Creating views with a chainsaw

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Bob said:
Do a little research, this is a totally inaccurate statement.

Uh, "overwhelming" as in about 99.9 % of climate scientists think that humans are responsible for most of the 1+ degree F warming of the past century (I never said the past 15,000 years). The 0.1 % of climate scientists who are skeptics for the most part have been bought off by the energy companies to lobby in their behalf. So, my statement is "totally" accurate.
 
<mod hat>
Tweeeeeet! If folks want to have a discussion about global warming, please start another thread. Let's keep this one on the topic at handsaw, um, I mean, at hand.

-dave-
</mod hat>
 
I had to stop and think. Every time that I've climbed any mountain above 2,000 feet, it has been for the potential view. Guess I'm a view freek! I do lots of low elevation walking and trail running, but for the infrequent times that I'm able to do anything "big", I've always gone for the view. I've done 32 of the 48 and don't know if I'll ever find the time and/or interest for Owls Head or travel the extra miles to do Cabot. I'm lucky enough to have Monadnock, N & S Pack, Skatutakee, the Wapack Trail, Gap, Bald, Crotched, among others in my back yard, so I can always get my view fix. Maybe when I have a little more spare time, I'll explore a few viewless peaks.

BTW, what really gets my goat are "trohpy" homes on hills that have to clear cut acres of land to get their expansive(expensive) view. A few trees on a ledge to enhance a view seems ok to me.
 
I may be the only one to hold this opinion but a tree at the summit with a three toed woodpecker or gray jay or a bicknell's thrush is good enough. Who needs the massive view of a mountain when you have the microcosm of nature right in front of you. Like the saying goes a bird in the bush is worth two peaks five miles of in the distance.
 
TDawg said:
North Crocker wouldn't have much of a view w/o it's trail and man made view, ...
I'm curious about this trail and view, it's been several years since I've been to N. Crocker. At the time I was there, a very straight path had been cleared towards the NW I believe it was. It seemed to become a viewpoint as the elevation dropped sharply. Is this what you're referring to? If so, someone suggested it was cleared as part of a survey. Sounds like someone, probably a different someone, now maintains this for its view?

Sorry if this digresses too far from the original post.
 
Leave the trees alone

One thing we don't need to do is cut down trees for views.

Mother nature has a way of removing trees and altering a landscape on its own......just imagine another serious ice storm like the one 1998 and what that would do! :eek:

Plus I am not lugging a chainsaw to the summit. :p
 
Raymond said:
First, I'd like to challenge Timmus's statement that "There is a whole bunch of hikers carrying a small saw in their pack." What bunch? How many members? Who are they?

Oh, I admit, I never did a serious research on what hikers carry in their packs, and I am too far from being smart enough to create a poll on this one.

But feel free to do it, if you really want to know.

I'm not sure people who has this habit are all vftt members though.
 
My Swiss Army knife has a saw that will go through a 2x4, but it's never been used to clear a view. :D
 
some clarifications...

some clarifications about the original post...

1) I didn't mean hikers would carry their weapon of choice up Hale and start whacking trees. I meant a discussion with WMNF, USFS, AMC, NH Forest & Wildlife (or whatever the proper title is), and any other interested parties...get together, hash it out. If it's a good idea, consider it. If it's a bad idea, squash it. That's all.

2) The chainsaw in the title was not for shock value. I thought chainsaws were used for this sort of thing. If the preferred tool is one of those 8-foot, two-man, you-take-it, no-you-take-it, no-you-take-it type of saws, that's fine too. I hate loud noises in general (chainsaws, motorcycles, rap, etc), so I'm certainly not advocating chainsaw parties in Crawford Notch.

Lots of passion on this topic, and that's cool. Whether it's a good idea or not, some solid points have been made on both sides.
 
Last edited:
Jazzbo said:
This thread is getting long and I don't have time to check, but has anyone mentioned name of this site?

