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 06-02-2017, 06:59 PM   #41
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCD View Post
Of course I'm not talking about the "operation" itself. I know that these operations don't make a lot of money. But they drive tons of traffic to the local area. Compare the newly resurgent North Creek (Gore) with Upper Benson (Lapland). 'Nuff said.
They usually lose money. Like I said, check the numbers.

I'd rather compare an area that actually gets decent snow but I know xc doesn't have the draw in the US that dh does. A lot of XC places don't make snow, so they have to wait on the weather like dh places used to before snowmaking.

Let's compare Hickory to Lapland. Not a lot of driving force behind either of those.

So for the modern, big, expensive ski areas... why should the residents of NYS subsidize your need to drive business into the area when you could just as easily move your business elsewhere*?

*I'm playing Devil's advocate here, I like skiing so I'm willing to overlook the expense
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2017, 09:04 PM   #42
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,436
You know I think we are on the same page. I'm not advocating for a big state subsidy for anything. I'm just making the point that human powered recreation in the US rarely draws big crowds. Put in something (anything) where out of shape people can take some kind of thrill ride without doing any work, and you will have a draw. Doesn't matter whether it's lift served skiing, ATVs, dirt bikes, snowmobiles, motorboats. Even in rock climbing (one of my sports) the crowds are all at the gym, the bolted sport climbs, and cliffs with easy approaches. Sure, there are few folks who hike hours to a big scary remote crag, but VERY few.

About the only human powered money makers in this area are the LP Ironman and Cascade.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2017, 10:15 PM   #43
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
I don't know if we really are on the same page TCD, but that's OK too.

I understand where you are coming from, I think but I guess I'm also trying to point out the solution(s) is not really simple. I mean you could auction off the state land and remove all the regs and let everyone go hog wild, and perhaps some folks living in the area now might get some benefit, but I think the reason they live where they live would die off pretty quickly.

I like a lot of NY, and I've lived all over this state, in pretty much every region but NYC. The issues I see in the Adirondacks are not unique IMHO. They are the same, but like I said, the only difference is there are more government agencies to blame (people in CNY and WNY just blame the Governor).

I also know why I like living in the Adirondacks more than any other place, and why I have a desire to move back. There are a lot really nice places in this state, but they lack exactly what a lot of people feel holds the interior of the blue line back. In most of these areas I see little economic benefit other than agriculture, and the Adirondacks have a number of challenges in that regard besides any government regulation. But anyway, back to what sets the other non-blue line areas of NY apart: Fragmentation of state lands, too little state land and far, far too little forest (and not the same types of forest).

As far as the state run ski resorts: I have no qualms with them other than to say, IMO, they picked the wrong mountains. History has something to do with that, but I think in terms of quality of skiing and sustainability of the industry, Gore and Whiteface are not ideal. As to whether or not that is good use of state lands, I feel having the state run the facilities is better than leasing to private companies, which is what happens with a lot of other large ski resorts. And because they are state run, they don't get the sometimes necessary real estate development that comes along with the private resorts.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2017, 03:24 PM   #44
Hard Scrabble
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
And if you think something like dh skiing in the Adirondacks is so easy, and a way to make money, by all means, PLEASE go to the bank, get a loan, buy Big Tupper and have at it.

You can be the hero to that whole town when you succeed, but you won't, so unless you have a million or so to flush, get these ideas out of your head.
The Big Tupper thing has already been tried and been blocked by the APA Commission.
Hard Scrabble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2017, 05:39 PM   #45
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard Scrabble View Post
The Big Tupper thing has already been tried and been blocked by the APA Commission.
No, it was approved and the developers won the lawsuits against them. And this was not simply to reopen the ski resort but do a TON of real estate development.

https://www.northcountrypublicradio....lls-back-taxes

https://www.northcountrypublicradio....f-project-land

See, you blamed the APA and it was never even a fault of them.

Last edited by montcalm; 06-03-2017 at 07:39 PM..
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2017, 08:06 PM   #46
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,436
Yeah it was approved. But only after it was hung out to dry for 7 years. 7 years might as well be a lifetime in real estate development; conditions change much faster than that. The naysayers have learned that is they can delay something long enough with BS court challenges, that alone will kill it. It's a standard page from the playbook.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2017, 08:39 PM   #47
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
There were a number of issues with this project (see the articles linked) but it always seems convenient to blame the APA, and the Sierra Club (or whoever sued).

Who knows if it will even go through. But I'd be willing to bet a good sum of money that the ski resort won't make any money. All their profit will come from the necessary development that comes along with this kind of thing.

I would have been happy to see NYS buy Big Tupper, strip the lifts and auction them and let mountain bikers and skiers maintain it for uphill travel kind of like what the groups in Vermont are doing i.e. Rasta.

The skiing may never be a big draw, but the biking is starting to grow from Saranac to Wilmington. Adding a stop in Tupper would have been a welcome addition and perhaps drawn some people from the two most popular campgrounds in the park that are only 5 miles away.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2017, 03:22 PM   #48
Hard Scrabble
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCD View Post
Yeah it was approved. But only after it was hung out to dry for 7 years. 7 years might as well be a lifetime in real estate development; conditions change much faster than that. The naysayers have learned that is they can delay something long enough with BS court challenges, that alone will kill it. It's a standard page from the playbook.
The slopes of Mt Morris have had seasonal residences for years.
We can't make the assumption that a proposed ski area would not be profitable.
Hard Scrabble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2017, 04:33 PM   #49
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard Scrabble View Post
We can't make the assumption that a proposed ski area would not be profitable.
It's not an assumption, it's an educated guess based on the facts.

Big Tupper is not a big mountain with a great deal of interesting terrain. It's not a particularly snowy area. And it has to compete with Whiteface which is a very short distance away.

