# From KZone:  Guerilla Trailblazers Arrested



## thetrailboss (Aug 4, 2007)

Just saw this on KZone.  As folks who ski Jay know, there is already too much traffic over at Big Jay.  But these guys actually cut a 60 foot wood swath, 3/4 of a mile in length with the intent of skiing it!  

*The article.*


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 4, 2007)

Ha, looks like someone got a little carried away. :dunce: Low branches and shrubs just weren't enough. 'Cause no one will notice clear cutting on the side of a mountain. :roll: 

Hopefully there won't be a backlash on the careful back country pruners.


----------



## millerm277 (Aug 4, 2007)

You've gotta wonder what they were thinking....I'm sure no one will notice a giant ski trail cut through the protected forest below a major mountain peak...

Seriously, that must have taken a LOT of time and effort, that's a lot of trees if it's really 60 feet wide, and moving them off the trail will either require heavy equipment, or a lot of cutting.

However, now that the damage has been done, it would be a shame to let their efforts go to waste....hopefully it wasn't south-facing.


----------



## twinplanx (Aug 4, 2007)

yeah seriously 60' is a bit much


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 4, 2007)

millerm277 said:


> However, now that the damage has been done, it would be a shame to let their efforts go to waste....hopefully it wasn't south-facing.


Actually I really hope it grows back in.  People will certainly ski it, but no additional pruning.  The forest will reclaim it soon enough.  It's adventures like this and the illegal trail cut to Big Jay from the ski area that is going to result on some serious crackdowns.


----------



## awf170 (Aug 4, 2007)

I highly doubt that it was clear cut.  It was probably a 60 ft. wide glade.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 4, 2007)

awf170 said:


> I highly doubt that it was clear cut.  It was probably a 60 ft. wide glade.



[Scratches head]

Well, it does say this in the article:



> In late July, State Game Warden Sgt. Brad Mann and Warden Mark Schichtle, following up on a complaint from members of the Green Mountain Club, *located a forest cut approximately 60 feet wide and three-quarter of a mile long* near the top of Big Jay Mountain within Jay State Forest in the Town of Westfield.




Doesn't sound like a glade to me....


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 4, 2007)

I don't think the article provides an accurate description to draw a conclusion either way regarding if it was clear cut or just gladed out. The article only states the cutting was sixty feet wide. I suspect the number is exaggerated. If it is a clear cut, I find it really hard to believe two people could clear that much acreage. They would almost certainly have needed powder tools and assistance moving fallen trees. If this truly is accurately report as a clear cut sixty foot wide swath that runs 3/4 a mile long, these guys should get the book thrown at them. That is beyond reckless.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 4, 2007)

Anyone in the neighborhood who can run/hike by and take some pics for us? That should settle what was going on. 

Even if they were not clear cutting, they must been a little over enthusiastic with the glading. Don't they look the other way most of the time when folks are doing a little pruning up that way?


----------



## millerm277 (Aug 4, 2007)

David Metsky said:


> Actually I really hope it grows back in.  People will certainly ski it, but no additional pruning.  The forest will reclaim it soon enough.  It's adventures like this and the illegal trail cut to Big Jay from the ski area that is going to result on some serious crackdowns.



I agree, especially since it will probably result in areas being less lenient to the off-season pruners, that keep a lot of tree runs skiable.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 4, 2007)

Admittedly we don't know.  By the sound of it, the mess is extensive and they caught the guys who did it.  



riverc0il said:


> They would almost certainly have needed *powder tools* and assistance moving fallen trees. If this truly is accurately report as a clear cut sixty foot wide swath that runs 3/4 a mile long, these guys should get the book thrown at them. That is beyond reckless.



Powder tools?  :lol:  Someone is jonesin'!!!!  :lol:


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 4, 2007)

Oops, that was a really bad slip. I was converting my 04-05 season trip reports today and had powder on the brain. That would be power tools, of course, a complete and total no no for more appropriate and subtle brushing.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 4, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> Oops, that was a really bad slip. I was converting my 04-05 season trip reports today and had powder on the brain. That would be power tools, of course, a complete and total no no for more appropriate and subtle brushing.



As I said, you are jonesin' to ski.  :wink:


----------



## twinplanx (Aug 5, 2007)

well with the width of the trail maybe they were planning on some "powder tools"


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 6, 2007)

was up on jay for the jay challenge cheering a friend on - having heard about investigation and the details from  one of the state workers i too couldn't believe it when he said it was clear cut...

well, it is, there is now a huge open gash on big jay, it is awful, and sad, i can only wonder how it will effect the drainage of heavy rain and snow over the years, land slide does not seem out of the question, you can now drive my VW down the face of big jay

everyone be careful this fall heading into the woods with loppers - and be smart, if you have to chop it down then it isn't the right way


----------



## bvibert (Aug 6, 2007)

kingdom-tele said:


> well, it is, there is now a huge open gash on big jay, it is awful, and sad, i can only wonder how it will effect the drainage of heavy rain and snow over the years, land slide does not seem out of the question, you can now drive my VW down the face of big jay



That is really sad to hear that it is indeed clear cut.  I wonder how long they were working on it?


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 6, 2007)

kingdom-tele said:


> was up on jay for the jay challenge cheering a friend on - having heard about investigation and the details from  one of the state workers i too couldn't believe it when he said it was clear cut...
> 
> well, it is, there is now a huge open gash on big jay, it is awful, and sad, i can only wonder how it will effect the drainage of heavy rain and snow over the years, land slide does not seem out of the question, you can now drive my VW down the face of big jay
> 
> everyone be careful this fall heading into the woods with loppers - and be smart, if you have to chop it down then it isn't the right way



Wow! I hope they throw the book at them, they probably screwed things up for everyone for several years. 

Are the authorities sure they were doing this for skiing? It could have been an illegal logging operation? Either way they were not too bright.


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 6, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Are the authorities sure they were doing this for skiing? It could have been an illegal logging operation?


There's no way to haul logs out from there, and they are literally 1000's of places much easier to get wood from.  It's for skiing, no other reason to cut up there.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 6, 2007)

David Metsky said:


> There's no way to haul logs out from there, and they are literally 1000's of places much easier to get wood from.  It's for skiing, no other reason to cut up there.



Makes you wonder what they did with all the lumber?


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 6, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Makes you wonder what they did with all the lumber?


From what it sounds like, just tossed it to the sides.


----------



## RENO (Aug 6, 2007)

I still don't understand how they could cut something so huge and nobody at the resort saw it? :???:


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 6, 2007)

your would not see it from the resort proper unless sitting at the tram house or up on the northway

it must have taken a while though and to not see the progression on the line is odd, that being said though - i hike up there weekly and its 50/50 if you can see big jay or the hand in front of your face, i never noticed it before


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 6, 2007)

millerm277 said:


> You've gotta wonder what they were thinking....I'm sure no one will notice a giant ski trail cut through the protected forest below a major mountain peak...
> 
> Seriously, that must have taken a LOT of time and effort, that's a lot of trees if it's really 60 feet wide, and moving them off the trail will either require heavy equipment, or a lot of cutting.
> 
> However, now that the damage has been done, it would be a shame to let their efforts go to waste....hopefully it wasn't south-facing.



It sounds like they had been working on it for several weeks (from what I gathered from the article I saw). The trees on the upper parts of Big Jay aren't real big due to the harsh enviroment making it hard for trees to grow large. However, it sounds like they had to be using power tools to clear cut a strip like that. Moving them off trail wouldn't necessarily require heavy equipment. Cutting the trees into smaller pieces and the aid of gravity allows a couple guys to move a tree fairly easily. Hopefully the tree waste they moved off of their "Swath" didn't adversely afect the good lines that were already in place on Big Jay.
I know that "pruning" that I have done on a 1/4 mile long glade took me about 2 full days of work with a lopper and a bow saw. I never cut anything greater than 2-3 inches in diameter. I can't imagine what could be done with a couple of chain saws and a couple of weeks :-o .
Cutting down trees larger than that is just wrong (not that don't feel that there is a certain amount of pushing the boundary between wrong and right in my pruning operations). This situation is lending fuel to the fire that gives all pruners a bad name. :evil:


----------



## snoseek (Aug 6, 2007)

RENO said:


> I still don't understand how they could cut something so huge and nobody at the resort saw it? :???:



can't really see it from the bottom of the resort. view from 242 is pretty good i think.


----------



## RENO (Aug 6, 2007)

Any pictures?


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 6, 2007)

I found this on TGR that has a similar thread to this one:







Looking at this pic, why on earth would you need to cut a trail here?


----------



## AdironRider (Aug 6, 2007)

My boys at UVM are already talking about it. While Ill be out west the majority of the season Ill be around the Burlington area for about a week in Feb. Ill post up a TR once I hit it. 

