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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-04-2017, 08:49 PM   #21
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 718
I can't believe the number of people who live in this state and have no idea that the Adirondacks even exist. Might be a good thing... but having a few people as advocates for wild lands isn't a bad thing.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 05:23 AM   #22
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,743
"We only value what we know and love" Jack Turner - "The Abstract Wild"
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 12:04 PM   #23
BillyGr
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradox6 View Post
It will cost the state nothing. It will cost the taxpayers.

No body knows what it will cost or how big a program it is. What is does spend is money the state does not currently have. So actually, it just adds to the pile of debt our kids and grandkids have to pay.
In the long run, it may not cost that much. A small amount that they aren't getting for the campsites being used, probably (which could be recouped in the future by greater interest by those involved renting sites).
Perhaps something for staff (although they may just be people who would be paid to be out there anyway and just doing something different those weekends).
Wouldn't be surprising if much (maybe even all?) of the gear they work out deals to have sponsored by various companies that make/sell those items - after all, if it turns out that these new folks like the weekend and decide to go camping again, they'd need to buy their own stuff, so why not advertise your gear to them so they have a name to look for (or a store to buy it from)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
Not that I'm against camping, but I've done my fair share in the campgrounds and I'd say a lot of people aren't directly helping monetary tourism. Some never even leave the campground and bring everything they need but wood. Now that they have vendors drive through, you don't even have to leave.
Although they would, at minimum, contribute a bit to the area buying things that aren't included (like food supplies) and, depending on where they are coming from some extra $ to the state via taxes on fuel and other items they might need to (or want to) pick up en route.
BillyGr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 12:23 PM   #24
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyGr View Post
Although they would, at minimum, contribute a bit to the area buying things that aren't included (like food supplies) and, depending on where they are coming from some extra $ to the state via taxes on fuel and other items they might need to (or want to) pick up en route.

I was speaking generally, and not to the program. I am in support of it.

I'm just saying... I wouldn't rely on camping and outdoor rec to support a "tourist" economy. I think of tourism economy as much more shops, restaurants, lodging and entertainment i.e. like the stuff you find in Old Forge, Lake Placid and Lake George.

I'm not saying campers don't go to restaurants and go shopping for knick knacks, but I don't believe that is their specific goal in their vacation. Some just want to sit at the campground and make fires, others go on day adventures, and I'm sure a portion do go do more "touristy" type stuff. I don't have any scientific data but I've read some papers on this and the data supported what I'm saying and I also survey "tourists" and business owners I know. I don't have a large database, but it ranges from people who just go to towns and stay in camps/cabins to those who mostly do backcountry type trips.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 02:07 PM   #25
Buckladd
Member
 
Buckladd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hogtown
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
Personally stocking trout is a waste of my tax dollars. I don't fish and I don't believe in artificially adding fish to ponds for those that do.
Montcalm: I don't believe too many of your personal tax dollars are being used for stocking trout. It's paid for by the Conservation Fund, which is funded by sporting license sales as well as Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Jonhson funds, which are Federal taxes on guns, ammo and fishing gear and are re-appropriated back to the states and must be spent on fish and wildlife matters. In fact, many non-game species have benefited from these taxes.

There are General Fund dollars that are directed to the Conservation Fund, which mainly helps pay salaries and benefits of ECOs and Forest Rangers, who spend a lot of time doing things other than those related to hunting and fishing. There have been EPF funds given to fish hatcheries in some years, but that too is only one's tax dollars if they've bought real estate.

It is a shame that we have to stock fish and that they can't thrive on their own. With the exception of some of the heritage strains.

That said, I'm all for this program. DEC and Parks and Rec will be the first to tell you that there are not enough minorities involved in outdoor activities and part of this program is seen as a way to encourage more participation among them.
__________________
Life's short, hunt hard!

Last edited by Buckladd; 05-05-2017 at 02:59 PM..
Buckladd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 03:09 PM   #26
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckladd View Post
Montcalm: I don't believe too many of your personal tax dollars are being used for stocking trout. It's paid for by the Conservation Fund, which is funded by sporting license sales as well as Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Jonhson funds, which are Federal taxes on guns, ammo and fishing gear and are re-appropriated back to the states and must be spent on fish and wildlife matters. In fact, many non-game species have benefited from these taxes.

There are General Fund dollars that are directed to the Conservation Fund, which mainly helps pay salaries and benefits of ECOs and Forest Rangers, who spend a lot of time doing things other than those related to hunting and fishing. There have been EPF funds given to fish hatcheries in some years, but that too is only one's tax dollars if they've bought real estate.

It is a shame that we have to stock fish and that they can't thrive on their own. With the exception of some of the heritage strains.
Thanks for the clarification, but it really doesn't bother me that much. I was just giving an example to the poster who said this money could be used to stock more fish to remind them that not everyone is interested in stocking fish just as he/she wasn't interested in this program. We don't always get the final say in where our tax dollars go (or even know!) but if we are concerned, casting your vote is the best way to remedy that, not to poo-poo a program that seems to be something positive IMO.