So to me that reads... not many skiers will be willing to go out of their way to ski average terrain. BT will have to invest and spend a great deal on snowmaking to keep it open during the short holidays where they may make money and to meet commitments to the few season pass holders they may have. They have, on paper, an absolute behemoth to compete with that is only an hour away. Those who drive up from out of town will still be drawn to WF. Conditions at WF are not always ideal, but when they are good at BT, likely they will be a WF, so people will go to WF.

BT will be nothing more than a perk for those who may buy into the condos (assuming they are built and people actually want to pay a good deal of money for real estate in an area that's already past its prime.)
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2017, 06:55 PM   #50
Bluefire
Pond hopper
 
Bluefire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Grafton NY
Posts: 39
I have been following this thread with great interest. I tend to agree that the town does little to promote outdoor recreation. Very slow to plow trailheads and although the Schroon River runs the length of the town, there are no canoe access points. As far as the northway tunnels they were originally built for deer and other animals to get to the east side of the northway as the northway blocked access to the schroon and other sources of water. When the northway first opened one could see the large chain link fences that funneled into the tunnels. Justin mentions the store. Years ago it was owned by the Dobies, who I believe sold it to Brenda's parents. I seem to remember years later Brenda married one of the Dobie brothers. As far as the demise of the town the first blow I remember is the state picking Gore over Hoffman mountain to build a ski resort. Then it was all downhill, for me the most devestating closures were the Gray Goose and the drag strip.
Bluefire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2017, 09:33 AM   #51
SpencerVT
Member
 
SpencerVT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brattleboro, Vermont
Posts: 58
I think this thread needs more JOHNNY CASH PLAYED AT FRONTIER TOWN talk. AMAZING!!
__________________
Spencer Bigfoot
SpencerVT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2017, 03:59 PM   #52
Hard Scrabble
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
It's not an assumption, it's an educated guess based on the facts.

Big Tupper is not a big mountain with a great deal of interesting terrain. It's not a particularly snowy area. And it has to compete with Whiteface which is a very short distance away.

So to me that reads... not many skiers will be willing to go out of their way to ski average terrain. BT will have to invest and spend a great deal on snowmaking to keep it open during the short holidays where they may make money and to meet commitments to the few season pass holders they may have. They have, on paper, an absolute behemoth to compete with that is only an hour away. Those who drive up from out of town will still be drawn to WF. Conditions at WF are not always ideal, but when they are good at BT, likely they will be a WF, so people will go to WF.



BT will be nothing more than a perk for those who may buy into the condos (assuming they are built and people actually want to pay a good deal of money for real estate in an area that's already past its prime.)
I agree that Whiteface would attract more hard core skiers and Tupper would have to compete with a state owned facility, an hour away as you said.
But, Big Tupper has an adequate elevation and would lend itself to family groups.
Something Whiteface can't offer.
Hard Scrabble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2017, 05:43 PM   #53
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
Big Tupper died once already. I don't see it making a big comeback.

WF has plenty of green and blue runs on the lower mountain and there are a number of other small resorts, as well as Gore, to compete with.

LP already has a thriving scene which Tupper does not, and even after this, I doubt will have. There are a number hotels, restaurants, shops as well as the Olympic theme that is hard to compete with. To say that North Creek is doing well in comparison is pretty optimistic IMO. Most of the skiers that ski Gore stay in the Lake George/Queensbury area. Ski areas bring people, in some cases, but to say they revive towns is ludicrous. People will go where the best deals are, case in point, Gore... most are willing to drive the extra half hour to have the amenities of the LG area.

Usually ski areas die for a reason. Repeating history and expecting different results isn't usually the best decision.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 07:57 AM   #54
kwc
loser
 
kwc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Johnstown NY
Posts: 1,229
The latest on the Frontier Town boondoggle ...

http://www.timesunion.com/local/arti...y-11204338.php
__________________


Once a year, go some where you've never been before.
kwc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2017, 10:28 AM   #55
Bounder45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trail Boss View Post
In 2006, NAFTA agreed with the US that Canadian softwood is subsidized so countervailing duties are fair and even the score. Except they calculated the US had been overcharging Canada for years and had to repay the excess amount. The US returned $4.5 billion and Canada agreed to cap its exports to ~1/3 of the total US market. Anything above the 1/3 gets dinged with escalating fees. Horse-trading at its finest.

The story goes on but you can see it's an old one and both sides just want what's best for them and usually find a fair compromise. That's good business.
I don't know about Canada capping its exports at 1/3 of the total US market. Where did you read that?

The previously mentioned Softwood Lumber agreement (it was that agreement, not the NAFTA ruling, which established a fair competitions agreement between Canadian and US lumber companies) has expired, hasn't it? So I'm not really sure what mechanisms, if any, are protecting the US economy from Canadian price wars.

Anyhow, my earlier point was this: tourism doesn't sustain the whole Park, especially in the off-seasons. We all need wood and wood products to build homes and furniture and fix stuff. It would make sense that the NY state government, and the APA, would find ways to promote local lumber harvesting to satisfy the local demand in that part of NY. It's more eco-friendly than paying for stuff that was harvested in Maine or Ontario and it does help out with the park's local economy, which unlike the rest of upstate NY, has no alternative economies to fall back on when tourist season dies down.

We can argue about ski resorts and real estate development plans until we're all blue in the face; that's never going to change the fact that tourism doesn't support all, or even most, of the ADK's through the entirety of the year. If you spend just a little bit of time driving areas away from the main tourist towns (e.g. Placid,Old Forge) during the late fall and winter seasons, you'd realize that. A lot of towns simply shut down for the cold seasons.

Last edited by Bounder45; 06-18-2017 at 10:39 AM..
Bounder45 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 09:55 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.