Seriously though, while it sucks these nimrods thought they needed to clear cut an area, mother nature has a remarkable ability to retake the land suprisingly quickly. Within 5 years, those who didnt know about it to begin with wont be able to notice Im sure.


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 6, 2007)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> So how many of you will ski it this winter?


On TeleTips a group is organizing a volunteer work weekend with the National Forest people to replant up there this summer/fall and mark the affected area as regeneration zones.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 6, 2007)

kingdom-tele said:


> was up on jay for the jay challenge cheering a friend on - having heard about investigation and the details from  one of the state workers i too couldn't believe it when he said it was clear cut...
> 
> well, it is, there is now a huge open gash on big jay, it is awful, and sad, i can only wonder how it will effect the drainage of heavy rain and snow over the years, land slide does not seem out of the question, you can now drive my VW down the face of big jay
> 
> everyone be careful this fall heading into the woods with loppers - and be smart, if you have to chop it down then it isn't the right way



:evil::evil::angry::angry::angry:

This makes me beyond angry. Not only to have the clear cut verified but also on Big Jay of all places. That was the last place in the world that needed cutting. The best part about Big Jay is the natural aspects of that area. I encourage all fellow Big Jay skiers to join me in a complete boycott of that area pending many many years of regrowth. Not only on philosophical grounds but also practical as that area will almost surely be avalanche prone now that all those anchors have been removed. These guys really deserve to have the book thrown at them.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 6, 2007)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> So how many of you will ski it this winter?



I've never skied Jay (although, I want to). This story just really caught my attention. It sounds like no one will be skiing it anyway, which is probably a good thing. If you want to ski on a trail that's what the ski areas are for.


----------



## snowman (Aug 6, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> I found this on TGR that has a similar thread to this one:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To me, it looks like the trees are so sparse it would take no time at all to clear out a trail like that. Depending on the line you took, to cut a 60 foot wide swath it looks like you only need to cut a tree every 25 feet or so. That's about 150 trees in 3/4 of a mile. Two guys with chain saw skills could do that in a day. You can fall a pretty big tree, strip it and chunk it in 5 mins if you really know what you're doing and have a good sharp chainsaw. That's 6 hours, 15 mins for 2 guys, no breaks = a day with a break here and there, refuelling, and 5 chain changes each.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 7, 2007)

snowman, it's not as open as it looks.... it would certainly take a few weeks even with power tools.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 7, 2007)

I dont think they moved the trees anywhere.  The just cut them and let them drop.  As long as they are flat on the ground they would be covered in no time.

I dont think it took as long as a lot of people think.  Two guys two chain saws that terrain I bet they did it in a weekend.   

They must have been smoking some pretty good stuff,  It the only way I can imagine people doing something so dumb.


----------



## drjeff (Aug 7, 2007)

Should we even venture a guess or head down the "were they skiers or boarders?" path.  Or the locals vs. Jay road trippers path?

Not to stereotype, but my guess would be on U.S. male snowboarders in their mid 20's that road trip to Jay from more than 4 hours away.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 7, 2007)

drjeff said:


> Should we even venture a guess or head down the "were they skiers or boarders?" path.  Or the locals vs. Jay road trippers path?
> 
> Not to stereotype, but my guess would be on U.S. male snowboarders in their mid 20's that road trip to Jay from more than 4 hours away.



Dude, did you even read the article? It's a couple of local guys in their late 40's.


----------



## skibum1321 (Aug 7, 2007)

drjeff said:


> Should we even venture a guess or head down the "were they skiers or boarders?" path.  Or the locals vs. Jay road trippers path?
> 
> Not to stereotype, but my guess would be on U.S. male snowboarders in their mid 20's that road trip to Jay from more than 4 hours away.


They're also from North Troy, which is right around the corner from Jay. Shows how accurate stereotyping is...


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 7, 2007)

drjeff said:


> Should we even venture a guess or head down the "were they skiers or boarders?" path.  Or the locals vs. Jay road trippers path?
> 
> Not to stereotype, but my guess would be on U.S. male snowboarders in their mid 20's that road trip to Jay from more than 4 hours away.



I think someone needs to layoff the nitrous . . . :lol::razz::lol:


----------



## threecy (Aug 7, 2007)

skibum1321 said:


> They're also from North Troy, which is right around the corner from Jay. Shows how accurate stereotyping is...



You're just that stereotypical person who says that stereotypes are generally wrong.


----------



## drjeff (Aug 7, 2007)

Just delerious from the heat today  and my teething 18 month old son being up every hour last night 

I won't even venture into the stereotypes that two forty year old guys from Northern VT conjures up!


----------



## JimG. (Aug 7, 2007)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> My guess would be your guess is wrong ... I believe the news article stated they were in their forties plus I don't believe you would ever find a twenty year old with that much ambition let alone two.



Except for the stereotype about ambition in 20 year olds, you are correct. They were two relative locals in their 40's. Mid-life crisis? 

Oh, and about the 20 year olds, I would agree if you said you wouldn't find a 20 year old with a chainsaw and the tools and spare parts needed for this job let alone two. 2 stroke yard tools are the domain of the old fart.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 7, 2007)

drjeff said:


> Just delerious from the heat today  and my teething 18 month old son being up every hour last night



Wow, still teething a 18 mos. That's a bummer! Both my kids started getting teeth at 3-4 months. The 10 month old has about 1/2 of his in already.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 7, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Wow, still teething a 18 mos. That's a bummer! Both my kids started getting teeth at 3-4 months. The 10 month old has about 1/2 of his in already.



Probably those rear molars...they can take a while to break through. And they hurt like a bitch until they do.


----------



## snowman (Aug 7, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> snowman, it's not as open as it looks.... it would certainly take a few weeks even with power tools.



Really?! It almost looks to me like there's 100 to 200 foot stretches here and there where you wouldn't have to cut anything, creating that average. Due to the type of trees and width of their canopies you only have to take out maximum 2 wide to get 60 feet. Since you've been, and I haven't, what do you think the average spacing footage is? I'm assuming they took the optimum path where they would have to drop the least trees.......


----------



## drjeff (Aug 7, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Wow, still teething a 18 mos. That's a bummer! Both my kids started getting teeth at 3-4 months. The 10 month old has about 1/2 of his in already.



Actually my son has less than 1/2 of his baby teeth so far, although that doesn't stop him from eating just about anything 

Big sis didn't get the last of her 20 baby teeth until just after she turned 3.  Just mean the tooth fairy won't be stopping by my house until my kids are close to 8 rather than the usual average age of 6.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 8, 2007)

I wonder if the scar will look anything like this PhotoChopped image? :evil:
Big Jay was plenty open without having to plow a blvd down the face.


----------



## Boardguy (Aug 8, 2007)

We need pictures!!!!


----------



## threecy (Aug 8, 2007)

I was thinking it probably looks more like this


----------



## snowman (Aug 8, 2007)

threecy said:


> I was thinking it probably looks more like this




Nice! How much time/fine do you think I'd get for sneaking up there with my buddy and installing a high speed quad???


----------



## ctenidae (Aug 9, 2007)

snowman said:


> Nice! How much time/fine do you think I'd get for sneaking up there with my buddy and installing a high speed quad???



You'd have to be careful- it'll be hard to hide the helicopter.


----------



## djspookman (Aug 9, 2007)

ctenidae said:


> You'd have to be careful- it'll be hard to hide the helicopter.




or, if you don't use a chopper, it may be easier to hide a bulldozer in the woods while you build a road to each tower, then use some ground machinery to hoist the towers in place....  yikes!

the news of the SCAR at big jay sickens me though..sucks..

dave


----------



## pepperdawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Boardguy said:


> We need pictures!!!!





http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html


----------



## bvibert (Aug 10, 2007)

pepperdawg said:


> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html



Thanks for the link!  That doesn't look like 60' across to me I think the narrator said 20'.  Looks like a lot of damage, but I was expecting worse the way the article sounded....


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 10, 2007)

pepperdawg said:


> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html



Not exactly 60ft wide, but still pretty ugly.


----------



## bigbog (Aug 10, 2007)

*...pretty wide...*

60' wide......I guess we can rule out *Greg* and a newfound bumpfield...;-)


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 10, 2007)

pepperdawg said:


> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html




Thanks for the link I was hoping to see the actual cut.  


OK so who will ski it?


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 10, 2007)

with any luck no one will be skiing it, it should be roped off, replanted, and allowed to recover for the good of the hillside

there is plenty of skiing available on big jay that this should be left alone and allowed to recover, skiing it would be just a step behind cutting it, go left or right and ski the woods how they were meant to be skied


----------



## 2knees (Aug 10, 2007)

I'd bet the forest service might not be too happy about anyone skiing it.


----------



## trtaylor (Aug 10, 2007)

pepperdawg said:


> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html



Good grief...what were those woodchucks thinking?


