From KZone: Guerilla Trailblazers Arrested

[kcyanks1]

settle down, don't get your golf knickers in a bunch pal. I never made one comment about the socio econmic differences between skiers and golfers.

JD's arguement is actually quite sound in that regard though when talking about that particular golf course. While yes, as a whole, the entry costs for golf are lower and it is more accessible to lower income people than skiing, there are exceptions. If you've seen it, they completely TRASHED a pristine valley and mountain side so that not the rich, but the MEGA FILTHY RICH, can play golf. Whatever inner city programs you speak of, which I think are great, certainly aren't welcome at that track.

I certainly don't condone what these people did at Jay. You want to go in the woods and carve out a couple a shots by pruning some lower branches and saplings with a hack saw, fine by me, in many instances that actually helps the forest, however what they did was certainly wrong. BUT, if you compare what these people did in comparison to what Stowe did in putting in that golf course, in terms of degradation to the environment, they aren't in the same league. That's JD's point and I agree with him completely.

Except what does the wealth of the people that are going to use the gold course vs. those that are going to use the "trail" have to do with the environmental impact? We can discuss the latter without saying anything about the former. There was no need to bash the golf course because the people using it might be rich. If the point is to say it was more destructive to the environment than the cut on Big Jay, that's a whole different issue. (And what about all of the legally cut trails, if we are going to start compare magnitude without regard to legality?)

 

[JD]

Golf is great. It runs in my family. When I'm so old that walking 18 actually counts as exercise I'll be all over it, but in the case of the golf course at Stowe Mtn Resort, I think you'll find that it is somewhat more the 20 bucks a round. Unattainably expexsive, just like their day passes. Which is the resaon no one comes to ski here, which actually works out for me...
but the point was somewhat lost in that I feel that if you are a super citizen, willing to pay 2 mill for a condo, they will mow down important habitat so you can play golf out your back door. But god for bid you're the guy that works at the butcher, who lives here to ski, cuts down a few dozen trees for the benefit of everyone who heads over to ski Big J. Bit of a rediculous double standard and I think class is definitely part of this issue in the context of this comparison.
((*
*))
((*
*))
JD

 

[snoseek]

Golf is great. It runs in my family. When I'm so old that walking 18 actually counts as exercise I'll be all over it, but in the case of the golf course at Stowe Mtn Resort, I think you'll find that it is somewhat more the 20 bucks a round. Unattainably expexsive, just like their day passes. Which is the resaon no one comes to ski here, which actually works out for me...
but the point was somewhat lost in that I feel that if you are a super citizen, willing to pay 2 mill for a condo, they will mow down important habitat so you can play golf out your back door. But god for bid you're the guy that works at the butcher, who lives here to ski, cuts down a few dozen trees for the benefit of everyone who heads over to ski Big J. Bit of a rediculous double standard and I think class is definitely part of this issue in the context of this comparison.
((*
*))
((*
*))
JD

i totally see where your coming from.

 

[tjf67]

Golf is great. It runs in my family. When I'm so old that walking 18 actually counts as exercise I'll be all over it, but in the case of the golf course at Stowe Mtn Resort, I think you'll find that it is somewhat more the 20 bucks a round. Unattainably expexsive, just like their day passes. Which is the resaon no one comes to ski here, which actually works out for me...
but the point was somewhat lost in that I feel that if you are a super citizen, willing to pay 2 mill for a condo, they will mow down important habitat so you can play golf out your back door. But god for bid you're the guy that works at the butcher, who lives here to ski, cuts down a few dozen trees for the benefit of everyone who heads over to ski Big J. Bit of a rediculous double standard and I think class is definitely part of this issue in the context of this comparison.
((*
*))
((*
*))
JD

The chink in your arguement is that the golf course had done the environmental impact studies and had all the legal permits. Kinda of a big one there.

We all ski here. What the heck have we done to the hills. More damage than a golf course?
As far as I'm concerned cut wherever you want it more to ski for me.

 

[JD]

The permitting process was actually "streamline" in the case of this development. Anything to raise property values even more. The selectmen directly benefit from the decisions they make as property owners in town.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

The permitting process was actually "streamline" in the case of this development. Anything to raise property values even more. The selectmen directly benefit from the decisions they make as property owners in town.

