Snowshoes MUST be worn in Dacks

[bruno]

.. it's a matter of safety.

-A postholer leaves more than a couple holes.....cat
-Someone has to help someone with a broken or rolled ankle...cat
-Conditions change and a packed trail at 9 AM can, and often does, turn into a postholing nightmare by 2PM. I know I ve done it and led people in without shoes and we all had to full inseam post-hole all the way out,cat
-Snowshoes and skis can be rented, so its not elitist. Its not like they are requiring you to have a humvee (when a jeep will do),cat

my bad, dog! i'm just used to "live free or die". that's all i'm sayin'.

looks like you have a bit of the ol' new england libertarian streak in you too, dog!! takin' a buncha folks on a li'l jaunt sans snowshoes!! way to go!! what happened?

ok, and then i'll let this rest as ol' bruno (believe it or not) is one busy dude, but requirin' dudes (or dudettes for that matter) to take stuff they don't feel like takin' just rubs ol' bruno the wrong way. peace, dude!

 

[rondak46]

I was wrong..

bruno wrote

"looks like you have a bit of the ol' new england libertarian streak in you too, dog!! takin' a buncha folks on a li'l jaunt sans snowshoes!! way to go!! what happened? "

I poo-pooed the rule and said "we don't need no stinking snowshoes"...
until it was time to come down from Marcy. I had to eat my shorts and lost a couple of potential hiking partners.

Mike

 

[Pete_Hickey]

... and it ain't the adk hikers i was referrin' to as "pansies" but the lilly-livered politicians or whoever it was that came up with a citationable LAW requirin' snowshoes. . . .i'm just sayin'!

It wasn't the politicians. When the DEC asks for input on its plans, interested people speak up. There are discussions different sides listening to the other, then things happen. There is much more of a history of skiing in the Adirondacks than in other places in the NE. People who cared about the conditions of the trails made their input. Others waited until it was too late, and then complained.

BTW, I could say just about the same thing about the summit cannisters in the adirondacks.

If people care about rules/regulations, they should do something when their input is asked for.

 

[Neil]

Hey Bruno! In Canada we have laws comin' out our arse holes.

For example, here every hiker must wear a GPS bracelet and leave a credit card number with the Central Hiking Authority (CHA). If you step off the trail -bang - you're dinged for a hundred bucks. You squat for 5 minutes within 100 feet of a waterway and you're dinged for a grand. Light a fire and the satellites pick it up and you're out another grand and you're done hiking for 5 years. You dare bareboot a trail with greater than 8" of snow and they cut off your feet. No kidding. Why do you think Harryk only hikes in the states. To avoid the CHA!

 

[bruno]

Hey Bruno! In Canada we have laws comin' out our arse holes.

For example, here every hiker must wear a GPS bracelet and leave a credit card number with the Central Hiking Authority (CHA). If you step off the trail -bang - you're dinged for a hundred bucks. You squat for 5 minutes within 100 feet of a waterway and you're dinged for a grand. Light a fire and the satellites pick it up and you're out another grand and you're done hiking for 5 years. You dare bareboot a trail with greater than 8" of snow and they cut off your feet. No kidding. Why do you think Harryk only hikes in the states. To avoid the CHA!

duder-cat-dog! hey neil, you're one funny canadian! and some of us thought that without hockey you guys'd be all morose and northern and cryin' in your molson's bradoor (or whatever that high-content stuff you hosers drink up there, if you know what i'm sayin' ). good to see that it ain't just the dang new yawkers who have to put up with all sorts or fleabite effete annoyances.

can't wait to bareboot my first high peaks trail!

 

[jrbren]

IMO I do not see a compelling reason for this law. I do not see how someone tripping over a posthole is any different then someone tripping over a rock or a tree root, watch where you are going ! If you want nice groomed trails for skiing go to a ski area. I remember going in several year's ago with 2 friends to marcy damn and several strangers freaked out. This protective attitude of nice groomed trails seems to be limited to the Marcy damn area, I have all over the ADKs(and Green's & Whites) in winter and see postholes all the time. I just step around them. Almost 100% of the time I wear snowshoes, but just because it is easiest to carry them on feet as opposed to on my pack, not because I feel I am doing anyone any favors or have any duty to leave a groomed trail for the next person. That day mentioned above I was with 2 friends who did not own snow shoes and in my judgement I did not need them (I stand by that judgement). I do see this as elitist, snow shoes rentals are not cheap. I will abide by the rules when I am there, but on this forum and can speak my opinion on the rule, I do not agree with it.

 

[Tramper Al]

. . . there was definitely some trail damage left from the barebooters and an occasional deep posthole . . .

Postholing is dangerous for those who follow.

. . . those three people wrecked that trail probably for the rest of the season . . .