----------



## Marc (Aug 10, 2007)

JimG. said:


> Except for the stereotype about ambition in 20 year olds, you are correct. They were two relative locals in their 40's. Mid-life crisis?
> 
> Oh, and about the 20 year olds, I would agree if you said you wouldn't find a 20 year old with a chainsaw and the tools and spare parts needed for this job let alone two. 2 stroke yard tools are the domain of the old fart.



I had already rebuilt two chainsaws, a weed wacker and two push mowers by the time I was 20.


I only own one chainsaw now, but am in the market for a stihl 026 pro, if anyone is selling.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 10, 2007)

kingdom-tele said:


> with any luck no one will be skiing it, it should be roped off, replanted, and allowed to recover for the good of the hillside
> 
> there is plenty of skiing available on big jay that this should be left alone and allowed to recover, skiing it would be just a step behind cutting it, go left or right and ski the woods how they were meant to be skied



Yeah I dont know.  When I am over there I am going to take a look at it.  I guess I will decide at that point.  
I think people are going to ski it.  Its done, it was stupid and should have never been butit is what it is. 

Looks like there is a couple of good hits in there


----------



## JimG. (Aug 10, 2007)

Marc said:


> I had already rebuilt two chainsaws, a weed wacker and two push mowers by the time I was 20.
> 
> 
> I only own one chainsaw now, but am in the market for a stihl 026 pro, if anyone is selling.



But you're a mutant farmer boy.

An old fart before your time.

That doesn't count.


----------



## Marc (Aug 10, 2007)

Well.  That backfired on me.


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 10, 2007)

unfortunately I think you are right, but if the forest dept or GMC can act fast enough at least it would give people considering not skiing more reason to do just that, by at least getting some regrowth started it might deter most of those who give shit


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 10, 2007)

tjf67 said:


> Its done, it was stupid and should have never been but it is what it is.


NO!  This is a stupid thing and it shouldn't be rewarded or you're just going to get more.  That's what happened with the original illegal trail over to Big Jay, and this is the result.  I think there will be a solid effort to rope this sucker off for revegitation.



> Looks like there is a couple of good hits in there


There were plenty of good hits before these assholes cut this swath.  It wasn't needed, the skiing was better before it got cut.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 10, 2007)

tjf67 said:


> OK so who will ski it?


No one. Seriously, please do not ski this abomination. I know it looks tempting. Just pretend it is not there. I would like to see it made a crime to ski that thing. I will be skiing Big Jay this year but will be avoiding that section. Since most sensible backcountry skiers will be doing the same, I fear it will be considered even more worth it for some skiers will lower ethics. I would like to see it made a felony to ski this cut.


----------



## awf170 (Aug 10, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> No one. Seriously, please do not ski this abomination. I know it looks tempting. Just pretend it is not there. I would like to see it made a crime to ski that thing. I will be skiing Big Jay this year but will be avoiding that section. Since most sensible backcountry skiers will be doing the same, I fear it will be considered even more worth it for some skiers will lower ethics. I would like to see it made a felony to ski this cut.




Could it really be made into a crime to ski?  Anyway, there is no way they could enforce it.  I think they best way about this is just planting new trees, then marking it off as a re-veg zone.  Maybe use some construction barrier webbing to keep people out, though that might be just as much as an eye sour as the trail.

Maybe some of this in a less noticeable color.






Also, this thing does look like a very nice run.  Probably a contender for best run in New England.  Still don't ski it though, I know I won't.


----------



## L2RAFO (Aug 10, 2007)

I followed this thread at the beginning, and just took a look at the end, but, as I just paid my Snowbird condo fees, I'm a little too weak at the moment to read the whole thing. So, if this has already been covered, I apologize, but would like to know how the cut could have gotten so far without anyone noticing. I'm not at all familiar with Jay, but is that spot they cut so far away that no body would've heard it?


----------



## snowman (Aug 11, 2007)

ctenidae said:


> You'd have to be careful- it'll be hard to hide the helicopter.




No biggy. I've got a buddy with one of those black CIA op's silent jobbies! lol :razz:

As I said earlier, doesn't look like they had to cut any more than a tree every 25 feet on average. 1 day job for some pros.


----------



## MrMagic (Aug 11, 2007)

*from 'snowjournal' pictures of big jay cut*

from snowjournal.com,  pictures/slideshow of trail cut on big jay, VT. 

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html

all i have to say is whaaaaaat were they thinking?????


----------



## snoseek (Aug 11, 2007)

wow. a little pruning is cool with me but that is quite the strip. plenty of stuff like that at the ski area.


----------



## JohnGD33 (Aug 12, 2007)

I didn't think it was that wide. A little overboard? All gladed runs need some work in the off season but come on? Did they think they were not going to get caught?


----------



## JPTracker (Aug 12, 2007)

Here is Sundays article:
Article

It seems that Jay Peak employees were the first to report this.


----------



## threecy (Aug 12, 2007)

JPTracker said:


> Here is Sundays article:
> Article
> 
> It seems that Jay Peak employees were the first to report this.



Can you imagine being the one they told?  I can picture a manager..."a what?  What do you mean you see a new ski trail on Big Jay?  Have you been drinking?"


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 12, 2007)

JPTracker said:


> Here is Sundays article:
> Article
> 
> It seems that Jay Peak employees were the first to report this.



It's sounds like not only did they cut a trail but they widened the existing approach, which is where the 60' number came from.


----------



## jimmer (Aug 12, 2007)

seems to me that if your a woods skier you should know that a few trees are going to get wacked, maybe they went a bit overboard, and if they left a few trees in the middle of the trail, maybe not so much stink, after all what do you think ski area glades looked like before they took ouy those trees. this stuff goes on all over the place, im sure alot of you have skied illegaly cut trails before.i know of a few places that took illegal trails and made them there own, on the trail map and all. lighten up theres alot worse things to get all worked up over.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 12, 2007)

jimmer said:


> seems to me that if your a woods skier you should know that a few trees are going to get wacked, maybe they went a bit overboard, and if they left a few trees in the middle of the trail, maybe not so much stink, after all what do you think ski area glades looked like before they took ouy those trees. this stuff goes on all over the place, im sure alot of you have skied illegaly cut trails before.i know of a few places that took illegal trails and made them there own, on the trail map and all. lighten up theres alot worse things to get all worked up over.


Certainly bootleg glades are cut all the time. But when was the last time a bootleg trail of this magnitude was cut in the Northeast? I have no recollection of anything even remotely close to this. "Illegal trails" usually involve folks thinning out some underbrush or perhaps taking out a few 1-2" diameter trees at most. Point usually is to make it an unknown tree run with a canopy. To say these guys went "a bit overboard" is a huge understatement. The kicker is that the damage actually decreases the special aspects of Big Jay because it was perfect as it was. This type of stuff is certainly not going on all over the place and the less of this type of thing that happens the better.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 12, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> It's sounds like not only did they cut a trail but they widened the existing approach, which is where the 60' number came from.


The article is unfortunately deceptive in that 60' number which apparently came from "the state." Here is the exact wording in the article:



			
				Burlington Free Press said:
			
		

> Access to Big Jay comes via a trail that runs along a spine from the resort's south side, and the usual winter descent begins east of that trail, just below Big Jay's summit. The top of that line is now cleared, in what the state says is a three-quarters-of-a-mile strip some 60 feet wide.


3/4 of a mile is what was reported as having been the length of the illegal cut. I think the 60 foot wide remark is attributed "the state" as the original estimate of the route cut by the two gentlemen in question. Perhaps the approach was also widened but I do not think that paragraph specifically states so and is rather non-specific about the numbers it throws around.


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 12, 2007)

jimmer said:


> maybe they went a bit overboard, and if they left a few trees in the middle of the trail, maybe not so much stink, after all what do you think ski area glades looked like before they took ouy those trees.



No, this is not just a bit overboard.  This is completely different then the previous glade trimming in New England.  They didn't improve a skiing area, they destroyed it.  What use to be a great tight tree run is now an open gash.  Before they took out those trees it was a tree run.


----------



## AdironRider (Aug 12, 2007)

whoa whoa whoa fellas, relax, take a deep breath, and chill for a second. 

Destroyed a ski area ... hardly. Your telling me, that because of a 20 foot wide scar on Big Jay, that the area is ruined? Puhlease. Time will allow that to grow back, it has before and will do so again. It sucks that these morons did what they did, it was way overboard for what they wanted, but theres no way it ruins what Big Jay was, is, and will continue to be. You know this, I know this, everyones just a little riled up as noones skied in months and theres still at least 2 months to go.


----------



## Greg (Aug 12, 2007)

AdironRider said:


> at least *2 months* to go.



:blink: kinda overly optimistic, aren'tcha?


