Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

11-08-2017, 12:56 PM   #21
JohnnyVirgil
Member

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 523
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to new forms of recreation in the ADK's. You can go fly a drone over some remote Crown Land in the far northern reaches of Ontario, CA, but dammit if you fly one in the High Peaks you're destroying someone's nature experience, and never mind the sight-seeing planes flying overhead....just doesn't make sense.
IMHO, it's just....more. More noise, more intrusion. You do what you can to prevent "more" from happening. Here's an (admittedly bad) analogy. If I live in an apartment on main street and almost every night an ambulance goes by and wakes me up, there's not much I can do about it. But if a new neighbor moves in and he blasts his stereo at all hours of the night and that also wakes me up, there IS something I can do about it. So I try to prevent him from doing that, either by talking to him and asking him to stop, or calling the cops.

Because it's just more noise. And less noise is better than more. Generally. Or something.

11-08-2017, 01:03 PM   #22
Bounder45
Member

Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 285
Quote:
 Originally Posted by JohnnyVirgil IMHO, it's just....more. More noise, more intrusion. You do what you can to prevent "more" from happening. Here's an (admittedly bad) analogy. If I live in an apartment on main street and almost every night an ambulance goes by and wakes me up, there's not much I can do about it. But if a new neighbor moves in and he blasts his stereo at all hours of the night and that also wakes me up, there IS something I can do about it. So I try to prevent him from doing that, either by talking to him and asking him to stop, or calling the cops. Because it's just more noise. And less noise is better than more. Generally. Or something.

What if there is new technology that allows for drones to fly nearly silent? What if someone comes up with some other camera flying equipment that doesn't require propeller blades?

The noise issue is the easiest, most obvious thing for certain people to latch onto. I have a strong suspicion that even if the drones were totally silent, there would still be people opposing their use because they're not "compatible" with a true nature experience.

11-08-2017, 01:56 PM   #23
JohnnyVirgil
Member

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 523
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 What if there is new technology that allows for drones to fly nearly silent? What if someone comes up with some other camera flying equipment that doesn't require propeller blades? The noise issue is the easiest, most obvious thing for certain people to latch onto. I have a strong suspicion that even if the drones were totally silent, there would still be people opposing their use because they're not "compatible" with a true nature experience.
See, that wouldn't bother me at all. It would be like flying a kite. I latch onto it because it's what annoys me most. Motorboats, chainsaws, generators, motorcycles, ATVs...especially on a lake. Sound travels so far, one rinky-dink 4 hp outboard can basically ruin the wilderness experience on a lake for dozens of people. That's why I prefer places like Lila, where there are no motors allowed. I'm thinking I should probably just jab sharp pencils into my ears and be done with it.

Last edited by JohnnyVirgil; 11-08-2017 at 02:18 PM..

11-08-2017, 06:15 PM   #24
geogymn
Member

Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 , there would still be people opposing their use because they're not "compatible" with a true nature experience.
That would be me, I admit it without compunction. The noise is the worst though. Maybe your occupation allows you to avoid the drone of motors all day, if so, I am happy for you. But some of us aren't as fortunate and really crave the sweet sound of silence.
Also some of us have atavistic passions. We can't help it, the need to reach deep within and search for a lost understanding is best accomplished in a wilderness setting. The wilder the setting the clearer the perception.
You should give it a try, you would make a powerful convert.
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden

11-08-2017, 06:28 PM   #25
dundee
Member

Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,408
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 Where does FAA supervision end and DEC supervision begin? Right, because with the hundreds, sometimes thousands, of other people visiting the High Peaks on any given summer weekend, a few drones flying overhead is just going to ruin that peace and quiet. I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to new forms of recreation in the ADK's. You can go fly a drone over some remote Crown Land in the far northern reaches of Ontario, CA, but dammit if you fly one in the High Peaks you're destroying someone's nature experience, and never mind the sight-seeing planes flying overhead....just doesn't make sense.
It might not be just ONE drone, it could be dozens. Maybe they will be silent someday, but would you want one ( or more) hovering around you while you enjoyed the view from a High Peak, or anywhere else? It will also be recording every move you make. Would that be ok?

