Can you "own" a line cut at the area?

ski220 · Dec 27, 2007, 10:35 PM

This is true. There are really very few people who care enough to become activly involved on a continuing basis.

I help lead a 'friends' group at a local park that does trail work and environmental restoration. The group was born out of necessity to prevent trail closure (to mtn bikers because they are a visible target). On any given workday, scores of people pass by and compliment us on our comitment and work. We talk them up, but very few ever participate. Yet they all enjoy the fruits of our labors.

More and more it seems that back/slack country skiing is analogous to the mtn biking scenario that I've seen evolve over the last 20 years. Increased use, environmental degradation, closures. Hmmmm. I think I said that previously.

I also said previously that most slackcountry skiers are just a bunch of yahoos on fat skies. What can you do about the few that willingly and knowingly don't give a dam. Ala skiing the cut on Big Jay? The ski areas them selves are partially to blame, They promote this type of skiing in their brochures and photos.

ski220 · Dec 27, 2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckofer

At first I thought it was bit beaurocratic to craft too many rules this way but then I envisioned what our state parks would look like if 1000 people put in trails without a plan or standard...

Are there really that many true backcountry skiers cutting lines? A thousand lines spread around the state doesn't seem excessive. Or is this mostly an issue at ski areas?

ckofer · Dec 28, 2007, 3:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ski220

Are there really that many true backcountry skiers cutting lines? A thousand lines spread around the state doesn't seem excessive. Or is this mostly an issue at ski areas?

There may not be right now. As it becomes a trend, the response from some may be to ban it completely (zero tolerance). Proactive reasoning can go a long way here.

The 1000 figure is arbitrarily high to make a point.

JD · Dec 28, 2007, 9:56 AM

Of the natural Mtns. I ski at (no lifts) there has been cutting. Enough to go with your crew of 3-4, ski all day, not cross a track and leave. Ussually at these areas we are skiing vert of 800-1200ish. We'll ussually get 4-8 laps in. These "developed" areas are mostly mid elevation hardwood and I have never considered the activity there a detriment.
Some areas at Stowe are so over-worked that more then a few "secret" lines cross 2-3 other "secret" lines on their way down. The good terrain is so hammered, and here we're talking about high alpine spruce and fir, steep terrain. Lower down on the hill there are several glades that are really groomed out and can be skiied with as little as 20 inches dense snow. Some of these areas should prolly be closed for a few seasons, but that will never happen. Others prolly could be more easily controled.

After thinking about management, which seems to be the big problem in SC woods runs, I think the 40 inch rule is a good place to start.

BITD, MTBing was about getting muddy to a certain extent. When we realized that riding muddy trails litterally wrecked singletrack, we started to try and educate people about not riding if the trail surface is soft enough to leave a rut, which captures water and brings it down the trail, instead of draining accross. People were skeptical about changing people's behavior and for a year or two in town people continued. But more and more people changed their way of thinking, and with educational signage and a few encouters at the trail head, I am happy to say that if you were to go ride in the rain in Stowe now, you'de be lucky to get out of town w/o some sort of emotional trama.
I think the same thing can happen, problem is, no one understands their impact. Generally, people want to do the right thing. Signage and a good locals effort to let folks know what is and isn't cool could have a big impact on the masses behavior, unfortunately, this kind of change in the mindset of folks looking to get off piste takes time to sink in, and the JBird thing has obviously affected the land manager's patience.
Long story short, closeing off piste areas for thin cover seems like a logical first step, and an easy one to impliment. From there, see what areas are still getting abused and direct the limited resources towards further enforcement.
And if you want to cut ski runs in the woods, don't do it at the lift served areas. The heat is on there.
Go to topozone, search out areas with 1000 vert, north faceing, and go for a hike with your pruning saw and extension pole. You'll not be bothered, and you'll never find "Your" line skiied when you show up.

riverc0il · Dec 28, 2007, 4:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD

And if you want to cut ski runs in the woods, don't do it at the lift served areas. The heat is on there. Go to topozone, search out areas with 1000 vert, north faceing, and go for a hike with your pruning saw and extension pole. You'll not be bothered, and you'll never find "Your" line skiied when you show up.