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 12, 2007)

Last two years, I skied in late October and that trend goes back a few additional years for other AZ members such as Salida. 2.5 months is perhaps more realistic 

Adiron, I don't think it is being blown out of proportion at all. No one ever wrote "Destroyed a ski area" but that cut will certainly negatively effect the atmosphere of that area somewhat, especially for those of us that enjoy as close as a backcountry experience as can be had over there. As DM previously mentioned, the ridge cut already reduced some of that backcountry atmosphere. You are totally right that it will grow back but it won't happen soon enough. And it isn't just about Big Jay. With all the attention this thing is getting, you can bet there is going to be a crack down on more reasonable activities which might result in some changes across the region regarding maintainable lines. This is not just some Summer "to do" issue (believe me, I know this board and others are full of "much ado about nothings" and I will admit to occasionally getting involved, far more often than I think I probably should). This is a big issue and it should be made a big deal out of. Maybe next time it will be your favorite tree shot that someone thinks would be better off as an open slope. That is what we are up against here, copy cats, bad publicity, and crack downs on those that do things with concern and approach the forest with some respect.


----------



## Greg (Aug 12, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> Last two years, I skied in late October and that trend goes back a few additional years for other AZ members such as Salida. 2.5 months is perhaps more realistic



I know. I'm speaking of lift-serviced which is when most of us get out...


----------



## skibum1321 (Aug 13, 2007)

There was something somewhat similar that happened at Smuggs years ago. Off the side of Robyn's Run there is an open gash from someone clearing a swath down the side of the mountain. It is awful and never fills in because it is so steep and just doesn't hold snow. From what I've heard Smuggs will confiscate your pass if they catch you on it - this from a mountain that lets you ski virtually anywhere. FWIW, I have never actually seen anyone on it.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Aug 13, 2007)

Greg said:


> I know. I'm speaking of lift-serviced which is when most of us get out...




He knows what you meant, but Oil has to be Oil. ;-) Which is a good thing IMO.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 13, 2007)

[





AdironRider said:


> Your telling me, that because of a 20 foot wide scar on Big Jay, that the area is ruined? Puhlease. Time will allow that to grow back, it has before and will do so again.



The last time The forest on Big Jay grew back it was 80 years ago before people were skiing down it. I'm not sure the boreal forest of short stunted spruce and fir (above 3000 ft) was ever even cut during the 19th century. Skier traffic makes it extremely hard for trees to grow back since their tops are runover/cutoff by skiers every winter. Trees have a hard enough time growing at 3000 feet without skier traffic. 
The great thing about skiing Big Jay was the way the skiable lines were broken up. 50 yards here, 40 yards there. You had to pick your way down. That is another reason why this gash down the side of Big Jay is horrible. This chute would only be good for a couple of runs (IF it didn't avalanche) before it turned into a Luge run (for those of you that have skied the Deliverance chutes at Jay Peak ski area you know what I mean). And if anyone doesn't think there can be avalanches on Big Jay, Riverc0il, NHski, and I have witness a mini slide first hand this spring that was started by Riverc0il as he made this turn 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





. 
In the video I took of Riverc0il skiing the line I actually comment on the slide.
The sluff slid down around me and came to a stop. Luckily we were in one of the 30 yard lines so the slide could not pick up momentum.
What those guys did is just ridiculous and it appears that they cut this line directly down the main face, effectively wrecking the prime area of BC skiing. Please do not ski this line, and beat the crap out of anyone who does!


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 13, 2007)

from_the_NEK said:


> I wonder if the scar will look anything like this PhotoChopped image? :evil:
> Big Jay was plenty open without having to plow a blvd down the face.



According to the Freepress pictures, I think I have the top section in there pretty accurately. However, it looks as though the trail they cut goes skier's right toward the cliff band rather than to the left into the main bowl as I hypothesized.


----------



## Chute (Aug 13, 2007)

Why didn't they just clip their ticket?


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 13, 2007)

I modified the winter image chop to reflect what I can gather from the BFP pictures...






Still not pretty:???:


----------



## SnowRider (Aug 13, 2007)

When tourist see the trail it may give them a motive to hike over and do it. not only will this kill some of the natural glade skiing at big jay it may make it more crowded.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 13, 2007)

I think this or this is what from_the_NEK was going for, of me coming down a chute and triggering a small slide. from_the_NEK had hit the same chute before me and it didn't slough that much. I am just thinking of going through those random lines as from_the_NEK describes and popping out onto a trail while treading my way through the trees. I am going to not be a happy camper when that happens.


----------



## ccskier (Aug 14, 2007)

I heard about this a few weeks ago when it all happened, seen all the pictures, read all the articles, etc.....  Sure it sucks, shat happens, but what has been done is done.  There is much worse things going on all around us.  People going up there and trying to rebuild/replace the damage is going to do just as much damage.  At least the stumps were left there, that will help with erosion and possible slides.  There are other areas up there that are just was wide open, but not as long, so maybe I am just not taking the length into consideration

This is nothing new, just more blatant, it happens every year all across Vermont and beyond.  Everyone is complaining that there is going to be more traffic over there, well if you have not been before do not even think about it.  Big Jay/any back country area is not a place for novice skiers nor anyone who does not have any outdoor skills.  Things can go from bad to worse with the run out/heading down the wrong chute- losing your sight of the horizon, it is long post holing walk back to 242.  I have been a season pass holder at Jay for a while and have fallen in love with the area and the mountain.  There are not any secrets anymore, Joe tourist can talk to someone at the lift and find out where to go these days.  Sure, I will take some heat for saying this, but in all honesty if there is not a government warning not to ski it, I probably will check it out.


----------



## VTpowder (Aug 14, 2007)

:argue:

lets fight, you can just try to kick some *ss, just don't let me see you there,
and rivercoil, steve, your an idiot. i don't know what else to say, you are being ridiculous and don't know the first thing about cutting glades and what any of the terrain of big jay looks like without snow, just stop posting about it.  
the particular area where the most trees were cut down is right at the top and alot of the trees that were removed were already damaged and or dieing from people skiing out there with not enough snow or from pulling and fight your through spaces that were too tight to ski to get to the more open spaces. 
i know i will see you out there skiing it and that is why all this hypocritical nonsense needs to stop. 

 the old saying goes"good or bad , any publicity is good publicity" and the more that this is made an issue the more people it will appeal to. the whole matter needs to be dropped .  let it be.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 15, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> :argue:
> 
> lets fight, you can just try to kick some *ss, just don't let me see you there,
> and rivercoil, steve, your an idiot. i don't know what else to say, you are being ridiculous and don't know the first thing about cutting glades and what any of the terrain of big jay looks like without snow, just stop posting about it.
> ...



Its about time someone said it.


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 15, 2007)

theres no question selective trimming and cutting has been done throughout the forests of new england to make skiing more enjoyable, however, there is a big difference between a limb clip / prune and complete removal of a tree,  there is also is the knowledge that comes with doing the job, which is to some degree the adventure of woods skiing, finding the "open" glade, linking the the zones and putting to memory which tree and rock to turn left or right at, this cut removes all of that, it now offers a desent more like teardrop, which is great in its own right, but not "woods skiing" its a trail, with little adventure or cause for awareness - an invite for way to many, you talk about how hammered the trees were from skiers already, what cna be expected now


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 15, 2007)

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Having skied up there I find this to be an unneeded, poorly thought out, horrendously executed clusterfuck.  It will change the nature of that area for the worse for years to come.  I hope the two idiots get the book thrown at them.  This is the second major illegal trail cut in that area where none was needed; it seems no one learned from the first one.


----------



## Tin Woodsman (Aug 15, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> :argue:
> 
> lets fight, you can just try to kick some *ss, just don't let me see you there,
> and rivercoil, steve, your an idiot. i don't know what else to say, you are being ridiculous and don't know the first thing about cutting glades and what any of the terrain of big jay looks like without snow, just stop posting about it.
> ...



Dude - talk about the pot calling the kettle black.  You're a clown.  Even worse, a clown who can't write.


----------



## awf170 (Aug 15, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> your an idiot.



http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/yourretarded


----------



## JimG. (Aug 15, 2007)

awf170 said:


> http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/yourretarded



Austin, you make me laugh.


----------



## nhski (Aug 15, 2007)

I'm interested in hearing peoples thoughts on this question.

Are people being a hypocrite for saying they won't ski this illegaly cut "trail", but use the illegaly cut trail to get to big jay from jay peak?


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 15, 2007)

nhski said:


> I'm interested in hearing peoples thoughts on this question.
> 
> Are people being a hypocrite for saying they won't ski this illegaly cut "trail", but use the illegaly cut trail to get to big jay from jay peak?



Of course they are.  It just a matter of how illegal it was to suit there personal wants.


