Couchie Revisited, 8//16/06

[JoeCedar]

Like so many others I was outraged by the reports of destructive hacking of trees in the Santanoni Range. Since I had been looking forward to a revisit sometime (but I gave up waiting for my daughter's interest in 46R hiking to rekindle) I decided to hike the range again, in part to see the vandalism for myself. The forecast for good weather was also a positive factor.

First for the technicians among you, here are a few statistics from my altimeter, GPS, and the ADK guide book, in case you're thinking about exploring the range. It's a long day, not to be taken lightly. Total miles = 17.1 from the parking area. Total ascent = 5030 ft. Hiking times vary widely depending on stamina and weather. I have other data if anyone is interested; send me a PM.

The recent tree hacking starts shortly after the turn-off from the Bradley Pond trail and continues frequently nearly to Herald/Times Square. As reported before, it is frequent and is not placed purposefully--it is seemingly random and pointless. Hacks are sometimes on trees with the old yellow survey paint blazes on them, or within sight of the yellow blazes. Sometimes trees ten feet or less apart were marked. Just for the record, there are a few old blazes on the paths as well, especially on the Couchie path. One in particular is on a tree on the Couchie side of the swamp in the col, next to the start of the path up the "mountain".

Now the good news: The paths from Times Square to Couchie, Santanoni, and Panther are almost free of tree damage. What a relief :) ! Between TS and Couchie I counted five newly-cut blazes on live trees. I did not count cuts on downed or standing dead trees, which would amount to a few more. I saw no cuts on Santanoni or Panther. Maybe I missed a few hacks but this is the general case. After all, I was taking a hike in a beautiful remote area, and was not on a forensic expedition.

I did manage to collect three nice authentic dudenchikn wood chips, either for souvenir or legal evidence purposes. I'm reserving one as a gift for Mavs00, in recognition of his leadership in raising attention to this vandalism. I am not sure what to do with the other two. What do you think, put them up on ebay or just accept bids privately :eek: ? Of course, I could just keep them, and have them framed and hang them on the fireplace or somewhere!

In conclusion, the damage is bad but almost completely limited to the path from the marked trail turnoff to Times Square. Thank goodness the more environmentally critical ridge paths to the peaks were minimally damaged.

Go up and see for yourself! Currently you can keep your feet sort-of dry. Despite comments to the contrary from those who won't return, it is a wild and beautiful place. Let's hope it stays that way.


Joe

[Rusty and the Maniac]

Let me know what you get for those woodchips!!!
I'll be up there next weekend and maybe I'll start a lucrative new internet business!!
I better take my big pack so I can fill it up... Ohhhh yeahhh, 7000cu inches of chips... Think of all that money. :D

[Gandalf]

I'm glad to hear that the Couchie path was only slightly affected. Not that this excuses (by a long shot) the criminal damage to the Bradley Pond-T.S. trees and path, but I would've been immeasurably more saddened had the route to one of my favorite peaks also been hacked up...

[1ADAM12]

I have to go back up there and get Sant. What an eyes sore those trees will be.

Adam

[Neil]

Maybe his arm was getting tired from so much chopping so he rested it to Couch and back from TS. Then, feeling adequately rested, he laid into the trees from their uphill side on his way down from TS. Just idle conjecture on my part.

[AlpineSummit]

Thanks for the report.
You even made me laff w/the wood chips and again w/ebay.

[Neil]

With enough wood chips you could make a very nice mobile. Maybe varnish them up and do little paintings on them. The paintings could be some sort of theme.

[mudhook]

Nice TR.(or damage assessment) Fortunatly mother nature has a way of healing herself, given time.

[LionRoar]

Please let me shed some light on this damage issue.

I'm a trail maintainer and I "see" things that other's don't notice. I saw these blazes on Thurs., July 20. They looked as if they were cut within a few days of my trip. But, with such little foot traffic to the remote peaks (what, about 200 max people per season? Compare that to Dix or Phleps or Cascade, which have 200 people per week!!), it could have occured earlier and nobody would have noticed.

Or cared, for that matter.

True, others may have noticed it and may have said nothing, attributing it to the "nature of the woods." But, for those of us who hike often because of our love for the mountains, it's a big blight on the landscape.

I pose a question: will this incident make hikers more aware of their environment, of their surroundings?