I poo-pooed the rule and said "we don't need no stinking snowshoes"...
until it was time to come down from Marcy. I had to eat my shorts and lost a couple of potential hiking partners.

Well, I don't get it either, and I LOVE wearing my snowshoes. Trail 'damage'? 'Wrecked' trail? C'mon. You guys hike completely unbroken trails and bushwhack out there in New York, yes? I mean, you've got to be prepared for changing conditions.

You can't hike up a packed trail without snowshoes knowing that you can get back down easily only if that track stays just as nice and smooth as it was on the way up. Conditions change.

You carry snowshoes when you go into the woods, and trails don't get wrecked or ruined by footprints, no matter how deep. You need a law to keep your trails smooth? Sorry, I just don't get it.

 

[bruno]

Well, I don't get it either. Trail 'damage'? 'Wrecked' trail? C'mon. You guys hike completely unbroken trails and bushwhack out there in New York, yes? I mean, you've got to be prepared for changing conditions. You can't hike up a packed trail without snowshoes knowing that you can get back down easily only if that track stays just as nice and smooth as it is on the way up. Conditions change.

You carry snowshoes when you go into the woods, and trails don't get wrecked or ruined by footprints, no matter how deep. You need a law to keep your trails smooth? Sorry, I just don't get it.

hey hey!! ol' bruno's startin' to rethink his (what he thought was a) hasty characterization of ny hikers as "pansies". ok, so that's a bit contentious i admit, but ol' tramper al makes a good point. how's come you new york fellers are so defensive about your li'l smooth winter trails? what you want? a snowcat to groom 'em down? c'mon!!! where's the challenge in that?

 

[Whiteman]

I stand by "wrecked"

Well, Brother Al, I'd bet you would also say that ole trail to Allen was just a piece of crap with six feet a-post-holing away for miles. And since it was a nice warm day when all of these holes were dropped on the trail, many of them 8-12 inches deep or more, I bet you can imagine what a nice crappy trail it made the next day after things froze up again.

And I'm not talking pansy here. I really don't have a problem with a hole here or there, or barebooting a nicely packed trail that is cold and firm, but if the trail is more holes than trail, anybody who follows won't be having much fun, even the barebooters. It seems to boil down to just common sense mixed with a tiny bit of courtesy for others, and has nothing to do with elitism.

Then again, if it's the barebooters who are breaking the trail in the first place, who are the snowshoers and skiers to bitch about it?

Question for bruno: How are you feeling about all of those Boston potholes that pop up this time of year? Hey, if you can't blow a tire, wreck a rim, or drop a hubcap, what fun is it driving anyway, right? You don't want some damn steam roller making the road smooth, you know, what's the challenge in that?

Well, that's the view from cheap seats down here in the communist state of Mass-a-two-*****.

 

[Tramper Al]

Well, . . . Al, I'd bet you would also say that ole trail to Allen was just a piece of crap with six feet a-post-holing away for miles.

I understand that the trail was hard to walk on. But I think a trail is whatever it is when you get there.

If a tree falls in the forest and it happens to land across a path . . .

 

[afka_bob]

I stand by, wrecked...or: the unassimilated mind boggles...

A little confused by that last comparisons 'lief: if your winter trail must be as smooth as an un-potholed paved road, than maybe you NYers are a bunch of pansies.

Elitist? A bit, if you have to buy/rent gear to legally just walk on public land.

I've always thought the Adirondacks were good for at least one thing: they help keep the Whites less crowded

P.S.

When will they start mandating helmets and portable defibrilators? Are you allowed to sleep on the ground? Somebody could get a nasty chill and catch their death of a cold!

Mr: Hickey: I don't apply the same ridicule to cannisters in heavy-use areas, though: that saves bears' lives.

 

[BrentD22]

Very confused

Ok I'm talking about this in regards to the White Mountains. I have never been up to the daks so I wouldn't have knowledge of that area.

If the trail is hard packed and you do not post hole when bare booting why is it bad to bare boot? More populated trails that are packed down seem to have a lot of people carrying snow shoes and not using them. Why carry something you don't need.

I completely understand most people in their frustration, but I for one DO NOT GET ALL THAT ANGRY ABOUT POSTHOLES. I make all attempts to not get angry or frustrated about things I can not change.

Maybe it's cabin fever, but can we stop the posts about postholes, unsolicitated advice, regulations, and all the bad and annoying things out on the trail. Let's face it a bad day on the trail is like a great day in the office.

 

[Whiteman]

I understand that the trail was hard to walk on. But I think a trail is whatever it is when you get there.

Right: which is why it might be considerate to not punch a bunch of holes in a nice smooth trail. hmmm, that smooth ribbon of silk, so easy on the ankles . . .

If a tree falls in the forest and it happens to land across a path . . .

