Summit Registers

[mavs00]

Everybody seems to be in agreement on:
-herd trail formation on trailless peaks is undesirable.
-herd trails can form quickly and easily
-increasing numbers of people are doing the trailless peaks heightening the risk of trail formation
-internet is playing a role in publicizing these peaks and is partly (greatly?)responsible for the increase.
-the once trailless ADK 46er peaks are an example of what can happen to the now trailless peaks.

Whither now? One can attempt a passive effort. Ie. remain silent about one's own trips. The way things are now it looks like an active (proactive) effort is required. If the net is opening these areas up then it is an obvious medium for their preservation. I'm sure the idea of some sort of an internet based HH organization makes some people cringe (writhe in anger?). However an official,structured entity has a much better chance of influencing the course of events, contributing to the updating and creation of UMP's etc. than do a few posters on a forum.

The big question, as alluded to by Pete Hickey, is: would such an organization preserve the pristine nature of the Kilburns and Sawtooths or help ruin them through increased exposure?

Interesting.................... Do you mean like an Advocacy group?

Club to me pulls in some negative connotations. I think Erik is right to an extent........ Does the world really need a ADK HH / NE 770 club or any other club that forces you to stand in 100 / 770 different spots on the planet in order to "have a say" in things........ Hell if I want that, I'll geocache, at least I'll get cool little trinkets too . Don't get me wrong, I certainly think that anyone that achieves such an incredible feat, should be honored and recognized appropriately......... But, it really doesn't imply extra care or a willingness confront the hard issue facing us here..........

EX... I know someone that has climbed 95 of the HH and for various reasons will never make it to 100. Does that not mean that she, in her heart, is not every bit the HH finisher, steward and advocate of these places as those that climbed the other 5. While I think climbing them imparts the love and passion that fuels the desire to help, it by no means mean you don't "get it" before, at or after you climb the last peak.

Neil, look in the mirror, you yourself attained the Spirit behind the 46ers, long before last month............. right? (strictly my opinion). Did you really need to soil the last few peaks with your feet to get to this point of "caring". Then again, I know a couple that are working on their 2nd-3rd rounds and still ain't there yet and perhaps NEVER will be.

So by club, you mean, group of advocates that will first and foremost be stewards and fierce loyalists to a given set of peaks (not to the ppl who climb them), Interesting concept I suppose.......... But, if you mean..... I'll go stand there, take a picture, get me a nifty patch, YIPPIEEEEE ....... I'm not sure that would help that much, and I'd likely not be real interest (might even fight it actually) ... My thoughts anyway.

/////----- Another thought on HUMAN ZONES on remote peaks -----/////

Bushwhackers I know USE em'. Earlier this summer, on N. River, a remote peak thats rarely climbed, even by whackers (warning - PRIVATE PROPERTY ISSUE exist on it). Its a double hump peak meaning there are two lumps within the final contour line separated by a 15'-20' dip and maybe 75'. Both are maybe within 3-5 feet in elevation.

As we reached the first............ as experienced whackers (not me so much, but my partners, Bushwhacker and the peak twins - bagr & _bgr ) all knew at once, by the obvious lack of a "human zone" on bump #1, we wern't there yet. We headed over to bump #2 and immediately found our "human zone" and our true summit. Remember, you can count the annual summiters of this puppy on 1 hand, or 2 at most, and there might as well have been a sign there, it was obvious enough.

Granted, not a whisper till you were in it, but it was there. OTOH - Avalanche Mt (climbed more often but still pure whacking) you know your close as you get within 100 feet, by the subtle path pointing the way.

 

[Neil]

I don't think a person has to ever have set foot in the Adirondacks to become a member of the ADK Mountain club. By the same token I don't think having to climb all 100 in a hypothetical HH advocacy group should be a pre-requisite for membership. That could exclude many potentially valuable participants.
Preservation, ecology, trees and birds, personal fortitude, respect, humility and legislation are all words that would fit in a statement of purpose.

Note that I'm only thinking out loud here as if we were all on a hike together: Personal glorification, speed records and such would be discouraged. The spiritual nature of hiking wilderness such as the HH precludes that sort of stuff anyhow. Obviously, when someone does finish, backslapping and congrats are normal. In the group I'm thinking about when you congratulate someone on such a life affirming experience you are also indirectly congratulating yourself for being a part of it all and getting it....A trip report would be more of a sharing your experience with brethren than anything else. For ex. Bigmoose and AlG posted on your forum wonderful TR's that had very spiritual rings to them. Their experience has to a certain extent become mine.