----------



## skibum1321 (Aug 15, 2007)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> I hope these individuals were smart enough to keep their mouths shut.


I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that they aren't all that smart, considering what they did. And for the record, I would like to see these guys get the book thrown at them. Stupid doesn't begin to describe it...


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 15, 2007)

nhski said:


> Are people being a hypocrite for saying they won't ski this illegaly cut "trail", but use the illegaly cut trail to get to big jay from jay peak?


I skin up from the road.  I yelled (but not as loudly since I hadn't skied up there then) when the first illegal trail was cut.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html
Here's some images of the cut.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 15, 2007)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> Does the state even have a case here? Were there witnesses to the actual cutting? Was the finger pointed at these guys just from word of mouth? I hope these individuals were smart enough to keep their mouths shut. What trees were cut where ???



I know in NY State if you cut up that high in elevation something like that you would most likely spend time in jail.

There first mistake was cutting on State land.  Cutting above 3k is probably going to doom them.  That stuff does not grow easily up there.

You ski sugarloaf.  Look at the top of that hill. After the fire in the 50's it still has not grown back.


----------



## Tin Woodsman (Aug 15, 2007)

nhski said:


> I'm interested in hearing peoples thoughts on this question.
> 
> Are people being a hypocrite for saying they won't ski this illegaly cut "trail", but use the illegaly cut trail to get to big jay from jay peak?



People were hiking out to Big Jay long before Stenger widened the path.  Many people called Jay Peak out for that stupidity and rightly so.  Should Big Jay skiers now insist on skinning up from 242 in the interest of maintaining some theoretical purity?  

There are a thousand other routes down Big Jay than what these yutzes cut.  For the forest's sake, it would make sense to use those options.


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 15, 2007)

BTW, I wouldn't object to skiing along the illegal trail on the ridge because if you want to ski from the ski area you don't have a whole lot of choice in the matter.  They cut the trail exactly where the herd path was.  So I expect to ski that eventually but would have preferred a herd path.

I think the elevation, size, and visibility of the cut is going to doom these guys.  I hope the state makes an example of them in an effort to nip this type of activity in the bud (pardon the pun).


----------



## drjeff (Aug 15, 2007)

The real prosecution issue here maybe that if the State DOESN'T do something atleast semi-serious (i.e. big fine or some time behind bars or both instead of just probation and/or community service) then other "knuckleheads" may very well the get idea and do similar cuts  in other areas around the state.


----------



## dmc (Aug 15, 2007)

David Metsky said:


> I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Having skied up there I find this to be an unneeded, poorly thought out, horrendously executed clusterfuck.  It will change the nature of that area for the worse for years to come.  I hope the two idiots get the book thrown at them.  This is the second major illegal trail cut in that area where none was needed; it seems no one learned from the first one.



Agreed...  Never skied it.. But from the shots I've seen.. It seems VERY skiable..  With plenty of room..  So why even cut?


----------



## jimmer (Aug 15, 2007)

anybody have any ideas as what the name of this trail should be, usally left up to the builder, but maybe we can help them out. how about -busted or two idiots, any others ?


----------



## ctenidae (Aug 15, 2007)

jimmer said:


> anybody have any ideas as what the name of this trail should be, usally left up to the builder, but maybe we can help them out. how about -busted or two idiots, any others ?



If you ski the right side, it's Tweedle-Dum.
If you ski the left side, it's Tweede-Dummer


----------



## drjeff (Aug 15, 2007)

jimmer said:


> anybody have any ideas as what the name of this trail should be, usally left up to the builder, but maybe we can help them out. how about -busted or two idiots, any others ?



5 to 10 
Don't Drop the Soap!


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 15, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> lets fight, you can just try to kick some *ss, just don't let me see you there, and rivercoil, steve, your an idiot. i don't know what else to say, you are being ridiculous and don't know the first thing about cutting glades and what any of the terrain of big jay looks like without snow, just stop posting about it.


Name calling? Is an ad hominem name calling personal attack the best argument you can add to this discussion? Because that is what this is, a discussion, and it was a civil one at that until you posted. You are right, I do not know the first thing about cutting glades. Does that discount my argument? Perhaps, but I sure know enough about maintaining and trimming which is a heck of a lot better than clear cutting 20 foot wide trails which I want to remain clueless about. You "know" you will see me out there next season? When did you become omnipotent? Give me a break.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 15, 2007)

nhski said:


> Are people being a hypocrite for saying they won't ski this illegaly cut "trail", but use the illegaly cut trail to get to big jay from jay peak?


This is a good question and one that I considered. Big Jay was still accessible before the herd path became a fully blown "trail" so I don't think this is quite the same type of issue. And unlike skiing any where on Big Jay, unless you skin up, there is no way to avoid the cut. Though I would maintain there is a difference between a small cut and a twenty foot wide trail. I still would prefer it without the cut to ensure more pure experience. The rub here is the only way to avoid being "completely" "hypocritical" would be to avoid Big Jay or only skin up. However, I can certainly avoid skiing the cut from the ridge easily enough.


----------



## nhski (Aug 16, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> This is a good question and one that I considered. Big Jay was still accessible before the herd path became a fully blown "trail" so I don't think this is quite the same type of issue. And unlike skiing any where on Big Jay, unless you skin up, there is no way to avoid the cut. Though I would maintain there is a difference between a small cut and a twenty foot wide trail. I still would prefer it without the cut to ensure more pure experience. The rub here is the only way to avoid being "completely" "hypocritical" would be to avoid Big Jay or only skin up. However, I can certainly avoid skiing the cut from the ridge easily enough.



This is a question i have been pondering since i heard about the cut.  I agree there is a big difference between the herd path cut and the clear cut trail that these two idiots did.  I use the herd path (as you know) and probably won't be looking to ski this "trail" as there is plenty of good options out there.  It just seems like a double standard to say "ban skiing this illegal trail" and then to use a different illegal trail.  I guess it comes down to the severity of the illegal cut.  But then i say to myself wrong is wrong, regardless of severity.  Is stealling $10 okay but $100 not?


----------



## kbroderick (Aug 16, 2007)

nhski said:


> This is a question i have been pondering since i heard about the cut.  I agree there is a big difference between the herd path cut and the clear cut trail that these two idiots did.  I use the herd path (as you know) and probably won't be looking to ski this "trail" as there is plenty of good options out there.  It just seems like a double standard to say "ban skiing this illegal trail" and then to use a different illegal trail.  I guess it comes down to the severity of the illegal cut.  But then i say to myself wrong is wrong, regardless of severity.  Is stealling $10 okay but $100 not?



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.


----------



## VTpowder (Aug 16, 2007)

steve
the thing is, i have come across your path a number of times at jay. you are hard to miss. you post everything you do. so when i say i better not see you out there i mean it, because i most likely will. we share the same mountain and you seem to be there any time the snow is good the same goes for me.  so that is all i meant.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 16, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> steve
> the thing is, i have come across your path a number of times at jay. you are hard to miss. you post everything you do. so when i say i better not see you out there i mean it, because i most likely will. we share the same mountain and you seem to be there any time the snow is good the same goes for me.  so that is all i meant.


Fair enough, call me out as a liar publicly if you see me over there. Next time you cross my path, be sure to say hello  I would do the same saying hello to you if I saw you, but you seem to have the advantage in knowing what I look like


----------



## Phildozer (Aug 17, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> When did you become omnipotent?




Omnipotent?  Who said he has Erectile Dysfunction?


----------



## Phildozer (Aug 17, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> steve
> the thing is, i have come across your path a number of times at jay. you are hard to miss. you post everything you do. so when i say i better not see you out there i mean it, because i most likely will. we share the same mountain and you seem to be there any time the snow is good the same goes for me.  so that is all i meant.




Wow.  

Threatening violence over skiing.  Talk about a total buzz-kill. Very, very not-cool.


----------



## VTpowder (Aug 17, 2007)

no violence is intended, only words. 
someone who had post earilier in this thread had threatened violence and some of my comments were directed at them.
sorry for the confusion.


----------



## JD (Aug 19, 2007)

Fools (to get caught)  If they had done this thing and not gotten caught, I know what all of our reactions would have been stumbling onto this line this winter for the first time on a good day.  YEEHAW!  Does seem a little over kill to take out such big trees, but I can't wait to ski it.  What's it called anyway?  Jailbird?
DeWeez's Chute?
Forbidden fruit?


----------



## Grassi21 (Aug 19, 2007)

The trail should be called, "Don't drop the soap."

Edit: I just realized drjeff suggested that name.


----------



## AdironRider (Aug 19, 2007)

Ok so riddle me this...

