Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Do you support a snowshoe regulation for all units?
Yes 23 39.66%
No 35 60.34%
Voters: 58. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-04-2014, 09:04 AM   #21
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryTripAnExpedition View Post
Hello Guys:
Don't you think the ethic of wearing snowshoes is more a matter of
backcountry education/training?
But aren't some of the principles of LNT enforceable?

And I kind of agree, the law really only needs to be there when education/training doesn't work. But how many people have taken LNT training? I haven't, but I know the principles, but mostly because that's the way we did it before I ever even heard of LNT.

I would have worn snowshoes back when I started winter camping if I knew better. Back then I thought snowshoes looked like tennis rackets and were only used by Canadians in the great white north.

So obviously something is wrong if I knew enough to pack my garbage in and out and didn't know enough to use the snowshoes.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 09:44 AM   #22
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryTripAnExpedition View Post
Hello Guys:
Don't you think the ethic of wearing snowshoes is more a matter of
backcountry education/training? Like the "Leave No Trace" ethic which took maybe a decade to catch on. I push snowshoes on all my outdoor friends whenever I can- and even have an extra pair to drag them out on! Being a snowshoe ambassador with subtle persuasion can be rather effective.
It has been my experience that subtle persuasion only works only after hitting someone across the head with a 2x4 to get their attention
__________________
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 09:00 PM   #23
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhawk View Post
It has been my experience that subtle persuasion only works only after hitting someone across the head with a 2x4 to get their attention
...Another great regulation that should be enforced.
Justin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 07:48 AM   #24
EveryTripAnExpedition
Make Every Trip An Expedition!
 
EveryTripAnExpedition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: West Oneonta, NY
Posts: 3
I thought about this yesterday as I went about my business- are there any statistics anywhere for snowshoe/ski/ vs. bare-boot usage in the wintertime in the whole Park?
In the EHP- what is the adherance rate? And what would be a good adherance rate- like 80% compliance or so? (Even 60%?) I still think if you hit them with education, interesting signage, perhaps a "snowshoe awareness campaign", designated "snowshoe trails", and perhaps even "snowshoe days", it might sink in. Also, hit them when they are young- I introduced my nephew to snowshoes when he was 5 years old- its been 3 seasons now, and he now has his own pair, and thinks they are the coolest thing for the wintertime.
EveryTripAnExpedition is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 09:49 AM   #25
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by backwoodsman View Post
Instead of making snowshoes mandatory why don't they make postholing illegal. Then when the surface is hard enough you could bareboot.
So if we were to extend this to say the seatbelt law, should we make death or injury illegal as a result of not wearing a seatbelt? Or should we just make it a illegal not to wear a seatbelt? Seems obvious. I think the same sort of logic applies here.

It is much easier to instruct someone to wear snowshoes than to try to catch the postholer. I'm pretty sure the people who proposed this rule in the first place were intending to stop postholing and this was best way they could figure out how to.

Like anything, it isn't perfect. You may get people postholing that don't get caught and people barebooting and not causing any problems that get reprimanded. Same could be said for the seatbelt law. People die or are injured wearing a seatbelt and some people walk away unscathed not wearing one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryTripAnExpedition View Post
I thought about this yesterday as I went about my business- are there any statistics anywhere for snowshoe/ski/ vs. bare-boot usage in the wintertime in the whole Park?
In the EHP- what is the adherance rate? And what would be a good adherance rate- like 80% compliance or so? (Even 60%?) I still think if you hit them with education, interesting signage, perhaps a "snowshoe awareness campaign", designated "snowshoe trails", and perhaps even "snowshoe days", it might sink in. Also, hit them when they are young- I introduced my nephew to snowshoes when he was 5 years old- its been 3 seasons now, and he now has his own pair, and thinks they are the coolest thing for the wintertime.
My main question is if a person was going to wear snowshoes when appropriate, why would they have any opposition to a regulation? It should have no effect on them.

