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 01-28-2018, 09:40 PM   #61
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
I keep my spandex under a pair of baggies, so it doesn't matter much, as long as the chamois does it's job.

I'm not really into showing off my legs or my junk.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 07:05 AM   #62
JohnnyVirgil
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
The only thing I really care about is motorized vs non-motorized access in terms of that, but in terms of moving forward in the future and helping the Adirondacks have a healthy, sustainable economy, I think it's going to take more than Snowmobilers going bar to bar and driving drunk through the forest. Not something I like to tell my kids about the greatest place in NY, but it's the reality.
That pretty much sums it up for me as well. Mostly motorized vs non-motorized - to include generators, chainsaws, drones, etc.

Last edited by JohnnyVirgil; 01-29-2018 at 07:22 AM..
JohnnyVirgil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 07:20 AM   #63
JohnnyVirgil
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by dundee View Post
I can't speak for anyone else, but I have had very few good encounters with mt. bikers. Most of my encounters were of the negative variety where I am out on a hike and a mt. biker(s) tells me to get out of the way and screams past me at full speed.

This has happened in WF AND Wilderness areas and these people have had no regard for the law or another's safety.

The only time I had a good encounter was when the terrain was so rough, they had to get off the bike and walk.

Like everything else, I'm sure there are good bikers out there, I just don't see them often.

Perhaps it's the bikers attitude that needs to change.
I think a lot of this is the general dichotomy between the "need for speed adrenaline junkies" and the "in the woods for relaxation" set. Motorboats vs canoes, snowmobiles vs skis, hiking vs mountain biking. They tend to annoy each other.
JohnnyVirgil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 12:06 PM   #64
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyVirgil View Post
I think a lot of this is the general dichotomy between the "need for speed adrenaline junkies" and the "in the woods for relaxation" set. Motorboats vs canoes, snowmobiles vs skis, hiking vs mountain biking. They tend to annoy each other.
I hear this, but there is a HUGE difference between motorsports and human powered sports.

And I have tons of personal data on my own riding and skiing, and they I would say they are more similar than you might think. Average speeds for skiing are a little slower, but you can certainly hit the same top speeds on skis as on a bike. The other thing is if you don't know, bikes are FAR easier to control and stop than skis. Brakes and tires on bikes are so good now I can go from full speed to zero in very short distance. In theory, you can do a hockey stop on skis and stop very quick but to do that on long XC skis with softish boots on narrow trails in deep snow is not very easy.

Just for reference, I'm not extremely fit or extremely skilled on a bike or on skis, and I tend to average 6-7 mph on trails, even fast ones (really fit XC bikers can probably do 10-12, but a lot of that is climbing speed) and 4 mph on skis, maybe slower if I do a lot of climbing or trail breaking through heavy snow. Maybe a tad faster if conditions are flat or ideal. I don't like to go much more than 20-25mph on XC/XCD skis, beyond that you are really out of control. Making controlled turns is often much slower, like 12-15 mph. Topping out at 20 mph on a bike is pretty fast on most trails. I've definitely hit 30ish, but that was really steep, fast trail and it's not something I would do way in the BC.

Both DH biking and skiing are much faster, but are usually left to ski resorts. Those are far more adrenaline fueled and because you ride a lift, much less fitness involved (although both are very physical, just not as much so as BC skiing or biking).
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 12:22 PM   #65
JohnnyVirgil
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
I hear this, but there is a HUGE difference between motorsports and human powered sports.

And I have tons of personal data on my own riding and skiing, and they I would say they are more similar than you might think. Average speeds for skiing are a little slower, but you can certainly hit the same top speeds on skis as on a bike. The other thing is if you don't know, bikes are FAR easier to control and stop than skis. Brakes and tires on bikes are so good now I can go from full speed to zero in very short distance. In theory, you can do a hockey stop on skis and stop very quick but to do that on long XC skis with softish boots on narrow trails in deep snow is not very easy.