I try to move it out of the way. I usually don't cut down others to add to the mess.

Well, Big Al, and Mr. Bruno, and Sr. Bob, I don't mean to tangle with anybody, and I wish you all a fine evening. One thing I can promise you all--even if we don't agree on post-holing or moving trees, I'll still buy the first round. Cheers.

 

[rdl]

So, by the same logic professed by many in this thread, I can ride my ATV down ADK or White Mt hiking trails and make some nice big ruts -- a trail is a trail right ? Regardless of the condition ? So what if it makes it a little difficult or dangerous for other users... I don't care...

 

[afka_bob]

A walking trail or a vehicular riding trail -- by your "logic"?

In the Whites we have ski trails that are so designated. If you potholed one of those, well, you'd probably get a good talking to by a bunch of skiers.

These are, for the most part, hiking trails, right? I like walking on sidewalks, but I don't confuse the two. Boy, how many complaints did the WMNF rangers get from Dak-hikers before most of the railroad ties were removed from Lincoln Woods trail?

 

[CaptainJim]

Let's see... that's

bruno, jrbren, Tramper Al, BrentD22, afka_bob and myself against a "law" mandating snowshoes. I can see and somewhat agree with the intent of the law. but I don't agree with making it a "LAW". I think us backpackers are ,by nature, an independant bunch who don't like to follow the crowd and their rules, that's part of the reason we go away from the crowds.

It's a lot like scuba diving. There is a rule that you ALWAYS dive with a buddy, and the intent of the rule is good, but I've got well over 5000 dives under my weightbelt... probably half of them solo and they were usually my best! Once while on vacation around Laguna in California, I was told by some snotty nosed lifeguard I couldn't get in the water because I didn't have a "buddy". I said "don't worry about it. I dive solo all the time at home... been doin' it for 30 years" he said "not here you don't... we have a LAW, you have to have a buddy. If you try to go in we'll stop you and hold you till the police get here!" I was flabbergasted... I couldn't believe it, but they were serious. Haven't dove Sothern Cal since! It's pretty bad when society has to pass laws to protect people from themselves.

Another good point made is "you get what you get". When I go into the wilderness I watch out for rocks, trees, animals and yes Postholes. Yeah, I'll agree they're a damn PITA, but as pointed out"if you want groomed trails, go to a ski resort" or I might add GOLFING!

I went to Flume Slide Trail Sunday 3/20 and it was as yet UNBROKEN. The warm spring sun had seriously softened the snow and even WITH my snowshoes I was sinking in many spots Knee to waist deep, now I've left foot and a half long postholes. Are those any better than bareboot holes?

I don't know... maybe I'm getting off track here, but I gotta agree with bruno, jrbren, TramperAl, BrentD22 & afka_bob here... I think "Lawmakers" are trying to legislate too much into our lives. Guess I won't be diving in So.Cal or Hiking in the Daks next winter. Just My .02

Capt. Jim

 

[Barbarossa]

My $.02

A few years back, I climbed Carrigain in mid-April. I didn't own snow shoes; heck, I probably wore jeans. Signal Ridge trail was nice and crusty on the way up, but on the way down I started post-holing. Never mind the people that came after, I was frustrated.

In hindsight, I think the curteous thing to do is to carry snowshoes. A trail is a shared resource.

 

[rondak46]

To be sure....

... It is a regulation of the DEC; not a law, as such.

.... Second, it is not really about being overprotective of hikers; it's about keeping rescuers and rangers from having to respond to too many calls.

Mike

 

[mavs00]

I already regret being sucked in to this death spiral.

Let not make this a Whites VS. Adirondacks thing.

If you primarily hike only in the Whites and think that they are the ONLY wondrous place our creator has blessed us with or that the Daks is a cesspool of rules and regulations, then consider yourself lucky you don't have to "deal with 8" snowshoes regs" and leave it alone without editorializing. Read post #1 and answer the question if you can, that's all thats really asked for or needed.

If you are so inclined..........I suggest you ask around to some people that have actually hiked both areas (along with other places), and I'm sure you'll find that on the balance, you'll find both are wonderful and special places that are to be enjoyed by WHOEVER has the desire to explore them (rules and all). We can probably dispense with the "My sandbox is better than yours" tone this thread has already taken on. As I read the last bunch of posts, that what coming accross more than anything.

** My apologies for my annoyed tone here, but I REALLY hate this WHITES vs. DAKS crap. This type of thread has taken on that tone, and from where I sit, it was only started as a simple "request for info" post.

 

[mafogle]

This is the first time I've heard of a law to wear snowshoes in the ADK, I had heard that it was just a courtesy thing for the skiers.

Can anyone cite the reg for wearing snowshoes in the ADK's?

Just curious