:D Views From The Top? :D

Yes. I plugged it in the original post.
 
hikerfast said:
to get this thread back on track, does anyone have direct or second hand knowledge of what views have been lost,
The "Underhill" summit on Owls Head had views to Mt Washington in 1960, see the photo in her book. These were still somewhat visible in the mid-70s.

Starr King once had wonderful views, see old AMC guides.

On the other hand, Mt Tom once was famous for no view but with blowdown (and a trail cut to the S view) you can see a lot from there. Earlier this month, I watched the chopper flying loads to Zealand Hut.
 
In the Adirondacks....

On the 46 peaks, there are a good half dozen which have had trees cut to improve the views. The ones I remember now, are Sawteeth, Street (over a dozen trees cut), Hough, Giant, one in the Seward range...

Tabletop and Nye have had nature clearing a view. Views now exist there, which didn't exist 20 years ago.

Rocky Peak Ridge is loosing its views along the climb from New Russia. Many years ago, (60-70) Giant was much more open than it is now.

Now, a given wooded peak has different views at different time of the years. A peak with a lot of hardwoods had views in the Fall which do not exist in the summer. Some peaks collect a lot of snow, and in winter, become bald peaks. In particular, the transformation on tabletop and Seward can be dramatic.

Yeah, Timmus is right. There are a bunch of people carrying saws. One just has to define "bunch". Either that, or one person is doing a lot of hiking and a lot of cutting.
 
MichaelJ said:
I thought these paths were carved because they were property bounds and the viewpoints merely coincidental? I would be horrified to think they were done just for views.

That would make sense. They were pretty straight. There were also boundary "trails," marked with yellow blazes, parallel and perpendicular to the AT ascending Spaulding and along the side trail to Sugarloaf from the AT.

Stan said:
I'm curious about this trail and view, it's been several years since I've been to N. Crocker. At the time I was there, a very straight path had been cleared towards the NW I believe it was. It seemed to become a viewpoint as the elevation dropped sharply. Is this what you're referring to? If so, someone suggested it was cleared as part of a survey. Sounds like someone, probably a different someone, now maintains this for its view?

Sorry if this digresses too far from the original post.

Yes, NW seems like the right direction. That's the one. And I agree (with Dave) they did a sub-par (ugly) job on cutting all them.
 
Last edited:
BlackSpruce said:
When we, the 46-rs, built a new bridge on the Elk Lake Dix trail, didn't the trees come from a few hundred feet away?
When a tree is taken for some project there are rules which must be followed. The tree must be between x and y inches in diameter, it must be x hundred feet away from the trail, and each tree must be y hundred feet away from each other. Each tree must be approved by a ranger prior to being cut. The intent is that it must never be obvious that a tree has been cut. A tree which would open up a view could never be cut.
 
BlackSpruce said:
When we, the 46-rs, built a new bridge on the Elk Lake Dix trail, didn't the trees come from a few hundred feet away? And the stones we used for the hardening of the trails, etc. It's in large part done to better the climbers experience.

And NO even when I carry a saw into the woods I don't used it to open views.

Christine
Don't they build bridges, harden trails etc. more to prevent erosion and trail widening than to offer the hikers a better hiking experience? Same thing regarding the clearing blowdown from minimum maintenance trails?


I always carry a saw in winter but I hope never to need it.
 
Don't want to jump off the subject again, but. This tread reminded me of the jokers who marked up the santanoni trail. what ever happen to them if anything?
 
BlackSpruce said:
Yes, I know about those rules but then does it mean it's ok to cut if not obvious and for the good of the majority?
It means that it's ok to cut when approved by the landowner.
Neil said:
Don't they build bridges, harden trails etc. more to prevent erosion and trail widening than to offer the hikers a better hiking experience? Same thing regarding the clearing blowdown from minimum maintenance trails?
In the Adirondacks, yes. Note that cutting for views does NOT fit into this category.
 
Top