Just for reference, I'm not extremely fit or extremely skilled on a bike or on skis, and I tend to average 6-7 mph on trails, even fast ones (really fit XC bikers can probably do 10-12, but a lot of that is climbing speed) and 4 mph on skis, maybe slower if I do a lot of climbing or trail breaking through heavy snow. Maybe a tad faster if conditions are flat or ideal. I don't like to go much more than 20-25mph on XC/XCD skis, beyond that you are really out of control. Making controlled turns is often much slower, like 12-15 mph. Topping out at 20 mph on a bike is pretty fast on most trails. I've definitely hit 30ish, but that was really steep, fast trail and it's not something I would do way in the BC.

Both DH biking and skiing are much faster, but are usually left to ski resorts. Those are far more adrenaline fueled and because you ride a lift, much less fitness involved (although both are very physical, just not as much so as BC skiing or biking).
Yeah, I totally agree. I've never had a mountain biker be a dick to me, although I've had quite a few startle me with a last minute "on your left!" as they whizzed by. But that's on me for not always having the situational awareness to hear them coming from behind. I guess you could also split enthusiasts of all types into people who view things as "challenges" and those who don't. I have a handful of mountain biking friends and they do like a challenging trail. They feel like they beat something somehow. Same can be said for peak-bagging hikers who are all about how many and how fast. Me, I'm more of a lazy hiker/camper/paddler who enjoys the quiet. I think a 100 bikes are less intrusive than a single radio, for instance....
JohnnyVirgil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 12:26 PM   #66
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
The other thing with biking is speed is highly dependent on the trail. More technical trails are much slower. Flatter trails can be slower, except for those who are exceptionally fit. Adding in turns tends to slow the riders down and help you use the terrain and forest with minimal disruption.

I'm seriously impressed with how far bikers have come with trail design though. And there are all sorts of different types. Some look like BMX tracks and aren't what I'd recommend for the Adirondacks, others look very natural. If done right, they all drain and wear really well.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 03:56 PM   #67
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
Seems this whole bikes in the Wilderness was not just a diversion, there seems to be some real change here:

https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2...ilderness.html

I only skimmed the article, but it seems they want to allow bikes to White Lily pond even with a Wilderness designation. The traditional way around this was a primitive corridor, but it may just bring about a change to allow bikes in Wilderness areas on a case-by-case basis, which would make more sense than spot zoning with corridors.

This is similar to what I have advocated in the sense bikes should be allowed where use is seen as acceptable. Allowing them on old roads isn't exactly the change in MTB that I was hoping for BUT there are some good forest roads that do support multi-use with little detriment. Fish Pond TT is in exceptional condition and stays dry despite many different uses from bikes to canoe carts to skis. There is one bad spot that is starting to wash out and it appear to me that there is some asphalt that has been added in the steeper sections. But any road that is 12' wide will have issues like this.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2018, 04:42 PM   #68
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,640
Good news. I have long said that the "Wilderness / Wild Forest" divide for bikes was stupid nonsense. There are numerous trails in so-called Wilderness that are very well suited for bikes, and there are numerous trail in Wild Forest that are NOT suited for bikes. The only reason that divide was used for regulation is that it was cheap and fast, and did not require any "on the ground" understanding of the actual trails involved. Thus saving DEC budget dollars to actually put people on the ground to understand the trails. The "mechanized" clause in the Wilderness description has never been the reason, it's just a false pretext.
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2018, 11:59 AM   #69
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,141
Done deal...
https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2...-approved.html
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:43 PM   #70
Bounder45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
So um, I really don't get this... because someone had one bad encounter with some jerks, it's all finger pointing.
You don't get it? You seemed to get it quite well when you were complaining about the perceived abundance of drunk snowmobilers.