Last edited by dundee; 11-08-2017 at 08:38 PM..

11-08-2017, 07:08 PM   #26
mmaute
Member

Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 53
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to new forms of recreation in the ADK's.
Resistance and personal opinion are irrelevant to the issue. Motorized equipment is not allowed in lands designated Wilderness. Drones have been determined to be motorized so they are not allowed. I think it's really a very simple issue, there are laws and drones are in violation of those laws, therefore they are not allowed.

11-08-2017, 08:17 PM   #27
Justin
Moving along

Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,723
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to new forms of recreation in the ADK's.
I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to keeping wild areas in the ADK's free of the intrusive noise of a motor.

 11-08-2017, 11:28 PM #28 Trail Boss Member     Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 824 mmaute, Justin, Nailed it! Contravenes both a DEC regulation and the spirit of a Wilderness zone. __________________ Looking for views!
11-15-2017, 04:05 PM   #29
Bounder45
Member

Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 285
Quote:
 Originally Posted by geogymn That would be me, I admit it without compunction. The noise is the worst though. Maybe your occupation allows you to avoid the drone of motors all day, if so, I am happy for you. But some of us aren't as fortunate and really crave the sweet sound of silence. Also some of us have atavistic passions. We can't help it, the need to reach deep within and search for a lost understanding is best accomplished in a wilderness setting. The wilder the setting the clearer the perception. You should give it a try, you would make a powerful convert.
I have given it a "try" on multiple camping trips through various parts of the ADK's and other wild areas in the northeast. I just don't get all bent out of shape when I hear a little man-made noise in the woods.

I'm also confused why people get so concerned about a low output electric motor ruining their scenic High Peaks outing when they are in the company of dozens, sometimes hundreds, of other hikers making noise on the same trails and peaks. It just seems like a negligible annoyance in the grand scheme of things.

If people truly want solitude in the woods, there are any number of areas, both on trail and off, where they can go in the ADK's. The High Peaks isn't necessarily the best area for that kind of experience, depending upon the season.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Justin I don't understand why there is always so much resistance to keeping wild areas in the ADK's free of the intrusive noise of a motor.
"Intrusive" is the key word there I suppose. What you may find "intrusive," may not bother someone else. With the big summer crowds and accompanying foot traffic and conservation issues, certain areas of the High Peaks are well on their way to becoming the ADK's version of Yellowstone National Park. When you're already sharing a peak with large numbers of hikers, I fail to see how a buzzing camera drone is the one thing that truly ruins the experience.

As a compromise of sorts, I think the DEC should at least be willing to assign temporary permits to allow photographers and film-makers to capture scenic shots of the landscape using drones. Only allow a few permits to be issued out per area and deconflict by time....it gives people a chance to get the shots they're looking for but minimizes the buzzing commotion, however intrusive it might be.

Last edited by Bounder45; 11-15-2017 at 04:20 PM..

11-15-2017, 04:52 PM   #30
Trail Boss
Member

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 824
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 I just don't get all bent out of shape when I hear a little man-made noise in the woods. ... What you may find "intrusive," may not bother someone else.
There you go. It doesn't bother you. However, it bothers others. Your choice of words "get all bent out of shape" suggests insensitivity to the views of others. It's like calling people who don't mind the noise "stone deaf". Nothing's resolved by "Well it doesn't bother me so it's not a real problem."

Drones and "other hikers" is a false equivalency. I can pick and choose a time and High Peak to find peace and solitude. Even a peak with a handful of other hikers can be silent. Plus we're talking about other people, not machinery. It takes just one drone to break the silence ... and its operator doesn't even have to be on the same peak.
__________________
Looking for views!

Last edited by Trail Boss; 11-15-2017 at 06:06 PM.. Reason: Edited for clarity.