We all use ski trails cut by the mtns themselves that are on state land and above 3000 feet at some point in our skiing career, no? So these guys go ahead and do it themselves illegally, but in reality its no different than the legal trails cut, so whats the real big issue here. Sure it was illegal, and added to the total number of trees downed above 3000 feet, but I just find it funny how if two guys do it on their own it means they should be banished to hell, when (lets just use Whiteface and its Tree Island Pod expansion as an example) another mtn can go and do the same thing on a much larger scale and its the greatest thing since sliced bread. Sure one was illegal and the other wasnt, but the environmental impact is for the most part the same.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 19, 2007)

AdironRider, by that reasoning, any one should be able to climb up any mountain and hack down as many tress as they want, no? You could use the same reasoning that since we all drive on roads and have houses where trees were chopped down once upon a time then we should be able to go any where chopping down any amount of trees we want.


----------



## AdironRider (Aug 19, 2007)

When taken to extremes I see what your saying, but I just find it pretty funny how vastly different the public opinion of these guys actions is when compared to vastly more damaging effects undertaken by ski areas themselves. My point wasnt really to say that everyone should be able to do it, but rather aimed at the ramifications of their actions. I will admit that this type of behavior shouldnt be condoned (for the exact reasons you say - the whole if he can do it, screw it I will as well mentality), but it just seems ironic how a ski area can level hundreds of acres of high elevation terrain and its seen as a godsend, when these guys cut a 20 foot path and its the end of Big Jay as we know it. Not condoning the actions outright, but it seemed like an interesting discussion question.


----------



## kbroderick (Aug 19, 2007)

AdironRider said:


> When taken to extremes I see what your saying, but I just find it pretty funny how vastly different the public opinion of these guys actions is when compared to vastly more damaging effects undertaken by ski areas themselves.



I think if Jay Peak Resort had done the same thing these guys did--cut a ridiculous fall line swath on state property on Big Jay without any permitting--many of us would think it was just as wrong.  Quite frankly, I see a huge difference between thought-out and permitted expansion versus stupid and unpermitted expansion.

That's not to say that permitted automatically means thought out, but at least there's hope that somewhere in the planning and permitting process some brainpower will be applied.


----------



## AdironRider (Aug 19, 2007)

I agree as well, and my points arent made to be taken as a literal comparison. I understand the planning and permits needed for a resort to undertake an expansion, but in reality its still a destruction of alpine wilderness areas. Thats the point Im trying to make, despite the obvious and already mentioned differences between the two scenarios.


----------



## millerm277 (Aug 20, 2007)

AdironRider said:


> I agree as well, and my points arent made to be taken as a literal comparison. I understand the planning and permits needed for a resort to undertake an expansion, but in reality its still a destruction of alpine wilderness areas. Thats the point Im trying to make, despite the obvious and already mentioned differences between the two scenarios.



Certainly true, but typically in order to make the legal cuts, they have to go through many steps to minimize that impact, and on legal cuts, they also have to make sure that what they're doing isn't going to wind up eroding away, like this has a good chance of doing.


----------



## snowman (Aug 20, 2007)

I do have to agree somewhat with the crew laughing at oil and his pretentious ways and calls of blasphemy. "No, I won't ski the illegally cut trail" yada yada yada. Yet he skis every other back country ski trail, narrow or wide, and goes out skiing when there's 1 inch of snow on the ground most likely damaging territory inhabited by protected wildflowers. Last I checked, spruce trees aren't in short supply.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Aug 23, 2007)

A friend emailed me this. I'm not sure if its already in this thread and I didn't feel like going through the whole thing. These pics are pretty dramatic. Say what you want about those guys, but they sure where ambitious.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com:80/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html


----------



## deadheadskier (Aug 23, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> A friend emailed me this. I'm not sure if its already in this thread and I didn't feel like going through the whole thing. These pics are pretty dramatic. Say what you want about those guys, but they sure where ambitious.
> 
> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com:80/legacy/slideshows/081007jay/index.html




Dayum!

That is certainly a little more than pruning a favorite line.  As much as I don't condone what they did, I'm sure if I saw it while out on Big Jay and there was fresh to be had, I wouldn't be able to resist it.


----------



## JD (Aug 23, 2007)

After viewing that again, I have to say they did a nice job.  Stacked logs to fill in uneven terrain.  I would say that cutting the stumps right to the ground is really important.  If we learn anything from this, it's that you should cut the stumps TO THE GROUND. 

Looks like fun.  I really have a hard time getting too upset when I drive past the new golf course up at spruce when I go to the notch.  From the Tee boxes you can look at beech trees with YEARS of scarring from bears.  HUNDREDS of acers got cleared so a bunch of rich A$$HOLES can play golf out behind their million dollar condo.  Let's keep this in perspective when we think about all the BS development going on in sensative areas around the state.   This is less then a drop in the bucket over what?  Land that has allready been clearcut twice.  Not like it's old growth.  

rant off.


----------



## deadheadskier (Aug 23, 2007)

JD said:


> After viewing that again, I have to say they did a nice job.  Stacked logs to fill in uneven terrain.  I would say that cutting the stumps right to the ground is really important.  If we learn anything from this, it's that you should cut the stumps TO THE GROUND.
> 
> Looks like fun.  I really have a hard time getting too upset when I drive past the new golf course up at spruce when I go to the notch.  From the Tee boxes you can look at beech trees with YEARS of scarring from bears.  HUNDREDS of acers got cleared so a bunch of rich A$$HOLES can play golf out behind their million dollar condo.  Let's keep this in perspective when we think about all the BS development going on in sensative areas around the state.   This is less then a drop in the bucket over what?  Land that has allready been clearcut twice.  Not like it's old growth.
> 
> rant off.



very good point


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Aug 24, 2007)

JD said:


> HUNDREDS of acers got cleared so a bunch of rich A$$HOLES can play golf out behind their million dollar condo.  Let's keep this in perspective when we think about all the BS development going on in sensative areas around the state.   .



I don't play golf and I'm not rich, but why do people who do and are automatically have to be assholes? I know people who love golf and have worked dam hard to get the financial success they earned and they are good people.


----------



## Greg (Aug 24, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I don't play golf and I'm not rich, but why do people who do and are automatically have to be assholes? I know people who love golf and have worked dam hard to get the financial success they earned and they are good people.



I'm glad you said it... :roll: I never understand why those that are successful in life financially are looked negatively upon. Jealousy, I suppose. Newsflash! There are assholes in every age, race and socioeconomic group.

BTW, I don't regularly golf, but I do maybe once or twice a year and that's why I suck at it. It is rather expensive and you need to be pretty well off to play often, but I can *totally *see the appeal.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 24, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I don't play golf and I'm not rich, but why do people who do and are automatically have to be assholes? I know people who love golf and have worked dam hard to get the financial success they earned and they are good people.



Yeah...besides, using that logic we would have to believe that alot of snowboarders play golf. 

Because any skier worth his/her salt knows that all snowboarders are assholes...NOT!

I'm beginning to believe that stereotyping is genetic. It seems to be hardwired into the human brain.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 24, 2007)

Greg said:


> I'm glad you said it... :roll: I never understand why those that are successful in life financially are looked negatively upon. Jealousy, I suppose. Newsflash! There are assholes in every age, race and socioeconomic group.
> 
> BTW, I don't regularly golf, but I do maybe once or twice a year and that's why I suck at it. It is rather expensive and you need to be pretty well off to play often, but I can *totally *see the appeal.



That just means you're an...

never mind.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 24, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> very good point



Your remarks about golf are way off.  The medium income of a skier versus a golfer is much higher.  I am an advid golfer.  There are a lot of initiatives to get intercity kids involved with gof.  I dont really here anything about skiing.

You can get a decent set of clubs for 500 buck and I know a lot of golf courses that are less than 20 bucks to play. Good challenging courses.

You can't spend less than 50 bucks for any half way decent hill to ski. Put together gear for less than 500 buck is even harder.
Your remarks are like shit spewing forth from an anus.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 24, 2007)

tjf67 said:


> Your remarks are like shit spewing forth from an anus.



I guess we should put that in a Fagbag.

See, I'm getting this new ski lingo.


----------



## Grassi21 (Aug 24, 2007)

tjf67 said:


> Your remarks about golf are way off.  The medium income of a skier versus a golfer is much higher.  I am an advid golfer.  There are a lot of initiatives to get intercity kids involved with gof.  I dont really here anything about skiing.
> 
> You can get a decent set of clubs for 500 buck and I know a lot of golf courses that are less than 20 bucks to play. Good challenging courses.
> 
> ...



anus, mouth, no difference.


----------



## deadheadskier (Aug 24, 2007)

tjf67 said:


> Your remarks about golf are way off.  The medium income of a skier versus a golfer is much higher.  I am an advid golfer.  There are a lot of initiatives to get intercity kids involved with gof.  I dont really here anything about skiing.
> 
> You can get a decent set of clubs for 500 buck and I know a lot of golf courses that are less than 20 bucks to play. Good challenging courses.
> 
> ...




