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

[riverc0il]

Oh, what the hell...

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.

Be surprised all you want. The only way I will end up on that line is by accidentally popping onto it from the trees... and back into the trees is where I will go.

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.

Hypocrites? Hardly. Big difference between thinning out a tree run versus clear cutting a twenty foot wide "trail". Yea, there is some east coast BC that utilized power tools but many such trails (e.g. CCC trails) were legal cuts.

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.

Personally, I am least concerned about the "sensitive mountain environment" and thrushes effected by the cutting. I am concerned about the implications for cracking down on more reasonable trimming, removal of good tree skiing on part of Big Jay, and possible long term effects that may prevent regrowth. Also, there is a big difference between paying for a lift ticket to an organization that cut legit trails versus bootleg trails. I again submit that thinning out some underbrush without powder tools to make trees skiable is extremely different than clear cutting a twenty foot wide trail, clear cutting twenty feet of excellent back country tree skiing terrain no less. The media publicity certainly is not a good thing either.

 

[redeyes]

rivercoil

do you know what the name of the main line is down big jay from the top? while i do, it is called the "gash." do you know how wide it is in the summer? probably not, so i'll tell you, it is about twenty feet wide and a couple hundred feet long, sound familiar.
do you know how it got there? it was cut and is not natural. is it considered a ski trail or the backcountry?

have any of you actually been to the top of jay to see the cut for yourselves. it really doesn't look that bad. not much different than the other trail from the top. the media is sensationalizing the whole thing. the pictures are from the one spot at the top where the corridor was cut, after which no pictures have been shown. it is because further down the hill after this corridor the area was reasonable thinned and or gladed.

the thing that all of you fail to realize is that big jay is skiable from the top because it has been heavily cut throughout the years. otherwise there would be almost no way to ski the top half of the mountain due to the density of growth.

it just so happens that no one seems to notice these cuts when they are done at the appropriate time of the year.
since this happened in the spring time it was very noticeable, but if it had been done in the late fall, it probably would have gone unnoticed until the winter.

i have actually cut ski trails for ski areas and i love those of you who post about how it is actually done, and i can say for sure that at jay there is not a whole lot of planning that goes into it and also there is almost no concern for the environment while it is being done.
remember that all alpine vegatation is sensitive and loppers and hand tools can be just as destructive even when being done is a supposedly responsible manner.do you think all renegade trail cutters are also foresters? well they aren't. so do you really think you actually know what you are doing?

all these comments from the peanut gallery about this are from people who probably have never actually cut any ski trail and that is why you all should stop running your mouths about something that you really don't know all that much about.

so think what you want about the cutting, but if you ask me , these guys did a great job. it is going to be great to ski, giving people another option from the top, so i dont have to ski the bump line down the "gash".

how appropriate big jay now has two ski trails, the "swath" and the "gash."

 

[Patrick]

I would like to hear from Admin on this. He knows Jay much more than me and trees were probably thigher when Jay was his home area.

I know this comment applies to Smuggs and probably to Jay also. Woods were cut back then, but it didn't seem widespread as it is today.

My opinions on Big Jay? It sucks. Why? You can't have anyone that wants to start cutting wherever without any rules. When is it enough or to much? Cases and abuses like this last cut might also bring a more serious crackdown on these types of activities by the authorities(uncontrolled backcountry skiing included).

Can you control backcountry skiiing on public lands? Not all of it of course, but fines could be stiff enough to make it an expensive risk (ie. restrictions already exist in some of the Chic Chocs adn Katahdin (at certain time of the year).

 

[Yannick]

And what about that?

Even if it's "controled" and legal , i think we have bigger natural problem to fix. But i'm with you when you are saying that they have gone to far.

 

[Harvey]

Where is that?

Tree farming or logging.

 

[joegm]

redeyes wrote:

" so i dont have to ski the bump line down the "gash ".

i hear you.. bumps are really a pain in the ass ( especially when you're not good enough to ski em )

:roll:

 

[riverc0il]

redeyes wrote:

" so i dont have to ski the bump line down the "gash ".

i hear you.. bumps are really a pain in the ass ( especially when you're not good enough to ski em )

:roll:

Tree skiers are some of the best bump skiers out there since it mixes bumps with obstacles which requires even quicker reflexes. Never met a good tree skier that was not really good at bumps. Bump mastery is really a prerequisite for tree skiing, IMO. That said, powder tree skiing is significantly better than bump tree skiing to most tree skiers, which is redeyes point.

