation of how much modification of state land is acceptable to them. Where do you personally draw the line.
 
Like i said on ZoneSki, i've known him for years... like the hundreds of locals at the mountain... I never approved of his work... He did the atrocious line of the pump house a couple years back... I don't ride that line anymore cause it's always full of stumps sticking out and no longer fun... It use to be a lot more challenging!

I'm heading out to Jay this afternoon and will try to check it out... Keep in mind that even ski areas make mistake when it comes to cutting a glade...
 
BigJay":xc92zey9 said:
I'm heading out to Jay this afternoon and will try to check it out... Keep in mind that even ski areas make mistake when it comes to cutting a glade...
Click to expand...

Like I just mentioned on ZS, check one of the later page of that TGR discussion, there was a picture taken of the damage.
 
And as i said also, i have no respect for the kind of work he did! It's a disaster for all backcountry enthousiasts! After seeing the slideshow, i can't believe they tried to pull that off!

:evil:
 
Incredibly selfish. I got mine, screw you. Remedial action to limit the erosion is needed. Tough to do, but I would try to find some way to keep the skiers off it this winter. As much as there is public outcry over what was done, there are lots of people planning on hitting this bit of trail. Maybe do like reseeded soccer fields and put in metal rods high enough to clear the snow pack so it doesn't get pounded.
 
where does one begin with this type of blatent disregard for the subtle and incremental stature that the BC clipping community has gained over the years in places like Jay. To be clear , there a number of places like this all around the Nat. forest. in New England. Most are old and the whereabouts and clippers have been passed from one generation to the next. I have seen no damage from these trails as they were thoughtfully laid out, outside of drainages or seeps. stumps were flush cut, entrances are obscure to thin out the uncommitted (and false entrances cause retreate to the most of the rest).

These guys didn't flush cut stumps, and apparently used chainsaws-brilliant!

The environmental damage that this will purportedly cause is overblown. Just leave the thing alone and it will be fine. As a matter of fact the irony is that it will likely grow back thicker in 3 years. While well intentioned, people going up to "fix" the problem will likely only do more harm tearing up the duff or thin soils on ledge. Just leave it alone or have one person spread a bit of winter rye (that the offenders shlep to the top) on the site and it will be stable by Oct of this year.
 
WOW! Simply stunning looking at the slide show. I can't seem to wrap my head around where one even comes up with such an idea. "Gee lets haul chain saws up 3000 verts and cut down a whole section of forest we don't own and have no permission for". "Brilliant, no one will hear or notice that, lets go...".

Looking at the pics, the forest in that area seems quite dense, but I recall my years back east and I don't remember needing to do anything more than cutting a very few branches and then moving fallen logs or chopping at a small bush here or there. It is BACKcountry skiing after all. Cut trails are for, umm..., lets see, inside ski areas maybe? Wish I had more insight than to simply 'pile on' that it's a bad thing.
 
here's the problem, the big open spaces of big jay are like that for a reason, they were cut at one point. otherwise it would be completely unskiable. i will be really surprised if any of the people who have condemned their(the cutters) actions won't ski this line.

for all of you who feel so strongly, make sure you stay on the trails from now on, because most of the off-piste skiing in new england, if not all of it was cut, most likely with a saw, gas powered or not.
don't be hypocrites.

a saw is a saw and in the high alpine trimming small trees out, which are mostly likely very old, is just as bad. all the vegetation at that elevation is sensitive and is most susceptible during the short growing season, not when it is buried under 10 feet of snow.

if we all care about the destruction of sensitive mountain environments so much, how could any of you every possibly pay someone to ski on a mountain that has been destroyed and is an environmental catastrophy.

wake up
 
redeyes":2h3gp14d said:
here's the problem, the big open spaces of big jay are like that for a reason, they were cut at one point. otherwise it would be completely unskiable. i will be really surprised if any of the people who have condemned their(the cutters) actions won't ski this line.

for all of you who feel so strongly, make sure you stay on the trails from now on, because most of the off-piste skiing in new england, if not all of it was cut, most likely with a saw, gas powered or not.
don't be hypocrites.

a saw is a saw and in the high alpine trimming small trees out, which are mostly likely very old, is just as bad. all the vegetation at that elevation is sensitive and is most susceptible during the short growing season, not when it is buried under 10 feet of snow.

if we all care about the destruction of sensitive mountain environments so much, how could any of you every possibly pay someone to ski on a mountain that has been destroyed and is an environmental catastrophy.