The heat is on everywhere now if the State rep on the issue is to be believed. Though ski area slackcountry will definitely see the harshest crack downs because ski areas have people working there during the off season and can keep eyes on people. I suspect the ski areas will be somewhat more motivated to cooperate than letting people keep doing what they are doing.

atkinson · Jan 1, 2008, 9:42 AM

Great discussion everyone.

No sugar in my tank down here, but we have limited lines to lead tours, basically three narrowly defined options in the entire 2000 acre bowl. Sugarbush also maintains the lines and pays for the bus service that everybody uses to get back to the lifts.

My facts on how the Big Jay guys were caught may be inaccurate. At the time of writing, the details weren't clear. Sorry for any confusion.

Bolton has cut and maintained off-piste lines for many years, though it has been mainly employees who do the work. The Bush has a small voulnteer program for the official Slide Brook lines and I hoping to grow this program to include other areas, ala MRG's initiative.

CTA and GMC have explored maintaining glades and climbing trails, on Big Jay even, and I think they are in a better position to push for legal lines than any newly-formed group. I haven't asked Ben or Jim how they feel about it yet, but plan to get more info soon after the holidays end.

I agree that the statement about only skiing untrimmed stuff is deliberately ignorant. People in both organizations have trimmed lines and a whole lot more have skied trimmed lines. They may never admit it in public after this incident, but the point is that we are all part of the problem until we become part of the solution. Merely denouncing the Big Jay duo, or the long-standing trimming tradition that has developed, are not enough.

As for the analogy between biking and skiing, sure traffic is different on the two types of "trails", but the localism and territorial nature of un-approved bike trails mirrors the skiing issue that this thread orginally documented. And now that we have legal bike trails, this issue is no longer a problem. I believe that legal glades would accomplish the same change in the bc ski community.

John

swordy · Jan 1, 2008, 11:50 AM

Everybody should learn to play nice and share! Newer users to recreational resources are often targeted (like mountain bikers were at my local park), usually by exsisting users who have just as much or more impact (dog walkers and fishermen for example).

Seems to me that side/backcountry is pretty low impact, and have much less impact then the ski area they are adjacent to. There are alot of woods out there, probably more than there was 100 years ago. Wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the sprawling residential and commercial developement, instead hassling a few powder addicts.

Dec 27, 2007, 10:35 PM	#61 (permalink)
ski220 Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 125	This is true. There are really very few people who care enough to become activly involved on a continuing basis. I help lead a 'friends' group at a local park that does trail work and environmental restoration. The group was born out of necessity to prevent trail closure (to mtn bikers because they are a visible target). On any given workday, scores of people pass by and compliment us on our comitment and work. We talk them up, but very few ever participate. Yet they all enjoy the fruits of our labors. More and more it seems that back/slack country skiing is analogous to the mtn biking scenario that I've seen evolve over the last 20 years. Increased use, environmental degradation, closures. Hmmmm. I think I said that previously. I also said previously that most slackcountry skiers are just a bunch of yahoos on fat skies. What can you do about the few that willingly and knowingly don't give a dam. Ala skiing the cut on Big Jay? The ski areas them selves are partially to blame, They promote this type of skiing in their brochures and photos. Last edited by ski220; Dec 27, 2007 at 10:46 PM. Reason: additional thoughts