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.


----------



## kcyanks1 (Aug 24, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> 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 (Aug 24, 2007)

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 (Aug 24, 2007)

JD said:


> 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.
> ((*
> *))
> ...





i totally  see where your coming from.


----------



## tjf67 (Aug 25, 2007)

JD said:


> 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.
> ((*
> *))
> ...



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 (Aug 26, 2007)

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 (Aug 26, 2007)

JD said:


> 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 (Aug 27, 2007)

True.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 28, 2007)

kbroderick said:


> 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 (Aug 28, 2007)

JD said:


> 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 (Aug 28, 2007)

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


----------



## Tin Woodsman (Aug 28, 2007)

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 (Aug 28, 2007)

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 (Aug 28, 2007)

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. (Aug 28, 2007)

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 (Aug 28, 2007)

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 (Aug 28, 2007)

@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 (Aug 29, 2007)

JD said:


> 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 (Aug 29, 2007)

"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. (Aug 29, 2007)

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 (Aug 29, 2007)

: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.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 29, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> :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.



And then VTpowder will have it all to himself.


----------



## nhski (Aug 29, 2007)

I've been sitting on the fence for a while now, it's time to jump to one side.

I don't condone what these guys did and think the book should be thrown at them. That should keep future persons from doing the same.

With regards to skiing this line, if the state or another organization feels it is important to regrow the area then i'm sure they will put up the yellow tape with "revegetation area", i will respect that and leave it alone.  If not, its fair game.


----------



## ccskier (Aug 29, 2007)

VTpowder said:


> :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.




I agree, boycott it all together.  Besides with my bad comments who would want to ski with people like me.  Stay down south at great resorts such as Killington and Magic.


----------



## ctenidae (Aug 29, 2007)

We should start a movement to boycott all skiing in teh entire NE to protest what those two knuckleheads did.
Then,  AZ members can go on "Inspection Tours" to make sure the civilians are complying.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Aug 29, 2007)

I can't wait to ski that this winter..


----------



## jimskime (Aug 29, 2007)

I figure that those guys widened that out because they were unable to ski the tight trees. They probably figured if it was wider they could snowplow down.lol! It's not their land and they had no right whatsoever to take down any tree, living or dead. At Sugarloaf we've done lots of "pruning" over the years esp. us tall guys, but never something this stupid (Now I'm sure someone will correct me).

It's always a hoot to see the golf/ski fights.


----------



## Pennskier1 (Aug 30, 2007)

Me and my friends are excited about this trail.  For the past few years we always took a week long trip to Jay and we loved some of there awesome glades like Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.  We look over at Big Jay every trip up that tram and think how cool it would be to ski over there.  We just werent sure if we were good enough skiers to do it.  Now I know it will be easy to get over there since they made a wide trail going down the ridge and i can always bail on to the wide trail these guys cut if the glade skiing gets to hard.  We think they did a awesome job!  


Yay first post!


----------



## drjeff (Aug 30, 2007)

Pennskier1 said:


> Me and my friends are excited about this trail.  For the past few years we always took a week long trip to Jay and we loved some of there awesome glades like Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.  We look over at Big Jay every trip up that tram and think how cool it would be to ski over there.  We just werent sure if we were good enough skiers to do it.  Now I know it will be easy to get over there since they made a wide trail going down the ridge and i can always bail on to the wide trail these guys cut if the glade skiing gets to hard.  We think they did a awesome job!
> 
> 
> Yay first post!




Your 1st post just made a TON of people's point  :smash: :uzi:


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 30, 2007)

Pennskier1 said:


> Me and my friends are excited about this trail.  For the past few years we always took a week long trip to Jay and we loved some of there awesome glades like Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.  We look over at Big Jay every trip up that tram and think how cool it would be to ski over there.  We just werent sure if we were good enough skiers to do it.  Now I know it will be easy to get over there since they made a wide trail going down the ridge and i can always bail on to the wide trail these guys cut if the glade skiing gets to hard.  We think they did a awesome job!
> 
> 
> Yay first post!



Dammit! :uzi:


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 30, 2007)

Pennskier1 said:


> Me and my friends are excited about this trail.  For the past few years we always took a week long trip to Jay and we loved some of there awesome glades like Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.  We look over at Big Jay every trip up that tram and think how cool it would be to ski over there.  We just werent sure if we were good enough skiers to do it.  Now I know it will be easy to get over there since they made a wide trail going down the ridge and i can always bail on to the wide trail these guys cut if the glade skiing gets to hard.  We think they did a awesome job!
> 
> 
> Yay first post!



If you didn't think you were good enough before, you're STILL not good enough. The terrain on big Jay is still going to be several steps above Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.
The cut isn't a big wide groomer trail that is going to allow gappers to "bail out" if they are having a hard time. It is still STEEP and narrow and will very likely become a luge run from too much skier traffic, making it more dangerous than skiing the regular tree lines. PLEASE stick to the inbounds stuff. Ski patrol will charge to bail you out when you get in over your head/get lost out of bounds.

Hopefully this guy's just phishing


----------



## skibum1321 (Aug 30, 2007)

Pennskier is just trying to get everybody riled up. Chill out guys.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 30, 2007)

skibum1321 said:


> Pennskier is just trying to get everybody riled up. Chill out guys.



After I read the post again I figured out that I'm not awake yet this morning and realized that what ski bum pointed out is probably true.


----------



## ccskier (Aug 30, 2007)

from_the_NEK said:


> After I read the post again I figured out that I'm not awake yet this morning and realized that what ski bum pointed out is probably true.




Same here, I had typed up a response earlier, but more and more after I read it, I got thinking I would wait for others to say something.


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 30, 2007)

it shoud be interesting to see how many people end up needing help out there - it was bad enough to cross people out in the woods who had know idea where they were before, imagine in the basin - can already here the stories at the bar,"I was so pissed jay doesn't run a shuttle from bridge 7, we had to walk all the back" -


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 30, 2007)

kingdom-tele said:


> it shoud be interesting to see how many people end up needing help out there - it was bad enough to cross people out in the woods who had know idea where they were before, imagine in the basin - can already here the stories at the bar,"I was so pissed jay doesn't run a shuttle from bridge 7, we had to walk all the back" -



Of course that is assuming they know what/where bridge 7 is....


----------



## JimG. (Aug 30, 2007)

The last few posts deal with an issue I never understood...people who go OB with no idea where or what they are doing. Forget about Pennskier's troll post because there are skiers who do exactly that. I don't get that at all. Do people like to get hurt or spend the night lost on a mountain? Please explain this to me.

If you want to check something out you don't know, talk to people on lift rides and try to make friends with locals. Works for me, especially at places like Jay or MRG. Always managed to make friends and most skiers like company as long as you have the skills. So don't be mad or insulted if the local you meet wants to take a run or two with you to see if you're up to snuff. It's for your own good.

Yeah, yeah go ahead with the old fart jokes.


----------



## Greg (Aug 30, 2007)

JimG. said:


> *talk to people on lift rides* and try to make friends with locals. *Works for me, especially at* places like Jay or *MRG*.



So do you sit on the guy's lap or just yell to him from your chair?


----------



## JimG. (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> So do you sit on the guy's lap or just yell to him from your chair?



You're a knucklehead.

I'm in my own world on the single...love it.

But that lift line can be long sometimes and it's a great place to throw the BS around and make friends. MRG is especially friendly I've found...I've met skiers on trails who disappear into woods I don't know who I see on line at the bottom. So I strike up a conversation and mention I'd like to check out those woods I saw them jump into but don't know my way around in there. I've never been turned down there and I usually wind up with a skiing buddy for the rest of the day who shows me other lines I didn't know about.

I love MRG.


----------



## ComeBackMudPuddles (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> So do you sit on the guy's lap or just yell to him from your chair?





LOL


----------



## ctenidae (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> So do you sit on the guy's lap or just yell to him from your chair?



Nice.
I nominate this post for "Post of the Day"


----------



## kbroderick (Aug 30, 2007)

JimG. said:


> The last few posts deal with an issue I never understood...people who go OB with no idea where or what they are doing. Forget about Pennskier's troll post because there are skiers who do exactly that. I don't get that at all. Do people like to get hurt or spend the night lost on a mountain? Please explain this to me.
> 
> If you want to check something out you don't know, talk to people on lift rides and try to make friends with locals. Works for me, especially at places like Jay or MRG. Always managed to make friends and most skiers like company as long as you have the skills. So don't be mad or insulted if the local you meet wants to take a run or two with you to see if you're up to snuff. It's for your own good.



And _be prepared_.  If I'm prepared to head out on a possible adventure that involves skins, a map, and a compass, don't expect me to be sympathetic if you want to tag along and you don't have a pack with appropriate gear.  And _please_ don't follow my tracks...trust me, I might not know where I'm going, either, but I do have food, water, and sufficient gear to spend the night in the woods if I have to, as well as a map and compass to figure out how to get out of wherever I end up.