Case in point -- I have traveled the Calkins trail five times since June of 2004. Each time I walk it, someone cuts a little bit more, removing difficult blowdown, brushing and offending branches. As of Aug 17, other than the big mud wallow in the first third, it's become a beautiful trail.

And, the Couchsachraga trail is beautiful, as well. Would anyone really notice if the branches were cut, making the foot path clearer? Probably only a handful of hikers would. And, would anyone raise an eyebrow about it? Other than six, eight, or fourteen people on this board, probably not. So, while everyone joins the bandwagon in decrieing (sp.) the state of affairs, does it really matter? People are pointing out that the route up Lost Pond has become worn and that ledges and viewpoints are becoming open, but, does is this a true concern to everyone or are we just being PC so as to not ostracize ourselves from the rest of the HH community?

I do know that there are people who very much care and have expressed such on and offline and thank you for caring.

LR

[hawk]

I pose a question: will this incident make hikers more aware of their environment, of their surroundings?

Case in point -- I have traveled the Calkins trail five times since June of 2004. Each time I walk it, someone cuts a little bit more, removing difficult blowdown, brushing and offending branches. As of Aug 17, other than the big mud wallow in the first third, it's become a beautiful trail.

And, the Couchsachraga trail is beautiful, as well. Would anyone really notice if the branches were cut, making the foot path clearer? Probably only a handful of hikers would. And, would anyone raise an eyebrow about it? Other than six, eight, or fourteen people on this board, probably not. So, while everyone joins the bandwagon in decrieing (sp.) the state of affairs, does it really matter? People are pointing out that the route up Lost Pond has become worn and that ledges and viewpoints are becoming open, but, does is this a true concern to everyone or are we just being PC so as to not ostracize ourselves from the rest of the HH community?

I do know that there are people who very much care and have expressed such on and offline and thank you for caring.

LR

I think that there is enough publicity about the Couchsachraga damage and especially if there is a big fie, that at least it will be an "education" to a couple of groups of people: Thise who are ingorant of the rule (meaning they have not taken the time to learn them), and those who up to now haven't cared about them.

I hadn't been hiking in the woods for too long before learning the "rules" at a young age. There were other people who were kining and camping who had been doing it a lot longer then me and they filled me in. I was also eager to learn.

It was "old school" so a lot of what is policy today was unknown of them, officially. However, these people were able to ralize that doing certain things over a period of time affected the wilderness. So even back in the sixtys and seventies, people who spent a lot off time in the woods began to minimize their impact.

So it wasn't a matter of being PC, it was a matter of preserving and protecting what was dear to them.

"Slightly groomed trails" are nice, but if there are two many of them, it takes away from the naturalness of the wilderness as well as the solitude (easier trails gives access to more and often lazier people).

I think I would be correct in saying that if someone walked up a mountain one week, and then one week later, went up the same mountain and the effects of 100 years of human presence were there, the change wwould be very obvious and that the person would be up in arms and shouting for something to be done.

Therein lies the problem. It seems to me (and this is an observation and not meant to be an indictment) that we tend to look at everything in the now, and avoid thinking about the long term effect our presence has on things. By doing so we justify our impact by minimizing it compared to other things.

I have seen threads closed on outdoor forums dealing with this very subject with the reasoning that "they have run their course" or that they are "no longer relevant", when in fact there is still a lot of posting going on in on the threads. What that tells me is that first: the thread is relevant, (if not people would not be posting), and second that people don't really want to have to be confronted with what the consequences are of their actions.

As for the destruction that happened on Couchsachraga, it seems to me that it's a microcosm of the problem. I have no idea why the persons had who did the damage thought that they were Daniel friggin Boone and did what they did. Lets give the benefit of the doubt and say just plain ignorance. The real problem lies in the reaction they had to being informed that what they did was wrong, and I thought very politely, by Tim. The wagons were circled, suddenly we were persecuting him, he tried to destroy all his admissions to doing it and takes his blog off line. he sends an email to kevin threatening to sue him and have the adkforum shut down if his name is not removed. Not one expression of contrition, no willingness to admit a mistake and promise that it will not happen again.

In a way, when we minimize the impact that we make, even the slightest, and do not acknowledge the fact that our presence will alter the wilderness over a long period of time, and that we need to (as an outdoors community) begin to implemant something to slow down the process and possibly contribute to the healing process, then we are in a very small way, be acting the same as this individual.