And so on. Over.

 

[carole]

I enjoy reading the thoughts presented here...but why do I keep having visions of Cabbage Patch Dolls?

 

[Pete_Hickey]

Simply put, the Adirondack Forty-Sixers are not a conservation club. They are a peakbagging club. They encourage people to hike specific peaks and in return the hikers will receive rewards

In the '70s, there was debate, discussions about disolving the 46ers. The argument that kept the club together was, "People will climb whether there is a club or not (look at all the other 'lists' out there, even in the west.. CO 14ers, etc.)" By maintaining the 46ers, and encouraging them to write as they start their climbs, we will get a hold of them early, and educate them." We won't stop the impact, but we will at least lessen it.

I applaud Pete Hickey and anyone else for getting out there to try to reverse the tide. But this causeway of work will never be enough to stop the tidalwave of impact.

I'm just content to slow things down.

how many have gotten a reward patch for putting in 46, 146 or 346 hours of trail work (myself not included, though I have built and maintained trails for the past seven years)? 10? 20? 40?

Much better than you think. 40 have received the 346 hour award, 35 have received 146 (numbers are NOT reversed) 146 (really) have received 46 hour. THis year, we have put in 1,422 man-hours, with over 100 different volunteers.

Perhaps they should follow what one forest ranger suggested: you get the patch and your name listed after (1) you climb the 46 peaks and (2) you put in 46 hours of trail work in the high peaks with any trail organization (ADK, Forty-Sixers, SCA, ATIS or DEC). Not a bad idea.

This has been seriously discussed at the board. I for one, am against it. At first I thought it was great, until I looked at my work crew one day. I had a team with me that enjoyed what they were doing, and were there because they wanted to be. I don'T want to be leading in people who are only doing it because they 'have' to.... Well, maybe getting them to move privys would be fun...

 

[blacklab2020]

I don'T want to be leading in people who are only doing it because they 'have' to.... Well, maybe getting them to move privys would be fun...

Responsibility is not always fun, everyone out there hiking should be involved... maybe involvement teaches some people to appreciate the outdoors/trailwork more and gives them a chance to learn more about their impact.

 

[bigmoose]

Back to this post's beginnings: canisters!
I had a thought. Maybe those jars atop the 3ks can help alleviate the apparent problem of too much information/too much internet regarding trip reports, trail conditions and the like.
For many of us, posting a successful climb is a way of trumpeting the accomplishment more than sharing information about muddy trails, blowdown, or broken bridges. How else to let everyone know what you've bagged? If you climb Brown Pond Peak solo, how would anyone ever know without an internet outlet to post upon??
This brings us back to the canisters. Simple little jars or tubes, innocuous really, serving to define the highest point of a peak. But also an affirmation for those signing in that they reached their goal. Whether or not anyone every reads their entry, it's been posted. But on paper instead of electronically. Hey, that system worked pretty well in the not-so-distant past. I've enjoyed seeing Steve Smith, Mike Dickerman, John Swanson, Dennis Crispo and other legendary names in some of those cans. I didn't read about their climbs on the internet.
Canisters are frowned upon in the Adks it seems, but most survive in New England, although the peanut butter jars' tops are rusting away. Would it make sense to encourage canisters and their maintenace in the hope it would obviate electronic posting of trips to those peaks?
Just a thought....
jt

 

[mavs00]

Cabbage Patch Dolls?

Hmmmmmmmm. Not sure what that means.....

The big question, as alluded to by Pete Hickey, is: would such an organization preserve the pristine nature of the Kilburns and Sawtooths or help ruin them through increased exposure?

Oh yeah................. I can feel the pristine nature -SCREAMING- *** as I -GAZE- *** in wonder at what nature has bestowed me.................

Don't get me wrong, I'm told it's really no picnic to get there, and not a NOVICE b-whack, but here it is, the pristine nature of "THE HUMAN ZONE" that will reward your many hours of misery. We may have moved past the "Shhhhhhhh... we need to preserve the "untrammeled nature" of this area" point is all I'm saying.

Don't get me wrong, I personally can see value of signs or cannisters, I really can (and not really for any sentimental reasons). For me they, at very least, tell me that I can stop fighting (and damaging) the carnivious borreal conifers & pushing stuff over because I made it. .