redeyes, i never skied anything 20 feet wide at Big Jay, so I must have missed the gash, which is fine by me. I found some narrow ten foot chutes with occasional lateral movements to find entrances to the next line and that was the stuff I like, so thanks for pointing out I should avoid the gash too

 

[joegm]

that is just ludicruous to deduce that the reason those excellent bump skiers you speak of are in fact good bumpers because they are good tree skiers...it's the other way around... if they are in fact true expert tree skiers , it's because they have good bump skills. but i suppose 'good and excellent are relative terms. ( see below ) bumps are the hardest thing to do on skis well.. still doubt it click on the link below to the head us alpine coach and quite possibly one of the best u.s " alpine " skiers ever trying to explain and show how to ski bumps... they start the show at the 7 minute mark of the video...then they proceed to embarass themselves for a good 2 and 1/2 minutes ...sorry steve you are way off on this one


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qH5Cpr3 ... ed&search=

 

[riverc0il]

that is just ludicruous to deduce that the reason those excellent bump skiers you speak of are in fact good bumpers because they are good tree skiers...it's the other way around

I think that was kind of my point... you have to learn the bumps before you can ski the trees. But somehow, I just knew when I posted the above statement that you would take it completely out of context and infer I was snubbing bump skiers... which always amazes me when you do that since I also enjoy skiing bumps and long ago realized I needed to become very good at bumps before I could really enjoy the trees.

 

[joegm]

nothing at all was taken out of context... being a proficient tree skier does not necessarily make you a good bump skier, which is what you implied... when you say that , it just shows how little you understand about high level mogul skiing and what that actually is. but i can assure you that any high level bumper can ski trees with relative ease and a high degree of skill...there are no skills that one needs to be proficient at when skiing trees well that do not also have to be present at the same high level when skiing bumps.. but there are skills that must be demonstrated proficiently when skiing moguls that do not necessarily have to be present when skiing trees...none of this means good tree skiiers are not good skiers or whatever....what's your honest opinion of bode millers mogul skiing in that clip?. decent? good? awful? ....anyone who understands , and not necessarily who IS a great bumper, like the people who you say you know are, but rather anyone who really understands real mogul skiing , would say that his skiing in that clip is pathetic ... never mind for someone who is claiming to be giving mogul skiing "tips"...i hope the bumpers you are talking about as being " great " are a heck of a lot better than bode is showing in that u tube clip, steve...

 

[riverc0il]

nothing at all was taken out of context... being a proficient tree skier does not necessarily make you a good bump skier, which is what you implied...

I not only implied that part, but meant it. Tree skiing almost always involves skiing moguls. Therefore, it follows that being a good tree skier requires being good at mogul skiing since most tree skiing IS mogul skiing unless it recently snowed (and fresh powder rarely lasts more than a day before the trees bump up again). Let me say it again: 90% of tree skiing IS bump skiing but with trees interrupting the lines.

Regarding Bode... Bode can ski the bumps however he wants to but clearly Bode is a much better skiing on groomed terrain. I would not call his mogul skiing "pathetic" (I have seen a heck of a lot worse!!! I mean, really, the average skier isn't that good in the bumps) but it certainly is not what I would call great bump skiing. Highly proficient mogul skiing lacking in dedicated mogul skiing technique. Then again, look who that video is geared towards?! They reference natural packed powder that is slightly bumpy and moguls as "problems" to deal with rather than terrain to be enjoyed. These tips are no better nor worse than what Ski or Skiing or any other major publisher dedicated to selling stuff to your average middle age family skiers that spend lots of money on the activity but lack much skill or drive to really improve offer to their viewers. Is this a litmus test or something? You have to put down Bode's mogul skiing ability to have any bump cred? Let's see a video of Bode skiing the trees and then we can talk!? :lol: :wink: :twisted:

 

[Harvey]

Wow this thread has moved from the original topic.

From someone who definitely isn't a great bump or tree skier...I find the trees (at Gore at least) easier. The bumps are spaced by the ski level of the skiers -regular and TIGHT. The trees are definitely farther apart and less regular. On the other hand I've heard pretty good bump skiers complaining about the irregular spacing of the trees - saying it's harder.

My 2 cents. I think it is what you are used to and practiced at.

 

[Tony Crocker]

Nowhere in River's post did I see any comment of good tree skiing causing good bump skiing. From my observation at Stowe and Mad River, the gladed runs were wall-to-wall bumps, which is presumably the norm except after a big dump. Therefore eastern skiers will have trouble in glades most of the time if they don't ski bumps well.