That aside, more areas should be open to bikes. Old and active roads make sense, as do certain snowmobile trails. Certain foot trails, less so; the foot traffic is already causing quite a bit of trail erosion. Bikes, like anything else with mechanically-powered wheels, will take their toll on unimproved trails. There would have to be active maintenance for high traffic trails, which means lugging equipment several, or more, miles into the woods, which means time and money. The snowmobile clubs proactively help out with trail maintenance for their network of trails (both on private and public lands). You'd have to have the same kind of buy-in from bikers in order to make this work.

Bikes aside, everyone should feel good about the finalized plans for the Boreas area. I think a lot of people wanted to be able drive close enough before having to dismount and hoof it and the DEC wanted to have access to the dam structure; this plan seems to allow for that.

Last edited by Bounder45; 02-05-2018 at 02:57 PM..
Bounder45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 02:47 PM   #71
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder45 View Post
You don't get it? You seemed to get it quite well, when you were playing the blame game with "drunk" snowmobilers.
If you want to dispute that, I told you what you could do.

I hate to stereotype anyone, but go sit at any bar along a snowmobile route and report back. Take your Breathalyzer too.

I'll stereotype motorists as well, because plenty of people get behind the wheel, not legal, and never get caught.

And for those that do get caught, there is a whole pool of data that says motorists get behind the wheel drunk. It's not everyone, but it only takes a few to cause a real issue. Let's see the same thing for cyclists injuring or killing hikers.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:09 PM   #72
Bounder45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
If you want to dispute that, I told you what you could do.

I hate to stereotype anyone, but go sit at any bar along a snowmobile route and report back. Take your Breathalyzer too.

I'll stereotype motorists as well, because plenty of people get behind the wheel, not legal, and never get caught.

And for those that do get caught, there is a whole pool of data that says motorists get behind the wheel drunk. It's not everyone, but it only takes a few to cause a real issue. Let's see the same thing for cyclists injuring or killing hikers.
You know what I've learned from this conversation Monty? I've learned that some people just love to hate and complain.

I hope that you're able to take a break from your armchair ethics and go have some fun in the Boreas area. It's a lovely time and place to be an outdoors enthusiast. I can't think of another country, perhaps excepting Canada, which values conservation and wild lands in the same way that we do.
Bounder45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 03:47 PM   #73
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder45 View Post
You know what I've learned from this conversation Monty? I've learned that some people just love to hate and complain.
You learned something? Well, that's more that I can say about what I've got out of your retorts.

Because I'm honest about the way I feel about something, that makes me a hater? Because I don't like the noise, the smoke, the culture that goes along with a particular activity, it makes me a bad person? No. That just makes me real.

I'm not saying and never did say limiting motor vehicles from forest lands will limit any of those problems, but as I see it, they are real world problems. And I'd rather not teach my children that's the way they should enjoy the mountains.

If you want to vilify bicycles, go ahead, no one is stopping you and it's been done for nearly a hundred years. But if you actually go look at the facts and get involved with it (you live in Rochester, right? Go join GROC), your opinions might change by looking at real world trail building and shared use trails. And I won't say mountain bikers don't like their booze, but if you can show me one case of a cyclist seriously injuring or killing another cyclist or hiker, I'll shut my mouth and never say another word about it.

Cyclists are killed everyday by motorists. But where was anyone on that? Opening a road to motor vehicles is literally a death sentence to bikers. No one seemed to complain - but it is the reality. And people will not hike a road that they can drive on unless out of necessity, so let's not go there.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 04:12 PM   #74
Neil
Kayak-46
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,973
Now, now friends. Let us go gently forth into this Boreas discussion and perhaps even someday soon in reality.

No one wants to read the personal attacks, (or maybe they do). Anyway, I don't so please leave them dead at the keyboard.

Thanks!
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
Neil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 06:12 PM   #75
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,141
Congratulations to those who were & are hoping for yet another area of the Adirondacks with easy motorized access, and many thanks to the wilderness advocates that fought hard for a stronger “Wilderness” classification for the Boreas Ponds tract.…keep up the good work!