The second one though, even with my limited bushwhacking skills, I understand that when I reach the summit of a thickly vegitated borreal peak in the most rugged of Adirondack areas, and find the trees have magically and completly parted for my perfectly framed view of the Sewards......... Something deceidedly UNNATURAL is occuring (look very closely at the dead tree in the very forefront center of that photo) .

Hey, maybe we do deserve a view (and I'm not kidding)............ It is after all just a couple trees in a sea of millions, and you DO have to work very hard to get there. That's really not my point. The real issue for me is, with nobody steering the ship............ 1-2 other people just decided that the rest did "in fact" want a view, and by remaining silent (IMO) I wonder do we offer tacit approval when they decide to do so on the next one too?

I wonder if I'm beating a dead horse now too, I just hate to see the important discussion disappear.

*** - Those pics were taken by a close friend, and I understand that posting them here might make some uncomfortable that people will miss my point and be inspired to see it for themselves, continuing the spiral. Or.............. if you just want me to shut up already...... I will understand, just PM me

 

[Peakbagr]

Here's a quote from Kevin Rooney, a wise VFTT member, who gave me permission to quote from another thread:

"I think people are missing the larger point about pursuing any goal, and some of you are defensive about 'pursuing lists'. The issue isn't whether a particular goal is 'worthy', whether the goal be a list, a degree, a career, a whatever - only you can determine what is 'worthy' - never give up your power and let ANYONE determine what is 'worthy' on your behalf."

...and very appropos to this thread.

ps Tim, don't shut up...Keep the good posts coming

 

[Greg]

Hey Pete!

Nice axe. What kind is it? I'm in the market for a new one.

Are that many people really interested in hiking all the 3000 footers? Maybe they'll do a few, but it seems like very few will attempt to do many of them, although, I guess if every hiker tries five of them, that is a lot of traffic.
Very interesting thread. It's a real love/hate thing going on here, but I do think that any route sharing at all is going to be detrimental to those wild areas.

 

[RoySwkr]

you get the patch and your name listed after (1) you climb the 46 peaks and (2) you put in 46 hours of trail work in the high peaks with any trail organization

The Trailwrights 72 Club requires 72 peaks on separate trips and 72 hours of trail work. I wonder if that's why their membership in 15 years is about the same as finish the AMC 48 in a typical August.

 

[RoySwkr]

Has anyone ever had a remote untrailed unpopular peak they enjoyed.. years ago.. then found a path/trail cut? It is sad. Will your kids find such a peak? Will their kids?

It happens to me all the time. Traveler in Baxter Park, Sunday River Whitecap in Grafton Notch, The Horn in Kilkenny, etc.

But I'm not sure that I'm that sad. People still impact only a small portion of that area, and there is less likelihood of clearcutting or ski areas.

 

[post'r boy]

runnin' over the same old ground. pink floyd

The Trailwrights 72 Club requires 72 peaks on separate trips and 72 hours of trail work. I wonder if that's why their membership in 15 years is about the same as finish the AMC 48 in a typical August.

they also require you to hike the wildcat/ carter /moriah ridge 12 times in order to complete just that range. after all that hiking by all those folks that wish to complete that list,I.M.O. some trail work is in order!!!!
p.s. hi roy!
to add to roys post, puzzle and long mtns in maine too!

 

[carole]

Hmmmmmmmm. Not sure what that means.....

google "Cabbage Patch Doll'



Is the question really: Are we ruining the earth or ruining the experience?

 

[dms]

3k registers

Back to this post's beginnings: canisters!
I had a thought. Maybe those jars atop the 3ks can help alleviate the apparent problem of too much information/too much internet regarding trip reports, trail conditions and the like. Would it make sense to encourage canisters and their maintenace in the hope it would obviate electronic posting of trips to those peaks?
Just a thought....
jt

All of the 3ks I've done in the past two years are in ME, so my comments are a reflection of that experience. In reading the registers on those peaks, there are on average one person, maybe two, signing in a year, in several registers it had been two years between visitors. These peaks are not "popular" and they are not showing any signs of human activity. I can not see any future increase in visits because of postings on this site.

 

[Papa Bear]

All of the 3ks I've done in the past two years are in ME, so my comments are a reflection of that experience. In reading the registers on those peaks, there are on average one person, maybe two, signing in a year, in several registers it had been two years between visitors. These peaks are not "popular" and they are not showing any signs of human activity. I can not see any future increase in visits because of postings on this site.