I will freely admit that some of us lazy westerners can be fairly comfortable in the trees because we know where to find low density lines that aren't bumped up that much. Mt. Baldy has quite a few. I would also mention that after his training at Jay Peak and 3 seasons in LCC, admin is a tree aficionado and I can't come close to keeping up with him. I'm not sure that admin's skills are as dominant in moguls. But I think he seeks out the trees more than the bumps and thus gets more practice.

 

[redeyes]

the only reason that you guys are talking about the bumps in this thread is because i mentioned that big jay gets bumped up down the main line otherwise known as the gash.
if you want to debate the merits of who or why some are better at bumps in trees or not take that discussion elsewhere. if you want to talk about how much traffic that the backcountry at jay peak sees and how it is usually a mogul field, lets here your thoughts. personally i think that the whole point of bc skiing is to escape heavily skied areas, places with out moguls and for that matter people. i know that this idea is becoming less and less of a reality every year at jay, and having all this hype about the swath will only increase interest and traffic, which is very disappointing.
and joegm, anytime your up at jay and you want to rip some zippers just let me know, and i would be happy to give you a lesson.

 

[joegm]

redyeyes :
spoken like at true backcountry elitist snob...if u are kind enough to "let" the boys and i ski in jay land, we'll take you up on your offer of a " lesson" :roll: ... just let me know if jay ever gets in some decent mogul lines that are not wind scoured crap within 24 hours after the dump.... :roll:

 

[riverc0il]

Joe, try U.N. at Jay for a good bump run. The old Poma Line offers nice bumps but are very irregular pattern due to natural terrain aspects. Both are narrow trails with minimal wind scouring. Liftline under the Bonaventure Quad is also wind protected and has very good bumps, especially below the Can Am split where the pitch moderates and there are some really good lines. Bumps under Jet are generally pretty good and Derrick can occasionally be good if the coverage is there. Upper Milk Run gets a bit of the wind treatment but don't forget Kitzbeuhel which can be really good or really bad depending. Generally, quite a few protected bump lines compared to most ski areas since the narrower runs don't get groomed whereas many areas have wide open bump fields which take the full hit during a wind storm. Let me know if you plan on being in the area and we can hook up for some turns.

 

[joegm]

" moguls form because people ski, so you gotta learn to deal "..
jonny moseley in ' fistful of moguls' :.. 1998
my response to redeyes is strictly based on the inherent hipocrisy of a backcountry enthusiast who seems to not want to deal with what is the inevitable result of unmanaged backcountry terrain.... moguls...unmanaged being the key...eventually, whether you like it or not, that's what happens to all snow that is not dragged out by a groomer. what is it you would prefer redeyes?, that a groomer somehow drag that " gash " so you wouldn't have to deal with the bumps? do the moguls form relatively quicker with higher amounts of traffic ? obviously. you can complain all you want about higher amounts of foot traffic in bc areas...i would more than likely agree with the sentiment... but what's the point?... there is nothing anyone can do about it... people have the right to access land that is public land...
and to complain about the resulting terrain features that result from people skiing is just cry baby whining....sounds almost like the beautiful weekend warriors in the volvo xc90's complaining about a lack of grooming at places like loon or stowe or killington. move out to british columbia and buy a few thousand acres of a mountain if you can't deal with a few bumps in your backcountry stashes and lines. unbelievable :roll:

 

[skimore]

The only whining seems to be coming from you Joe. There was a comment about skiing a line void of bumps which is why most venture away from the resorts. Then you start calling people out.....your an (.)

 

[redeyes]

joegm,
i am confused? what is this post about? i am not complaining about moguls, in fact i usually enjoy them, and the idea of grooming the gash, i don't follow. you are right about one thing, the more skier traffic an area sees the quicker it gets bumped and the bigger they get, i wont disagree with you on this, but i think you missed the point about my post in regard to moguls, try rereading it.

just curious, where do you spend most of your ski days?

also, do you venture off the ski hill and into backcountry areas?

 

[BigJay]

I "kind of" understant RedEyes' point... If you were skiing the woods at Jay in early 90s, you had powder left all the time and didn't have to "hunt" for it... After Jay got bigger with the Freezer and new Tram, the places got crowded out and loose snow is harder and harder to find... but that again can be explained by how easy new shaped skis make tree skiing more accessible to everyone... That wasn't a problem in early 90s... Not much Tele back then either to access the backcountry... Nothing like snowshoes and a board on your backpack!

But now do we want to start another debate?

-Which is better:
Jay or Montgomery?
Boarding or tele or skking?

Hopefully, we'll get some great october turns this year again and snow will pill up all winter long... and to me, it's all that matters for now!

:arrow: