Big Jay access closed from Jay Peak

**bvibert** · Dec 11, 2007, 7:32 AM

Anyone else hear about this? I was wondering if something like that would happen as a result of the illegal cutting over the summer...

http://www.telemarktalk.com/phpBB/vi...c.php?p=556597

drjeff · Dec 11, 2007, 8:11 AM

Sounds like they had a nice "gentleman's agreement" worked out until a few ignorant folks with a sense of entitlement screwed things up

David Metsky · Dec 11, 2007, 5:09 PM

I actually don't mind closing access from the tram as I always skinned up from 242. But people will try to work around the closed access from Jay I'm sure. It'll be interesting to see how things unfold this winter.

**thetrailboss** · Dec 11, 2007, 5:21 PM

That, as well as people almost every year get lost skiing in the BC at Jay....we had someone get lost on Stateside this weekend and that launched a massive search.

riverc0il · Dec 11, 2007, 7:44 PM

Ouch, that really sucks. I will likely be at that meeting this Saturday to hear what they have to say. Might be a bit of lynch mob. Rightly so. Any one following the boards this Summer knows how adamantly pissed off I was about the cut. Disgust would be putting it mildly and I still hope these guys get the book thrown at them. But limiting access from Jay Peak is only going to make a bad situation worse. Now there is a big fat bullseye on the "Jailbird Chute" as it has become known as. They would have been better off letting this wash under the bridge quietly. They just gave Big Jay skiers (and people who were not Big Jay skiers but now are going to seek it out due to notoriety) a big fat reason to be defiant. Hell, I am considering skinning up this winter and being defiant once enough snow settles in (as apparently according the TTips thread, the original plan was say it could be skied once the base level is high enough). This is just making a bad situation worse.

Hey, whatever.... even deeper powder and even more untracked lines for those of us willing to skin.

The frustrating thing here is there was no dialog or conversation or consensus. Just a big ole fat this is the way it is. Who do they think they are punishing? Someone in that TTips thread said it very well that they are not punishing the "backcountry skiing" community. Any one in the "backcountry skiing" community still has access via earned turns. What is done is done and people are going to ski that chute and there really isn't much they can do about it. One season of limiting access isn't going to help much when it gets trashed the season after this. Education and partnership would be a much better approach than what they decided to do, IMHO.

ccskier · Dec 11, 2007, 8:24 PM

Are they going to just extend the fence that is already there? As others have said, it is just going to attract more cowboys out there. This weekends lost girl will be a regular occurence.

David Metsky · Dec 12, 2007, 7:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccskier

Are they going to just extend the fence that is already there? As others have said, it is just going to attract more cowboys out there. This weekends lost girl will be a regular occurence.

I disagree - the blocked off access will deter 90% of the people who would otherwise go over there. The remaining 10% will find a way, but hopefully not from the tram. Those folks are allowed over there, this policy isn't about people who skin or hike there. The fence already covers the saddle pretty well, they'll just close the gate and post it "no go".

I don't think this will attract more people, this isn't going to advertise it any more then having an open gate with tracks. What it will do is make it much more difficult for anyone without free heels from getting over there.

drjeff · Dec 12, 2007, 8:12 AM

You just worry that for some people telling them that they CAN'T go will just make them want to go more. And more often than not, it's those folks that will either get into trouble because they shouldn't have been there in the 1st place and/or really screw things up for those that have a clue and an understanding about the complexities of the alpine environment and its ecosystem.

It's almost the law of supply and demand that you have here. You limit the supply and you'll increase the demand

David Metsky · Dec 12, 2007, 8:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drjeff

It's almost the law of supply and demand that you have here. You limit the supply and you'll increase the demand

True, but they've also increased the cost (physical effort needed to get there). If people are willing to pay the cost they are more then welcome to ski it. I'm confident it will be self-limiting. I do worry about people trying to get discounts (climbing/breaking the fence) however.

trycash2 · Dec 12, 2007, 10:58 AM

Ok so for thoose of us who have only used the gate what are the other options? Hike up from 242?? What's the best route??

Man this SUCKS (*#@(*!@#(%*!!

Dec 11, 2007, 7:32 AM	#1 (permalink)
bvibert Too far forward?? Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Torrington, CT Posts: 16,609	Big Jay access closed from Jay Peak Anyone else hear about this? I was wondering if something like that would happen as a result of the illegal cutting over the summer... http://www.telemarktalk.com/phpBB/vi...c.php?p=556597 __________________ Brian 09 MTB - 4/5(4.7),4/19(~6.5),5/1(6.0),5/3(10.3),5/11(6.7),5/13(6.4),5/18(12.5),5/20(~6.5),5/24(11.8),5/26(7.3),5/31(8.3),6/2(6.8),6/7(15.2),6/10(6.8),6/16(6.1),6/30(5.1) SAC Tracker - Tramdock Tracker - Chainlove Tracker - WhiskeyMilitia Tracker - BonkTown Tracker - Brociety Tracker

Dec 11, 2007, 5:21 PM	#4 (permalink)
thetrailboss Mount Ellen--12/21/08! Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Sugarbush, VT Posts: 11,664	That, as well as people almost every year get lost skiing in the BC at Jay....we had someone get lost on Stateside this weekend and that launched a massive search. __________________ Live, Ski, or Die! Trailboss' Ski Videos now on YouTube! Trailboss' Photo Albums. 66 days for the 2007-2008 ski season!!!! 40 of the 48 New Hampshire 4,000 Footers Completed and Counting!

Dec 11, 2007, 7:44 PM	#5 (permalink)
riverc0il Black 01/19/09 Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Ashland, NH Posts: 7,828	Ouch, that really sucks. I will likely be at that meeting this Saturday to hear what they have to say. Might be a bit of lynch mob. Rightly so. Any one following the boards this Summer knows how adamantly pissed off I was about the cut. Disgust would be putting it mildly and I still hope these guys get the book thrown at them. But limiting access from Jay Peak is only going to make a bad situation worse. Now there is a big fat bullseye on the "Jailbird Chute" as it has become known as. They would have been better off letting this wash under the bridge quietly. They just gave Big Jay skiers (and people who were not Big Jay skiers but now are going to seek it out due to notoriety) a big fat reason to be defiant. Hell, I am considering skinning up this winter and being defiant once enough snow settles in (as apparently according the TTips thread, the original plan was say it could be skied once the base level is high enough). This is just making a bad situation worse. Hey, whatever.... even deeper powder and even more untracked lines for those of us willing to skin. The frustrating thing here is there was no dialog or conversation or consensus. Just a big ole fat this is the way it is. Who do they think they are punishing? Someone in that TTips thread said it very well that they are not punishing the "backcountry skiing" community. Any one in the "backcountry skiing" community still has access via earned turns. What is done is done and people are going to ski that chute and there really isn't much they can do about it. One season of limiting access isn't going to help much when it gets trashed the season after this. Education and partnership would be a much better approach than what they decided to do, IMHO. __________________ -Steve TheSnowWay.com "Skiing is not a sport, it is a way of life." - Otto Schniebs 19 Days 11 Powder

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Dec 11, 2007, 8:11 AM	#2 (permalink)
drjeff Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brooklyn, CT Posts: 7,657	Sounds like they had a nice "gentleman's agreement" worked out until a few ignorant folks with a sense of entitlement screwed things up

Dec 11, 2007, 5:09 PM	#3 (permalink)
David Metsky Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somerville, MA Posts: 565	I actually don't mind closing access from the tram as I always skinned up from 242. But people will try to work around the closed access from Jay I'm sure. It'll be interesting to see how things unfold this winter.

Dec 11, 2007, 8:24 PM	#6 (permalink)
ccskier Jay Peak Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Cape Cod Posts: 520	Are they going to just extend the fence that is already there? As others have said, it is just going to attract more cowboys out there. This weekends lost girl will be a regular occurence.

Dec 12, 2007, 8:12 AM	#8 (permalink)
drjeff Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brooklyn, CT Posts: 7,657	You just worry that for some people telling them that they CAN'T go will just make them want to go more. And more often than not, it's those folks that will either get into trouble because they shouldn't have been there in the 1st place and/or really screw things up for those that have a clue and an understanding about the complexities of the alpine environment and its ecosystem. It's almost the law of supply and demand that you have here. You limit the supply and you'll increase the demand

Dec 12, 2007, 10:58 AM	#10 (permalink)
trycash2 Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 17	Ok so for thoose of us who have only used the gate what are the other options? Hike up from 242?? What's the best route?? Man this SUCKS (#@(!@#(%*!!