I have to agree with this.

One peak (West Caribou) had two visits in 5 years.

I think there is a tendency to make grand (and unwarrented) generalizations on this issue.

The big picture:

There are different classes of peaks with different problems and different types of potential soultions:

1) First tier: The new England 4ks, (the 67) the ADK 46, and the Catskill 35, popular peaks (Monadnock, Chocurua, etc.). These have lots of use and trails: Problem: crowds, Solution: trail work, public education, good rules enforcement on camping in fragile zones etc.

2) Second tier: NE HH, ADK HH, perhaps some state HH lists, some other popular peaks. These have trailless peaks that are becoming herd path peaks. This seems to be the problem most of the above posts are about. I would guess 20 - 50 visits per year. Problem: loss of wilderness. Increas use (but certainly no crowds). Solution: I don't know, keep posting ideas.

3) Third tier: remote 3ks, obscure lists, unlisted peaks. Typically 0-3 visits per year. Problem: no problem (yet). Solution: keep your eye on this group.

I don't believe postings to this site specifically encourage people to climb any of these peaks, especially the third tier. But the general availability of information may facilitate climbing of the second tier. The first tier is beyond the need for advertising here or elsewhere. I say facilitate the climb, but not motivate someone to do the climb in the first place.

The bigger picture:

In my opinion all of the above problems and most of what had been posted here are dwarfed by other environmental issues: developement, ATV and snowmoobile use, polution (acid rain, global warming, etc.) - ever think that driving your car, truck or SUV to the mountain may cause 10 - 100 times the environmental problem compared to contributing to the formation of a herd path? etc. etc. You know what this is all about.

So keep a balance. If everyone tried to help on something, somewhere, this would be a better planet.

 

[bigmoose]

Once again, PapaBear's eloquence makes perfect sense. Right on! Might as well lock the thread!

 

[Peakbagr]

Papa Bear,

Good post, but I disagree on 1 point. The ADK bottom 54 trailless really are
"trailless". They don't have herd paths yet, and from the NYS-ers point of view, thats the issue of the well-intentioned debate. Unlike the more formalized routes in NH, the ADK HH see only a tiny amount of traffic in a year. My guess is that the 5 Sawtooth Peaks, Cheney, North River, Little Santa, a number of the Blue Ridges, Fishing Brook, Sentinels, get very few visitors a year now and thats what the debate is about.
The cat is out of the bag in New England.

PB

 

[post'r boy]

Once again, PapaBear's eloquence makes perfect sense. Right on! Might as well lock the thread!

unless someones gonna come up with a definite solution and post it.........
i agree with big moose!!

 

[post'r boy]

Papa Bear,

Good post, but I disagree on 1 point. The ADK bottom 54 trailless really are
"trailless". They don't have herd paths yet, and from the NYS-ers point of view, thats the issue of the well-intentioned debate. Unlike the more formalized routes in NH, the ADK HH see only a tiny amount of traffic in a year. My guess is that the 5 Sawtooth Peaks, Cheney, North River, Little Santa, a number of the Blue Ridges, Fishing Brook, Sentinels, get very few visitors a year now and thats what the debate is about.
The cat is out of the bag in New England.

PB

i respectfully disagree about the "cat being out of the bag in new england"
there are numerous peaks in new england with no herd paths and are not printed in the back of any guide book, a heck of a lot more than 54.

 

[Pete_Hickey]

Problem: no problem (yet).

Remember not to think linearly in a non-linear situation. Don't look at the traffic, look at the RATE OF INCREASE. If a given peak gets, say 10 visiters per year, that may not sound like much. But one must look at it in the larger picture. If that 10 is twice what it got, say 3 years ago, and that 5 three years ago, is twice what it got three years before that, its use is doubling every three years. This is much more significant than simply saying it is getting x visiters a year.

Bottom line, things are happening fast, and we have to be aware. Humans, in general, have a problem with non-linear thinking.

In my opinion all of the above problems and most of what had been posted here are dwarfed by other environmental issues.

Wilderness isn't exactly environmental. Environment is part of wilderness, but this issue is more of a wilderness issue than an environmental issue. A small path to a mountain (assuming no rare vegetation) does very little to the environment, but it does have a big effect on its wilderness.

The issue is preserving some wilderness for the next n generations, not keeping the plants pristine. Does every mountain need a name? Why is an unnamed mountain more 'wild' than a named one? Could Disney create a wilderness park?