I'm interested in the species surviving for biological reasons, but as far as sport and stocking, I have little interest.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 03:10 PM   #27
debmonster
No Ramen Allowed
 
debmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
I'll never forget a story one of my friends told me years ago...
After spending a night at a DEC campground during his first time on a "camping trip to the Adirondacks", he was hooked and wanted to try out some more primitve camping & backpacking, and then asked me for advice on places to go. This all coming from a guy I would have never pegged as an outdoorsy type guy. To this day he still enjoys camping in the Adirondacks. Just saying.
^*This*^
debmonster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 08:13 PM   #28
Grandpa Paddler
Old Goat
 
Grandpa Paddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Glenwood, NY (ski country)
Posts: 140
[QUOTE=montcalm;258328]I'm not saying campers don't go to restaurants and go shopping for knick knacks, but I don't believe that is their specific goal in their vacation. [/QUOTE

We will be going to Paddlefest in 2 weeks and will be camping (if you can call being in a totally self contained trailer with full hook ups camping). It's the easiest way to get my wife and granddaughter to go. We will be making a substantial contribution to the local economy! Fuel (a lot), firewood (a lot), 3 lunches, 3 dinners, at least 1 breakfast, and 3 nights at the campground. Then, all the stuff my wife will spend in her favorite OF stores and shops. My main goal will be to spend money at Paddlefest (dry bags, paddle, mukluks, misc. gear). In the event I can talk my wife into a new solo canoe... You do the math! I could be eating PB&J and hot dogs and Kraft dinners 'til Thanksgiving!

A fair chunk of change will be left inside the blue line.
__________________
...better to be up a creek without a paddle than to not be on the water at all!
Grandpa Paddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 09:43 PM   #29
pigpen
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: southern dacks
Posts: 41
This is asinine, just my opinion.
pigpen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2017, 10:18 PM   #30
bluequill
Member
 
bluequill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saranac Lake
Posts: 659
I think it is a good program. Many young families are struggling to get by as it is. Rolling the dice on a couple thousand dollars of camping equipment and then realizing that it isn't their cup of tea is just not worth the risk for them. By allowing them to test the waters, being taught camping etiquette and learning about wildlife is a great way to get people interested in the outdoors. It's not a big ticket item and a great way for big brother to give back to the serfdom.

I don't think the value of this program is if it brings $$ into the economy. It is not about the $$.
bluequill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2017, 10:15 AM   #31
Buckladd
Member
 
Buckladd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hogtown
Posts: 725
The real gauge will be participation.
__________________
Life's short, hunt hard!
Buckladd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2017, 02:25 PM   #32
wiiawiwb
Member
 
wiiawiwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 565
I think the program is utterly ridiculous. How did people get along before this? Don't they know of anyone who has camping equipment? Can't they borrow it from a friend? How about renting equipment?

I can't afford the investment of a sailing yacht on the chance I might not enjoy it. Maybe NYS taxpayers should "invest" a few hundred thousand dollars in a yacht so I could go sailing some weekend on Lake George.

That makes just as much sense.
wiiawiwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2017, 04:04 PM   #33
Fly Rodder
Member
 
Fly Rodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
I guess investments in the future have not paid off before. I don't know how successful this program will be, but people moan and complain about how there isn't any recruitment in the camping, hiking, hunting, and fishing communities. It's a low-cost, low-impact effort. Outdoor recreation spending is huge. Nationally, it's close to a trillion dollars. Fostering an initial interest in the outdoors may result in future spending and interest in protecting the Adirondacks and other wild/natural lands.

The NYSDEC spends millions annually on public land upkeep, management, and recreational opportunities that benefit many hundreds (or thousands) of private businesses. Promoting tourism is most definitely part of that responsibility.

Heck, and like Hardscrabble said, maybe a few people will learn a little about camping ethics instead of camping wherever and trashing the place.
Fly Rodder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2017, 04:11 PM   #34
Hard Scrabble
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,151
Hello!
The best campsites are free already!
Jim
Hard Scrabble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2017, 04:45 PM   #35
wiiawiwb
Member
 
wiiawiwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 565
I'd call it an expense rather an investment. It's curious how things that we're told are "investments" always yield deficits and debt.

There's nothing keeping private citizens from taking their own money and "investing" it in this worthy program. I'm sure Encon will gladly accept your investment and thank you wholeheartedly.
wiiawiwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2017, 04:46 PM   #36
RipVanWinkle
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 18
Sorry, i just dont have a warm and fuzzy feeling about getting more people out into the woods where many of us go to escape humanity. I'm seeing so much trash and general disregard by people who frankly dont belong out there and it is increasing exponentially.

Social media is already drawing the hoardes to places that used to be quiet, I've watched the "Blue Hole" an absolute pristine brook trout stream get trashed, the high peaks are utterly over run to the point that I wont even go there anymore...we all know plenty of other examples. I'm just tired of seeing it.
RipVanWinkle 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 01:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.