The argument could be made that the only reason one would oppose it being a law is that they intend to disobey it. The same argument is made against people who support legalization of drugs. Why would they want that unless they wanted to do drugs themselves? That situation isn't as simple, and we aren't talking about people being thrown in jail for years, we are talking about a typical DEC approach which is education, warning, and then if necessary, punishment.

If one thinks it may lead to other regulations such as fire bans, bear cannisters, etc like in the EHP then I can't see that as a bad thing either. If the area is impacted then fire bans make sense. Or if people can't make fires responsibly. Bear cannister regulations are obvious - it is more about the bear than your 'freedoms'. I think the bear has every right to steal your food if you are on it's turf. But in order to keep the peace, we must protect the bear from itself.

As far as numbers I have no idea. But I will put this point up. It only takes one to ruin the trail. And once it is, it may freeze over and become a safety hazzard. Many snowshoers and skiers have been injured from other peoples postholes.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 10:10 AM   #26
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by l'oiseau View Post
Many snowshoers and skiers have been injured from other peoples postholes.
Reference? If you please.
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 10:18 AM   #27
yellowcanoe
Member
 
yellowcanoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by geogymn View Post
Reference? If you please.
Me. Last Sunday featured frozen over snow. Ski tip caught in posthole. it was just a little wrenched ankle. Postholes are just another obstacle..as well I could have skied into a buried log.
yellowcanoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 10:20 AM   #28
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by geogymn View Post
Reference? If you please.
Go look at the other argument on the HP forum. People are posting about them there.

I agree with YC though - I can ski through them... they suck, but it is possible.

You down with OPP*? Yeah you know me!

*Other People's Postholes

Last edited by l'oiseau; 03-05-2014 at 10:31 AM..
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 12:39 PM   #29
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
BTW I am not planning on going to Albany and lobbying for a change. I think if a change was seen as necessary it would have been implemented already. I know that seems like a passive stance but I'm more interested in the rest of the Adirondacks where such regulations don't exist than where they do.

Maybe the opposition to the rule in the EHP has caused those who pushed for it to think twice. If it were to be a thing, and something the public could vote on, I would be for it. But I wouldn't push for it.

Interesting that so far the poll is split 50/50 and has wavered there the whole time. I don't really believe these polls too much because the sample is not truly random.

I am however interested in why someone would be opposed to such a rule, other than the fact that they wish to do what they want when they are on a public trail. As for a bushwhack, I don't think it matters, if it bothers you, take another whack.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 03:33 PM   #30
yellowcanoe
Member
 
yellowcanoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,177
Well rules need enforcing. Enforcing costs money. Otherwise rules mean nothing.. Its kind of like telling your toddler bedtime is 7 and letting them stay up as late as they want.

It would be so much cheaper to just use common sense. And I wonder after finding the postholes that seemed to go down three feet, if the postholer ever wants to repeat the experience.
yellowcanoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2014, 05:42 PM   #31
jan
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 589
A friend and I were snowshoeing on a trail yesterday that had been trashed by a postholer. We were risking a turned (or worse) ankle every time the side of the snowshoe dropped into a hole. In a lot of places we walked to the side of the path to avoid this. Imagine, breaking new trail was safer. The worst part was I was with a group of 4 a couple weeks ago, after the big storm, that helped break out this trail. There were 3 guys in front of us and then us. By the end of the day, there was a nice snowshoe route set down. Now it's a mess. As yellowcanoe said, I don't understand why a postholer would keep going. It had to be a miserable experience.
jan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2014, 10:42 AM   #32
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Ahh common sense. The answer for everything... I hate that term because apparently what one person thinks is common sense is not actually all that common or must not make sense to another. If it was then there would be no issues.

Call me a trouble maker, I'm just calling it as I see it.