I still think the real balance is that second gate about mid way up Gulf Brook Rd, which seemed to be working out pretty good judging from the multiple reports that I’ve read & seen online & in social media. Usage seemed like it was pretty steady, with many people returning more than just once. Not just to visit & paddle the ponds, but to also hike & bushwhack the surrounding peaks & old roads that are now filling in throughout the area.

It’d be interesting to be able to view the trail register data over the past 20 months…(and just for the record I even mentioned this to AWA a while back in their early emails as a possible way to gauge how many people were using the area, and I also voiced my concerns that the “compromise” might end up being at/near LeBier Flow if we can’t find a way keep it at the second gate, but my thoughts didn’t seem to gain much traction.) Hopefully the DEC decides to keep the current interior gate as far as the general public is allowed to drive during the summer months, and keeps it a fun bicycle ride to the dams & back, and is able to keep it a fun & safe x-country ski trail during the winter.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 07:14 PM   #76
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
As much as I prefer the current configuration to the alternative of keeping the entire road open, I don't think it's going to happen.

Somewhere I read they were already planning that it would be a snowmobile trail in the winter, so this will deter many skiers. I really, truly believe this was a big part of the decision too, because it allows the DEC to pop in that connector trail with minimal work.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 07:23 PM   #77
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by montcalm View Post
Somewhere I read they were already planning that it would be a snowmobile trail in the winter, so this will deter many skiers. I really, truly believe this was a big part of the decision too, because it allows the DEC to pop in that connector trail with minimal work.
Just curious... Where did you read this?
I agree that a designated snowmobile trail deters many of those on skis & snowshoes, but keeping the road open for emergency motorized DEC use and/or by DEC permit I’m ok with.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 07:43 PM   #78
bluequill
Member
 
bluequill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saranac Lake
Posts: 749
not sure......but can the DEC an still limit mechanical access to Labier Flow at the present gate/ upper parking area? Just because it is Wild Forest doesn't mean they "have to" open it to vehicles/bikes. The classification just allows DEC to use it for maintenance. I guess we just have to wait for DEC to come up with a UMP to see how the land will be used?

My concern in all of this is the easy access to the ponds where empty bait containers and beer cans will decorate the area with the eventual degradation of the fishing, hunting and wildlife.
bluequill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 07:48 PM   #79
montcalm
Mobster
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 946
You know, I *think* I may have read that wrong. I think the article just mentioned it as an option and I misquoted it. That is if it was the one linked above, although I may have read something else, but that seems unlikely because AE would likely have reported that.

bluequill is correct, they don't have to open the road all the way BUT the thing that makes me suspicious is the administrative corridor up the ponds dam. They could have done this as well from the middle parking lot. Although this may have blocked off bikes - they could have also zoned the area in between "primitive" and got around that, but I don't believe that was an option.

I'm going to stop reading into things and speculating, but my speculation is as stated above. It's not my choice, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't that way.
montcalm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 07:57 PM   #80
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluequill View Post
not sure......but can the DEC an still limit mechanical access to Labier Flow at the present gate/ upper parking area? Just because it is Wild Forest doesn't mean they "have to" open it to vehicles/bikes. The classification just allows DEC to use it for maintenance. I guess we just have to wait for DEC to come up with a UMP to see how the land will be used?
Correct.

Quote:
My concern in all of this is the easy access to the ponds where empty bait containers and beer cans will decorate the area with the eventual degradation of the fishing, hunting and wildlife.
Same here. There is no current reason to believe that this won’t be the case if the general public is allowed easy motorized access to Boreas Ponds, and the proof lies in the countless other areas where the public is already allowed to drive within close proximity (examples are plentiful & many have been shared in several previous discussions). Until DEC has more rangers & resources to enforce its education & regulations, there is absolutely no reason to believe things will be any different at Boreas Ponds.

Last edited by Justin; 02-05-2018 at 08:07 PM..
Justin 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 08:47 AM.


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.