APA revised management plan

Just saw this:
http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/news/local-news/2018/12/backcountry-ski-plan-could-have-big-impact-on-adirondacks/

Sounds interesting.... Those in the know feel free to chime in.

ck1 wrote

Those in the know feel free to chime in.

I'm not in that category, but I think it sounds good.

I don't know anything but it sounds like the proposal that APSA put forward to the DEC.

Next phase already.  Please send in your comments!

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/news/local-news/2018/12/apa-sends-cross-country-ski-plan-out-for-public-comment/?platform=hootsuite

Aha!

https://www.apa.ny.gov/Mailing/2018/12/StateLand/SkiTrailDraftGuidance.pdf

That is pretty short, and not a bad to read, but is the core of the proposal.  I had a version of this from a few years back when it was first proposed that I could not find, but this looks to be the identical material.  I believe the version I had was from APSA to the DEC.

I believe the only thing that was left out was the glade proposal, which the DEC rejected.  The reasons were kind of hokey, in that they claimed there would be more impact than a snowmobile trail, which is a 12' wide clear cut.  Designating a zone 60-80' wide and removing blowdown and saplings is not the same thing.  But we aren't there yet.  The skintrack trails did make it though.

I recall that when the Lookout pod was approved at WF there was a study done that found wildlife benefits from glading of the forest .  All that should be online and 8n hard copy somewhere

I think a link was even posted here back then.  Maybe Harv can dig it up for you

Z wrote

I recall that when the Lookout pod was approved at WF there was a study done that found wildlife benefits from glading of the forest .  All that should be online and 8n hard copy somewhere

I think a link was even posted here back then.  Maybe Harv can dig it up for you

Yeah - despite what anyone will think, the way the constitution is in NY, it won't happen.

Really what they should do is make a real BC area and study it.  It will obviously be different than a resort area in terms of traffic and impact, but really it's about forest maturity and not wildlife impact.  If you trim all the saplings and let the old trees die, the area will eventually be bare.  But really that's not the strategy that should be adopted.  The forest should mature naturally and only certain saplings removed.  You don't want it to get too open.

I actually think very little tree pruning would have to be done in the right areas.  Most of it would just be clear large blowdowns.

Cunningstunts wrote

Yeah - despite what anyone will think, the way the constitution is in NY, it won't happen.

What exactly about the way it is?

Cunningstunts wrote

I actually think very little tree pruning would have to be done in the right areas.  Most of it would just be clear large blowdowns.

I agree with you. It seems that a series or even network of "narrow gladed corridors" would have far less impact than a hiking trail.

ck1 wrote

What exactly about the way it is?

The amendment process to make something like this work within the "forever wild" clause of the constitution.  It's a good thing in that it makes it hard to just slash and burn our forest preserve, it's a PITA when you want to do something that will perhaps be good for recreation in the towns and communities but is a little bit on the fringe i.e. unknown.

ck1 wrote

I agree with you. It seems that a series or even network of "narrow gladed corridors" would have far less impact than a hiking trail.

Yes and no - some hiking trails and even bike trails remove zero trees.  It depends on the forest structure, but often times you can work around the existing woodlot and contours.  

The thing that wasn't readily obvious unless you read that .pdf I posted is that the new ski trails are not to be multi-use.  They are meant for winter use only by skis only.  That is to say there should be very little disruption to vegetation and soils unlike hiking trails.  The same could be said for a gladed "trail".

As it stands, there is nothing stopping you from finding and skiing glades, and even clearing every piece of dead and downed wood that stands in the way.  What is illegal is marking them and/or removing live trees.  This is where the distinction stands in making them official DEC, marked trails.