Most people probably don't want to hear that, but if you take time to look at it long term, you may have to agree with me.

The difference between me and many of the people who disagree with me. I do not believe that acting responsibly and taking steps to both minimize impact and help recovery will stifle my enjoyment of the forest in any way. I also feel that if we are part of the solution, then the DEC and other agency will not have to implement rules and regulations that effect all of us.

As far as being PC Correct, statements should never be based on that, they should be based on expression of our sincere beliefs, popular or not.

[Mavs00]

LR, you ask many questions, and one could spend hours looking inwardly to answer them for themselves. I think the everyone has a threshold as to what they feel is "acceptable" and what is not. In the Sanatanoni case, you had an individual that "cut trees", then reported back on the internet that he did it. I started to simple, mildly-worded messages reminding him (indeed all of us) of "leave no trace" wilderness ethic and that actually cutting into trees was not an acceptable practice, in fact its illegal. No call for the hanging judge, just a simple reminder. -THE THREAD- (http://www.adkforum.com/showthread.php?t=4625) is still there, so you can see.. my message was pretty gentle (I tried to portray that anyway).

The hubbub did not really begin until he began to chime in with "his" thoughts on the matter. "His right to do it, cuz he lived there" :blah: :blah: . So for that example, I don't think people have "extra" outrage here, its just that 1) someone took responsibility for it and we "know" who did it. 2) His attitude once it was brought up.

As to your other question, they are good questions and perhaps I'll add more when I've thought on it longer and have more time. I do know we all have a threshold and it varies from person to person. Let's also keep in mind degrees too. If you feel the need to "help along" fellow hikers on an obvious herd path, you can 1) put up that ugly orange tape, 2) build cairns, 3) paint blazes, 4) Cut trees...... hmmmm, obviously there are differences in severity.

[Willie]

I’ll comment on two of the issue raised by LionRoar.

[W]ith such little foot traffic to the remote peaks, it could have occur[r]ed ... and nobody would have noticed ... [o]r cared, for that matter.
That reminds me of the old adage: “If a tree falls in the forest will it actually produce a sound if no one is around to hear it fall?”

We’ve all heard anecdotal stories of persons illegally cutting ski trails in the High Peaks for winter skiing activities. As far as I know, I never saw one of these illegally cut ski trails, but I still don’t like the idea that persons are intentionally and illegally destroying trees for their own purpose. So, to answer the question directly: Yes, even though I may not see intentionally and illegally destroyed trees, I still care.

I pose a question: will [the Couchsachraga] incident make hikers more aware of their environment, of their surroundings?

Case in point -- I have traveled the Calkins trail five times since June of 2004. Each time I walk it, someone cuts a little bit more, removing difficult blowdown, brushing and offending branches. As of Aug 17, other than the big mud wallow in the first third, it's become a beautiful trail.
True, the Calkins Brook trail is a beautiful approach to the Sewards. However, my understanding is that the Calkins Brook trail was illegally cut. Does the end justify the means? I submit that the beautiful trail does not justify its illegal inception.

[Skyclimber]

True, the Calkins Brook trail is a beautiful approach to the Sewards. However, my understanding is that the Calkins Brook trail was illegally cut.

Looking in my journal it was around 1994, but we noticed it, in January of 1995 that the trail up Calkin's Brook WAS, illegally cut!! What a shame that was, as the bushwhack following along Calkin's Brook itself, was another beautiful route, in it's time!

Journal Entry, Donaldson/Emmons January 1, 1995:
As we started up, we noticed that someone had cut a route right up the brook. There were survey ribbons as close together as trail markers. They cut away tree branches overhanging the trail and there were little stubs of trees. The little stubs proved to be good snowshoe trippers, when they got caught on one. The route didn't follow along the brook this time. It's also a moderate to steep climb, compared to the gentle one, of the old way, we had come in on in the past. All this was new to us, with survey ribbons placing out the route. The survey ribbons ended about twenty to thirty minutes below the summit of Donaldson. It created thick krummholz and a steep bushwhack, through the spruces, avoiding the head wall that was once the route, to the final steps, of the summit of Donaldson. We came out about ten minutes from the summit, on the herd path to Seward.

[judgeh]

No call for the hanging judge, just a simple reminder.

Someone called for a hanging judge? :D