I've still yet to see a good reason why a law like this shouldn't exist.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2014, 10:50 AM   #33
yellowcanoe
Member
 
yellowcanoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,177
Because it needs teeth to bite.

how much discussion does this really need?
yellowcanoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2014, 10:56 AM   #34
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Well say a paroling ranger caught one person a year, and signage and information about the law in circulation educated another few people, etc... there may not be many teeth, but right now there isn't anything anyone can do except look like an a$$hole for telling someone who is barebooting a trail to get off or get some skis or snowshoes.

Somehow what happens in the EHP seems to deter most of it. If not it would look like a local park, I guarantee it. The Marcy dam trail would look like a pack of horse galloped down it every weekend.

I just don't necessarily see the other side. Some people who don't support the current rule want some kind of rule, but they want it reformed. I never specified what the rule should be, just asked if there should be one.

Now I am asking why you wouldn't support it. Some people think I am provoking them. OK yeah. Stand up for what you believe in for once.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2014, 12:25 PM   #35
l'oiseau
**BANNED**
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by backwoodsman View Post
Maybe the law is mandatory use of snowshoes to simplify enforcement, if it were any other way it's easy to see where the officers in the field would be faced with a big pain in the ass , especially when you consider how many people hike the High Peaks.
I agree completely. I think the law is there to keep the trails in decent shape for the herds of people and simple enough that there is no questions when it comes to enforcing it.

I also think it is advertised enough that if you head to that area, you'd consider bringing some snowshoes.
l'oiseau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2014, 12:38 PM   #36
yellowcanoe
Member
 
yellowcanoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,177
Sorry but this thread has become name calling garbage. I am out of the forum. Yes Bird you are just looking for provocation.

I have better things to do.
yellowcanoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 07:24 PM   #37
EagleCrag
Member
 
EagleCrag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gloversville, NY
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiiawiwb View Post
i don't have a dog in this particular race but, in general, the rub is who is it that gets to determine when behavior should be mandatory? You might like this one enactment and be utterly appalled by the next believing your liberties are being stripped away. It depends on who's ox is being gored.

If you live by that sword, be prepared to die by it too.

x3
EagleCrag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 12:57 PM   #38
JERSEYJOHN
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SOUTHWESTERN NY
Posts: 23
Maybe they should just ban snow shoes and ski's and the problem would be solved.
JERSEYJOHN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2015, 03:01 PM   #39
trent
OMG they killed Kenny!
 
trent's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Rochester
Posts: 131
In an attempt to post w/o stirring up drama, I was climbing last Sunday with the fiancee. We found that microspikes were the most reasonable ans safest foot traction devices for the conditions at the time.

We saw this older guy wearing snowshoes struggling to climb up some steeper rocky parts to the point where it was starting to get dangerous. Meanwhile everyone else in those famous red microspikes kept climbing up through the rocks safely like it was nothing.

I think mandating wearing of them is stupid and dangerous. It doesn't seem like there's issues there though. I've only seen one thread on here where someone got a ticket for not wearing snowshoes even though they had them in their possession and I think he won in court (or it got thrown out).

However I do agree with mandating having them in you possession as you never know when the weather will get wild. And again I still think that's a little broad, but it will save some idiots life some day.
trent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2015, 03:25 PM   #40
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 950
Totally agree with you trent. There is a reason people don't use snowshoes to climb walls of ice.

But I disagree that the law mandating skis or snowshoes is stupid.

If you think about it from a skiing POV it becomes more clear. Keep your skis on except where it becomes dangerous. If it is, put on crampons or skins. No one would be silly enough to climb steep rocky sections with skis on their feet, even with skins. Yet the law makes perfect sense except in those situations. And most skiers don't carry snowshoes.

So maybe if you are a hiker it seems ridiculous and you'll try to climb walls of ice with and technical sections with big clunky pieces of plastic strapped to your feet.

Typically the people that are issued tickets that I have heard of are walking on flat trails with bare boots or traction aids.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.