wake up
Click to expand...

well put
 
skimore":35dbzv2r said:
redeyes":35dbzv2r said:
here's the problem, the big open spaces of big jay are like that for a reason, they were cut at one point. otherwise it would be completely unskiable. i will be really surprised if any of the people who have condemned their(the cutters) actions won't ski this line.

for all of you who feel so strongly, make sure you stay on the trails from now on, because most of the off-piste skiing in new england, if not all of it was cut, most likely with a saw, gas powered or not.
don't be hypocrites.

a saw is a saw and in the high alpine trimming small trees out, which are mostly likely very old, is just as bad. all the vegetation at that elevation is sensitive and is most susceptible during the short growing season, not when it is buried under 10 feet of snow.

if we all care about the destruction of sensitive mountain environments so much, how could any of you every possibly pay someone to ski on a mountain that has been destroyed and is an environmental catastrophy.

wake up
Click to expand...

well put
Click to expand...

I might regret it, but I second that nomination.

None of us are defending what they did which was stupid and destructive. But I've spent tens of thousands of dollars on season passes to ski areas. Those areas will never recover.
 
I'm expecting admin to chime in here any minute, but my understanding from prior conversations with him is as follows:
1) Most of Vermont was clear cut for agriculture in the 18th & early 19th centuries.
2) The railroad moved the center of agriculture to the Midwest, and the forests have gradually regrown since then.
3) The "natural forest" is on average ~150 years old, and above admin's "brush line" of 2,500 feet elevation with north exposure has natural spacing in many places.
4) Freshly cut areas tend to grow back denser with usually inadequate spacing.

I am of the opinion that intelligently designed cut ski trails and liftlines have modest environmental impact. The pressure comes mainly from base area and real estate development and associated water, power, sewage etc. infrastructure.

Again, I'll defer to some of the Easterners who know their local history better than I do. And I am aware that in the boom era of the 50's and 60's there was little thought to environmental considerations, and that Act 250 was an understandable reaction to that.
 
Good points Tony.

I've gotta think that human presence in the mountains, or anywhere on the earth, basically destroys it. But I wouldn't advocate eliminating the human race to "protect" the planet. Skiing probably isn't the most destructive activity in the mountains either.

To me the issue is - somewhere we have to draw a line. If every outdoors person did what these guys did - cut down one acre of trees on state land - there wouldn't be much left. On the other hand - 50 years of "limbing" or whatever hasn't really gotten out of control? Or maybe it has.

For some of us - this act was "over the line." If you want to eliminate environmental hypocrisy completely, you need to do a hell of a lot more than stop buying ski passes.

Harv
 
I've gotta think that human presence in the mountains, or anywhere on the earth, basically destroys it.
Click to expand...
This statement, on its face, is ridiculous, but the rest of the post is quite reasonable.

I agree that the subject act of this post was way over the line.

Jared Diamond's Collapse describes historical examples of the consequences of civilizations ignoring environmental tipping points. But it also makes clear we can have a healthy environment without returning to the Stone Age.
 
I tend to disagree with redeyes general sentiment, even though I do agree with several of his individual statements. I draw a pretty big line between chopping a forest at random like these guys and cutting ski resort trails. Ski resorts have a ton of planning and input from authorities and environmental interests, etc... They have to follow numerous mitigation standards during construction, and re-vegetate with grasses. Those ski areas on federal land are required to remove all 'physical improvements' should they cease operations , etc... A very different ballgame of conscious public decision vs what these two did (or were trying to do). I know skiing many years in the east, I never cut a tree down; just a few branches.

Also, everyone should visit one of the 'lost' ski areas from 10 or 20 years ago. I think a lot of people would be surprised just how quickly the forest comes back in and the trails become nearly 'invisible' to tell where they were. It may take a bit to get to true 'old growth' trees, but not the length of recovery time that many think.
 
TC - Ridiculous or maybe facetious. Trying to make a point. Man, unlike most other animals, has the use of tools, which allows him to exploit the environment in ways that ultimately aren't sustainable.

There's an old abandoned ski area in the shadow of Gore that was called Harvey Mountain Ski Area. (My name sake!) Had maybe 600' of vert. It's not exactly on Harvey, but from the summit of Harvey - if you know where to look, you can see it clear as day, even though it did "recover." It think it ceased operations in the 50s. I don't think it's ugly or really represents environmental degradation, but 50 years later it's still obvious.

Anyone else know where it is? Sharon should.

Harv
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top