The flip side, of course, is that one should always be as discreet as possible when dropping into a less-known line or one that leads into an area where people could easily get lost.  Entrances that require turning around and skiing uphill are good, as is the habit of checking for observant lurkers before dropping into the woods...don't hesitate at the top of a line.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 30, 2007)

kbroderick said:


> And _be prepared_
> 
> The flip side, of course, is that one should always be as discreet as possible when dropping into a less-known line or one that leads into an area where people could easily get lost.  Entrances that require turning around and skiing uphill are good, as is the habit of checking for observant lurkers before dropping into the woods...don't hesitate at the top of a line.



All very good tips


----------



## Pennskier1 (Aug 30, 2007)

from_the_NEK said:


> If you didn't think you were good enough before, you're STILL not good enough. The terrain on big Jay is still going to be several steps above Beaver Pond and Timbuktu.
> The cut isn't a big wide groomer trail that is going to allow gappers to "bail out" if they are having a hard time. It is still STEEP and narrow and will very likely become a luge run from too much skier traffic, making it more dangerous than skiing the regular tree lines. PLEASE stick to the inbounds stuff. Ski patrol will charge to bail you out when you get in over your head/get lost out of bounds.
> 
> Hopefully this guy's just phishing



I know I can ski it.  Last March during my trip I did green beret without any trouble.  I can ski steep trails fine woods just sometimes give me trouble.  After I finish the trail it isnt even that steep so i will be fine.

What does phishing mean?  I'm not up to date on this cool internet lingo stuff.  You guys have to give me a break it is only my second day here. :-?


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 31, 2007)

Pennskier1 said:


> What does phishing mean?  I'm not up to date on this cool internet lingo stuff.  You guys have to give me a break it is only my second day here. :-?



"Phishing" or a similar term "trolling", both mean people who post about sensitive topics simply to try to get people all worked up about that topic in hopes of generating a lot of fire spewing posts (similar to my earlier response to your post).


----------



## JD (Aug 31, 2007)

I knew a guy that would take off his skis, walk into his cut lines, and turn around and pee behind him so people would just think it was a potty break.  if you were with him he would make you walk in his foot prints so it looked like 1 guy taking a leak.  Funny dude.  Legend.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Aug 31, 2007)

plus you would have to walk through the yellow snow to follow his track if he pees behind him. :blink: How bad do you want to follow that guy :lol:??


----------



## David Metsky (Aug 31, 2007)

Guys, Pennskier1 is just trolling.  It's pretty safe to ignore him.  Any reply you give him is the attention he is looking for.

The group from Telemark Tips should be headed up there with folks from the state to post some signs and hopefully put down some ground cover before the snow flies.  More details on TT.com.

 -dave-


----------



## JimG. (Aug 31, 2007)

David Metsky said:


> Guys, Pennskier1 is just trolling.  It's pretty safe to ignore him.  Any reply you give him is the attention he is looking for.
> 
> The group from Telemark Tips should be headed up there with folks from the state to post some signs and hopefully put down some ground cover before the snow flies.  More details on TT.com.
> 
> -dave-



Positive action.

I have to hand it to you, your responses are always prudent and effective.


----------



## 56fish (Sep 1, 2007)

Had to see for myself!:beer:

It's a trail.

About as wide as Poma over at Jay.


----------



## twinplanx (Sep 1, 2007)

WOW.... how about that last pic


----------



## drjeff (Sep 11, 2007)

An update:

http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=7057993

Now what is the judge going to do to uphold this, put a GPS ankle bracelet on them, or station the "powder patrol" at the top of the chainsaw massacre???


----------



## JD (Sep 12, 2007)

so it looks like when you get to the bottom of the cut line, traverse left into what looks like another cut line.  I'll keep that in mind.


----------



## JPTracker (Sep 12, 2007)

New Article with more info on how they were caught

http://www.caledonianrecord.com/pages/local_news/story/915114ea5


----------



## from_the_NEK (Oct 10, 2007)

More info on yesterdays hearings from WCAX:



> Newport, Vermont - October 9, 2007
> 
> Prosecutors are moving forward with a case against two men accused of cutting a back-country ski trail near Jay Peak. The illegal cutting left a 3,000 foot scar in a section of state forest land. Paul Poulin and Alan Ritter are being charged with a felony for destruction of property. Only Alan Ritter showed up for a status conference in Newport Tuesday.
> 
> ...



Does that last sentence mean that Big Jay is going to be completely off limits? :-o


----------



## bvibert (Oct 10, 2007)

from_the_NEK said:


> More info on yesterdays hearings from WCAX:
> 
> 
> 
> Does that last sentence mean that Big Jay is going to be completely off limits? :-o



I read that as meaning that they intend on keeping people out of the cut.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Oct 10, 2007)

bvibert said:


> I read that as meaning that they intend on keeping people out of the cut.



Thats going to be tough to do since people can ski in from the side. Are they going to fence it off? They would need fences 15 feet in the air or people will ski right over them later in the winter.
I could see Fish and Wildlife taking the easy route and posting an officer at the trailhead to Big Jay keeping anyone from going to the "area" of Big Jay (that would be a COLD thankless job...). 

Note: I don't plan on skiing that line but I would still like to hit Big Jay again this year.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 10, 2007)

I agree that's it's not going to be easy, it sounds like an awfully big area to keep people out of.  Unfortunately for Big Jay skiers you might be right, there could be a push to keep people off of Big Jay all together.  If that's the case, the two numbskulls better hope they get jail time to keep the lynch mob from getting them..

Hopefully they'll take a less drastic approach of marking the regeneration area and educating the skiing public of the importance of staying out of the area..


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 10, 2007)

This weekend is the first restoration work day up there.  I suspect the main efforts will be on reseeding, posting signs, and getting some ground cover.  I don't know if they intend on fencing.  It's volunteer labor by mostly backcountry skiers, coordinated by the GMC.

Next Wed is the benefit showing of PW07 in Arlington to raise money for the restoration efforts.  Lots of swag has been donated for the raffle, including a *Jay Season's Pass*.  Please come on by, see a great flick, and possibly win some great stuff.

http://www.hikethewhites.com/bigjayrestoration

 -dave-


----------



## kingdom-tele (Oct 10, 2007)

note that they are only going to need 15 people for the work due to the impact of foot traffic

unfortunately I will not be attending because fortunately it is my anniversary

NEK - I believe it is just to keep people off of the cut itself, there is still plenty left to ski


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 10, 2007)

These guys are morons. They couldve just denied till they died and never been caught. How are they going to prove it was them just by their cars being parked there overnight.


----------



## JD (Oct 10, 2007)

Just leave it....THIS is SOOO rediculous.   What about beaver pond glades?  When are they gonna restore that?


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 22, 2011)

Looks like this issue has reemerged.  Any new information about this case?  Has the gash healed?


----------



## Black Phantom (Sep 22, 2011)

thetrailboss said:


> Looks like this issue has reemerged.  Any new information about this case?  Has the gash healed?



How has this issue "reemerged"?

Hasn't this been tried in a court of law?

Aren't there ropes and signs posted at the entrance?


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 22, 2011)

Black Phantom said:


> How has this issue "reemerged"?
> 
> Hasn't this been tried in a court of law?
> 
> Aren't there ropes and signs posted at the entrance?


 
You and Nick have been talking about it in the "bowl skiing" thread.  So I was just wondering if folks have any more information or developments on it rather than talk about it in a different thread.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 22, 2011)

I posed the question to Steve in the Jay Challenge, but I don't believe he responded to it.


----------



## Nick (Sep 22, 2011)

I'm actually curious too how things are going,  it was four years ago


----------



## bvibert (Sep 22, 2011)

What kind of punishment did they end up getting in court?  I lost track of this, so I'm not really sure if I ever heard the outcome?


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 22, 2011)

IIRC there was a plea deal.


----------



## snowmonster (Sep 22, 2011)

Community service IIRC. 

I'm sorry I brought this up in THAT thread.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 22, 2011)

snowmonster said:


> Community service IIRC.
> 
> I'm sorry I brought this up in THAT thread.


 
:lol:  I know.  We have folks talking about Jay in that thread, and folks talking about Sugarloaf in a Burke thread.  What, tell me WHAT has this world come to?  :lol:


----------



## snowmonster (Sep 22, 2011)

We need snow. Lots of it.


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 22, 2011)

bvibert said:


> What kind of punishment did they end up getting in court?  I lost track of this, so I'm not really sure if I ever heard the outcome?


Plea bargain for probation and community service:
http://www.thesnowway.com/2009/04/25/plea-bargains-taken-in-the-big-jay-case


----------