 11-15-2017, 05:55 PM #31 Trail Boss Member     Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 824 This whole "noise" angle is a bit of a red herring. The "no motorized equipment" regulation isn't exclusively about inappropriate decibels but equipment that doesn't jibe with the goals of a Wilderness zone. That's capital-W Wilderness, namely a classification of land use designed to preserve the land in its natural state and minimize the presence of manmade things. That's why you're carrying bear canisters and not depositing your food in steel boxes and why bridges are made of wood (and some steel cable) and not concrete and girders. It's why there are no full service huts in Wilderness areas and there are regulations to control all sorts of activities and things including forbidding the use of glass containers. Perhaps one way to better understand the situation is to use a thought experiment. Remember the hoverboards in Back to the Future Part II? Imagine they're real. How would they impact hiking? They're small, silent and, unlike footsteps and bike tires, cause no trail erosion. Assuming you have enough of the unobtanium that powers them, you could visit many peaks in an afternoon. You could 'hover' all 46 peaks in a weekend (or less). Should they be allowed in the High Peaks Wilderness? No, not if you appreciate what a Wilderness zone represents. Hoverboards would be a very intrusive manmade addition to an area that is supposed to be maintained in as a natural a state as is feasible with as few manmade contrivances as is possible. In contrast, they'd probably be allowed in Wild Forest zones. Exceptions? Hoverboards for scientific research (resource-monitoring) and SAR. Back to drones. Allowing them on a permit basis for resource-monitoring and SAR use seems like a fair compromise (ATVs and snowmobiles are forbidden in Wilderness areas but are used for SAR). However, recreational use doesn't fit into a Wilderness zone's objectives anymore than hoverboards would. PS Harry Potter fans can substitute broomsticks for hoverboards. __________________ Looking for views!
 11-15-2017, 06:07 PM #32 montcalm Mobster   Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 748 As long as the High Peaks wants to call itself Wilderness, this should be a non-discussion. \end thread
11-15-2017, 06:17 PM   #33
Neil
Kayak-46

Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,864
Quote:
 Originally Posted by montcalm As long as the High Peaks wants to call itself Wilderness, this should be a non-discussion. \end thread
The High Peaks don't nor can't "want" anything.

The wilderness designation, while not controlling visitor numbers, prevents us from being able to build or purchase condos in the valley between Phelps and Tabletop, play 18 holes between Couch and Emmons or purchase lift tickets for the south side of Skylight or....etc, etc.

There are way less people say around the area between Snowy and Panther mtns, yet the area has a road network that become snowmobile trails in winter. Just in the Squaw valley between Snowy and Panther there are 50-60 camps.
I have nothing against either snowmobiles nor camps but given a preference I'll take the wilderness designation and the High Peaks.
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

11-15-2017, 06:35 PM   #34
montcalm
Mobster

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 748
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Neil The High Peaks don't nor can't "want" anything. The wilderness designation, while not controlling visitor numbers, prevents us from being able to build or purchase condos in the valley between Phelps and Tabletop, play 18 holes between Couch and Emmons or purchase lift tickets for the south side of Skylight or....etc, etc.
Of course they don't, that's what you call anthropomorphization. It's what the people of NYS want, ultimately. And until an amendment is drafted and passed to change the High peaks to something that would allow motor vehicles, there's no use discussing it.

Any forest preserve designation would prevent any of those things you listed, but specifically, it's motorized use/access. That's why it's a non-argument. Unless it's for S&R, it's off limits.

11-17-2017, 11:37 AM   #35
Member

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tupper Lake
Posts: 771
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 What if there is new technology that allows for drones to fly nearly silent? What if someone comes up with some other camera flying equipment that doesn't require propeller blades? The noise issue is the easiest, most obvious thing for certain people to latch onto. I have a strong suspicion that even if the drones were totally silent, there would still be people opposing their use because they're not "compatible" with a true nature experience.
Most drones are electric (battery operated) and make little to no noise. Once mine gets more then 5 feet away you can't hear it. There are some gas drones that do make noise that would be cause for concern in more then one way. Obviously in this discussion it's the noise, but what if one crashes in a pond and the gas leaks out? IMHO banning the gas drones while allowing the electric ones should solve most of the issues. Of course there will always be the ones that say no compromise either way.