“Society is one vast conspiracy for carving one into the kind of statue it likes, and then placing it in the most convenient niche it has”

 

[JD]

True.

 

[from_the_NEK]

I haven't skied Big Jay, so I don't know...but is the herd path relatively flat? The pitch on the new swath seems to make it quite liable to serious erosion, particularly if vegetative regrowth is hampered by additional skier traffic. If the herd path is less erosion-prone, then I don't see any double standard at all--it's not about the legality of the cut, it's about the impact of the action (the skiing, not the cutting) on the environment.

The hiking/traverse trail over to big jay is just that, a hiking trail. Maybe 4 feet wide and as far as I can tell did not involve removal of fully grown trees. Simply thinning branches to make the traverse less of a bushwhack and keeping everyone on the same herd path. There are hiking trails cut across every major peak in Vermont. The big ruccus over the Big Jay hiking/traverse trail was that Big Jay was the last peak about 3000' that DID NOT have a hiking trail on it. It really doesn't lead anywhere and I would be surprised if it sees much traffic in the summer.

The new cut is completely different. It's construction involved removal of large trees on a steep fallline, creating a fairly large chute down the mtn face. As I have commented before, it is not going to take very many skiers going down this chute to turn it into a luge run. But hey, the more people that want to go hit this new "trail" leaves more powder for me in the natural chutes.

I am going to make every attempt to avoid this cut other than possibly having to cut accross it.

 

[tjf67]

The permitting process was actually "streamline" in the case of this development. Anything to raise property values even more. The selectmen directly benefit from the decisions they make as property owners in town.

I bet if you were one of the select men it would have been fine. you sound like a hippie crying cause they are to busy smoking pot and comming up with grand ideas rather than actualy doing anything.

 

[JD]

Um, you know nothing about me, and your comment proves that. Go play some golf...I hear it's wicked.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Wow. Some stunningly poor arguments in this thread.

JD - you are the biggest hypocrite of the bunch. Why does it follow that the people who are playing golf at Spruce must all be assholes? That just lame class-warfare bullshit.

Second, have you taken a second to think of the pristine mountain environment that once existed in the Mansfield/Smugglers Notch area? You seem to have no reservations about skiing these hundreds of clear-cut acres but it's those awful, wealthy golfers who are the problem, right?

What a load of disingenuous horse shit.

 

[ComeBackMudPuddles]

Some pretty angry people on this thread!!! The whole golf/ski fight is pretty silly, IMHO. They both take money, and they both impact the environment quite a bit.....

And now for something completely different.

I'm actually not for any unapproved clear cutting/pruning/hacking/cutting/destruction in the woods, which I think puts me in the extreme minority on this board. Wild and protected state land is for the benefit of all of the public, not just backcountry skiers. I would prefer that it be enjoyed in its natural state. If it's not skiable, tough. Taking matters into your own hands, no matter how small the impact might be, is pretty selfish (IMHO), and alters the environment for everyone else for several years.

:smash:

To be clear, I'm not saying "no development". I'm all for controled development that's open to public review and comment. Everything has its place.

 

[JD]

TW, I would be happy if there were no lifts and no cut trails. I don't buy a pass and ski away from area most of the time.
You are putting words in my mouth and TJ is trying to tell me how I would act if I were on the select board.
You guys need to get out more. Maybe you could go shoot a few rounds on the local public course. I hear it's great.
I'm gonna go up to the notch and climb for a bit before work, and, as ussual, I'm gonna try to not looka the war zone that has become the base area at spruce.
PS
seems like golfers are pretty agro. Another reason to stay away from the "natural beauty" of the links.
AND, we are all hypoctrits, it's the attempt at a concious that makes the difference.

 

[JimG.]

Well, I'm getting a headache here.

I really feel that JD might have been better served if he had just qualified his golfer comment to cover the golfers who use the course at Stowe. Because obviously that course and its' development has been controversial and has its' staunch opponents. There's a strong and entrenched local population there, many of whom didn't like the golf development. If I lived there I might be upset by it too.

And by stipulating that, the discussion would have fit into the topic of the illegal cut on Big Jay. It annoys people, and some folks are mortally offended by it. But let's be honest, it's nothing compared to a new ski area development. In the big picture, it's a local issue at best.

Anyway, after that bit of interpretation, feel free to bash away.