Dec 28, 2007, 9:56 AM	#64 (permalink)
JD Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Northfield Posts: 935	Of the natural Mtns. I ski at (no lifts) there has been cutting. Enough to go with your crew of 3-4, ski all day, not cross a track and leave. Ussually at these areas we are skiing vert of 800-1200ish. We'll ussually get 4-8 laps in. These "developed" areas are mostly mid elevation hardwood and I have never considered the activity there a detriment. Some areas at Stowe are so over-worked that more then a few "secret" lines cross 2-3 other "secret" lines on their way down. The good terrain is so hammered, and here we're talking about high alpine spruce and fir, steep terrain. Lower down on the hill there are several glades that are really groomed out and can be skiied with as little as 20 inches dense snow. Some of these areas should prolly be closed for a few seasons, but that will never happen. Others prolly could be more easily controled. After thinking about management, which seems to be the big problem in SC woods runs, I think the 40 inch rule is a good place to start. BITD, MTBing was about getting muddy to a certain extent. When we realized that riding muddy trails litterally wrecked singletrack, we started to try and educate people about not riding if the trail surface is soft enough to leave a rut, which captures water and brings it down the trail, instead of draining accross. People were skeptical about changing people's behavior and for a year or two in town people continued. But more and more people changed their way of thinking, and with educational signage and a few encouters at the trail head, I am happy to say that if you were to go ride in the rain in Stowe now, you'de be lucky to get out of town w/o some sort of emotional trama. I think the same thing can happen, problem is, no one understands their impact. Generally, people want to do the right thing. Signage and a good locals effort to let folks know what is and isn't cool could have a big impact on the masses behavior, unfortunately, this kind of change in the mindset of folks looking to get off piste takes time to sink in, and the JBird thing has obviously affected the land manager's patience. Long story short, closeing off piste areas for thin cover seems like a logical first step, and an easy one to impliment. From there, see what areas are still getting abused and direct the limited resources towards further enforcement. And if you want to cut ski runs in the woods, don't do it at the lift served areas. The heat is on there. Go to topozone, search out areas with 1000 vert, north faceing, and go for a hike with your pruning saw and extension pole. You'll not be bothered, and you'll never find "Your" line skiied when you show up. __________________ Don\'t know until you go.

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

Jan 1, 2008, 9:42 AM	#66 (permalink)
atkinson Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 69	Great discussion everyone. No sugar in my tank down here, but we have limited lines to lead tours, basically three narrowly defined options in the entire 2000 acre bowl. Sugarbush also maintains the lines and pays for the bus service that everybody uses to get back to the lifts. My facts on how the Big Jay guys were caught may be inaccurate. At the time of writing, the details weren't clear. Sorry for any confusion. Bolton has cut and maintained off-piste lines for many years, though it has been mainly employees who do the work. The Bush has a small voulnteer program for the official Slide Brook lines and I hoping to grow this program to include other areas, ala MRG's initiative. CTA and GMC have explored maintaining glades and climbing trails, on Big Jay even, and I think they are in a better position to push for legal lines than any newly-formed group. I haven't asked Ben or Jim how they feel about it yet, but plan to get more info soon after the holidays end. I agree that the statement about only skiing untrimmed stuff is deliberately ignorant. People in both organizations have trimmed lines and a whole lot more have skied trimmed lines. They may never admit it in public after this incident, but the point is that we are all part of the problem until we become part of the solution. Merely denouncing the Big Jay duo, or the long-standing trimming tradition that has developed, are not enough. As for the analogy between biking and skiing, sure traffic is different on the two types of "trails", but the localism and territorial nature of un-approved bike trails mirrors the skiing issue that this thread orginally documented. And now that we have legal bike trails, this issue is no longer a problem. I believe that legal glades would accomplish the same change in the bc ski community. John

Jan 1, 2008, 11:50 AM	#67 (permalink)
swordy Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Stamford CT Posts: 2	Everybody should learn to play nice and share! Newer users to recreational resources are often targeted (like mountain bikers were at my local park), usually by exsisting users who have just as much or more impact (dog walkers and fishermen for example). Seems to me that side/backcountry is pretty low impact, and have much less impact then the ski area they are adjacent to. There are alot of woods out there, probably more than there was 100 years ago. Wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the sprawling residential and commercial developement, instead hassling a few powder addicts.