11-17-2017, 12:31 PM   #36
Terasec
Member

Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 83
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Bounder45 What if there is new technology that allows for drones to fly nearly silent? What if someone comes up with some other camera flying equipment that doesn't require propeller blades? The noise issue is the easiest, most obvious thing for certain people to latch onto. I have a strong suspicion that even if the drones were totally silent, there would still be people opposing their use because they're not "compatible" with a true nature experience.
that would resolve 1 issue,
wouldnt resolve other issues,
such as leaving objects behind,
drones have limited range and quite easy to drop anywhere once out of range,
higher priced drones, people will go to great length to retrieve them because of the cost,
but as they get cheaper drones will get left behind, they will drop in the lakes, get stuck in tree tops or just lost in the woods,
not all drones are high priced drones can already buy $50 drone toys, i doubt dads will be swimming in 30 degree lakes retrieving their kids$50 toys r us drone

heres a $30 drone, i bet dads wont spend more than 5 minutes trying to retrieve such a drone Quad Smart Drone Item # 205092 WAS$59.99
NOW $29.99 Receive a 20% Cash Back coupon & Free Shipping on Orders over$99! Use Code SHIP99 at Checkout.

IN STOCK - Usually ships from our warehouse the same day.

Our Quad Smart Drone is one of the fastest and most durable remote control drones around. It has two speed modes that allows for superior outdoor flying, even in moderate winds. Best of all, it can easily perform 360° flips, for the coolest tricks and aerial stunts in the skies!

11-17-2017, 05:58 PM   #37
JohnnyVirgil
Member

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 523
Quote:
 Originally Posted by adkman12986 Most drones are electric (battery operated) and make little to no noise. Once mine gets more then 5 feet away you can't hear it. There are some gas drones that do make noise that would be cause for concern in more then one way. Obviously in this discussion it's the noise, but what if one crashes in a pond and the gas leaks out? IMHO banning the gas drones while allowing the electric ones should solve most of the issues. Of course there will always be the ones that say no compromise either way.
What kind do you have? I've seen/heard electric drones capable of hoisting a GoPro and they weren't what I'd call silent. You could hear them from very far away.

11-17-2017, 08:12 PM   #38
Hear the Footsteps
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 102
Quote:
 Originally Posted by montcalm Of course they don't, that's what you call anthropomorphization. It's what the people of NYS want, ultimately. And until an amendment is drafted and passed to change the High peaks to something that would allow motor vehicles, there's no use discussing it. Any forest preserve designation would prevent any of those things you listed, but specifically, it's motorized use/access. That's why it's a non-argument. Unless it's for S&R, it's off limits.
Not to get off topic and I agree with you.

I don't see the connection with your usage.

Anthropomorphize definition
Giving human characteristics to animals, inanimate objects or natural phenomena is a human trait called “to anthropomorphize.”

Don

11-17-2017, 08:18 PM   #39
montcalm
Mobster

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 748
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Hear the Footsteps Anthropomorphize definition Giving human characteristics to animals, inanimate objects or natural phenomena is a human trait called “to anthropomorphize.” Don

Humans want, mountains and areas of land do not.

I stated it's "what the High Peaks want" when if fact it was a shortcut and a play to say it's really what we (NYS and special interest groups who would fight to keep HPW as it is) want. For the minority who don't want that, they'll need to take the proper route to try to change it. Simply watering down the non-motorized use/access protections won't cut it IMHO.

11-17-2017, 08:49 PM   #40
Hear the Footsteps
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 102
Quote:
 Originally Posted by montcalm Humans want, mountains and areas of land do not. I stated it's "what the High Peaks want" when if fact it was a shortcut and a play to say it's really what we (NYS and special interest groups who would fight to keep HPW as it is) want. For the minority who don't want that, they'll need to take the proper route to try to change it. Simply watering down the non-motorized use/access protections won't cut it IMHO.
I guess the mountains are calling too....
Don

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