 

[ccskier]

Every ski resort now has a golf course. Maybe the cutting up at Jay is an addition to the new golf course. This thread started out talking about how a few idiots made a bad decision and cut down some trees. It is now getting way out of context and makes no sense. Yes, I play golf, ski, drive an SUV that gets 15 miles to the gallon, pee outside and I plan to ski the cut trail if I come across it There I said it, I am sure I will be called a snob, ecohater, whatever. People are taking all this talk way too far and need to give it all up. What is done is done. Golf courses are built, trails are cut, houses/hotels will be built and the environment is not improving. I also lived in the Stowe area for about 5 years right before this whole development started and can't believe what is going on up there, but that is what makes the wheels of the Vermont economy turn. I have since taken my skiing up to Jay for the past few years and love what the are has to offer, beisides I have family there, fortunately it is too far to successful develop like Stowe.

As Jim G. said, this crap up at Jay does not compare to new developments. If people want to get fire up about something then look at that. I know that it is sad that this stuff is happening to such beautiful areas, but these days money talks in both business and politics. Both of which work together.

 

[millerm277]

@ccskier, there is a difference in my opinion, because of the elevation and conditions, it's going to take a very long time for those trees to re-generate on their own, instead of the few years that it takes down at lower elevations.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

The permitting process was actually "streamline" in the case of this development. Anything to raise property values even more. The selectmen directly benefit from the decisions they make as property owners in town.

Wow...gotta say something here. You mean the selectman plus every other property owner, you know, the community. Sure there alot of out of state second homeowners but Stowe is a real community made up of alot of hard working people. Part of the reason they are elected is to improve the economy, no matter what town your looking at.

In my view it took SMR over 15 years to get the permits to build their new developement and improving the amount of water for snowmaking. I can think of at least two other developement proposals they put together that were shot down by the state and the local community. About 10 years ago they even proposed building a huge pipeline to get snowmaking water from Waterbury Resevoir. In view of what happened to the Waterbury Res in the last 6 years lucky for them it was a very stupid idea with no chance of getting off the drawing board. After 15 years of trying maybe finally coming up with a proposal that works deserved alittle "streamling".

Back to Jay...Screwing with your own property is one thing but taking trees down on someone else's property, public or private, is just plain wrong no matter how some of you are rationalizing it. Over our history we took wilderness and built roads, bridges, railroads, farms and towns and somehow that makes what these guys did ok? This cut needs to be left alone so it can regrow. It shouldn't be skied. I'm with River on this one.


JD - to be honest pretty much every Stowe local I have talked to thinks the developement is too big and/or doesn't like it at all. Many mention your point, without the selectman reference, of course. It will drive real estate prices up even more and make it harder for locals to buy a home. Wouldn't you agree tho in reference to Stowe being an affordable place to live...that ship left years ago.

 

[ComeBackMudPuddles]

"What is done is done" and "It is what it is" are two of my least favorite phrases. They are exceedingly patronizing, especially in the context of this thread.

Things are right, wrong or something in the middle, but, in this case, the two chainsaw wielding guys are simply and definitely wrong. There's no way to redeem them, their actions or the gash on the side of the mountain.

 

[JimG.]

I don't think anyone is claiming what these guys did was anything other than stupid and just plain wrong.

Not to mention illegal...the guys were arrested and hopefully get the book thrown at them.

And if I had a house that had Big Jay for a view, I'd be very pissed about it.

I don't get to Jay much, and when I do I stick to tree skiing. If I had someone to show me over to Big Jay, I'd ski there but would probably stay off that cut...because I'm there to ski trees, not trails. If I wandered onto it by accident I'd be off it again in a turn, back into trees.

But that's as far as my conscience goes...I'm not moved to start a petition, or stand on the herd path admonishing hikers to stay off the cut, or stand in the cut and yell at skiers who do ski it. Good luck keeping people off of it. And the more it's discussed, the more the "ambulance chasers" will want to ski it.

The only way to keep people off it would be to cut Big Jay off completely...and arrest anyone who gets caught there. And I doubt even the most staunch of the cut haters is going to avoid Big Jay completely.

 

[VTpowder]

:flame:
i think there needs to be an all out boycott of jay peak and big jay! lets all just ski somewhere else to make a point.
your actions will speak for your statements.