12,000 Ossippee acres closed

David Metsky said:

IMO, the second to last paragraph was ill advised and unnecessarily adversarial. It doesn't appear to support your thesis that great care was taken to prevent landowner anger or promote good will.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Not sure why its there.

I read that paragraph as a factual warning,akin to "may be difficult in high water", "slippery when wet".

The Hikers said:

I read that paragraph as a factual warning,akin to "may be difficult in high water", "slippery when wet".

Click to expand...

Not the same thing. Water, generally does not get offended, even when I pee in it. Landowners, however, do get annoyed when you metaphorically piss in their face. It's like a juvenile backhanded apology.... "I'm sorry but you were a jerk as well!"

Still not saying I care much but if I was trying to play nice in a touchy area, even if I didn't agree in a philosophical sense with how a landowner was acting, I'd still try to play nice.

Saying it's factual is like saying, "Fact: Barbarossa you're an idiot" which even if it were factual (what kind of opinion is a fact?), it would not be good diplomacy... especially when he probably has the keys to the car and all those nude pictures of me.

-Dr. Wu

Do we have a clear list of which trails/peaks are absolutely, with no gray areas, off-limits and that fall within the Chocorua Forestlands land?

I know Larcom is definitely now off limits and I assume Bayle as well. However, the articles state that "Shaw is closed" but is this a correct blanket statement? I thought the LRCT had a trail up to Shaw and that Chocorua Forestlands didn't "own" all of Mt. Shaw. What about the peaks on the fringes of LRCT land such as Roberts and what is currently known as Faraway?

I'm disappointed this has come about. I really like the Ossipees as I am a terribly out of shape hiker and these trails/peaks are perfect for me. I will respect Chocorua Forestlands decision and not hike on their lands but I'd really like some clarification on where I can't tread.

(I keep being drawn to this discussion even though I am not local.)

I read that paragraph on the map. It's obvious to any neutral reader that that is a giant, gratuitous slap in the face to certain landowners. It refers to the landowners as "irate" and "beligerant" (sic), states that they are not following the law, and states that they are mad for no reason.

Definitely ill advised in the current context.

una_dogger said:

Agreed. Not sure why its there.

Click to expand...

It strikes me as a dig against a person or persons that he had a specific spat with. Right, wrong or indifferent it was unprofessional to let that bleed into the map text. It was ill advised and indicates a lack of proper restraint.

However, I think calling that out as causative in some way of the larger problem is overanalyzing things. If all of this can be tied to a personal issue between a couple of people then there are some people (landowners, state, the map maker) who need to feel ashamed of themselves for letting it adversely affect a much larger community, but I don't think that is the case. The map is just a symbol, it is not the problem.

This caught my eye earlier today. If it's been pointed out my a previous poster, please bear with me.

I noticed in the NH Bureau of Trails announcement the following sentence "The property posting was sparked by irresponsible trail development, use, and advertisement, and has been fueled by other landowners noting disrespectful treatment of their properties by summer recreational trail users." (the italics are mine)

By inference, the bad guy(s) were not snowmobilers, cross-country skiers, snowshoers, winter hikers, etc.

Historically, it's my understanding the Bureau of Trails represents the interests of ORHV users - ATV'ers, snowmobilers, etc - and those people are their constituency. Pure speculation on my part, but it will interesting to see what the Bureau's position on the closure will be as winter nears.

I’ll try one more question

Was this trail maintenance done with or without the landowners permission? Note pic #2
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=26297
The trail clearing of established trails and “old trails” was established here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=30146&page=2
post #18
Along with the use of herbicides, established here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13775&highlight=spray
and here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13359
Its not ALL about the map! The map was the final straw.

bandana4me said:

Was this trail maintenance done with or without the landowners permission? Note pic #2
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=26297

Click to expand...

Huh? rocket does a lot of joking in his trip reports. I don't see TB cutting that blow down with that little pocket knife he is wielding. This doesn't look like a trail maintenance photo to me. What are you implying here?

bandana4me said:

Along with the use of herbicides, established here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13775&highlight=spray
and here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13359
Its not ALL about the map! The map was the final straw.

Click to expand...

The herbicide damage carole wrote about was over THREE years ago. I do not believe TB was in the Ossipees in 2006. I think he was in St. John around this time.

I am not accussing anyone

The herbicides where used. Does it REALLY matter WHO did it?

This is not all about one map. It is a combonation of these things.

I guess rocket21 is the only one who is allowed to joke!

bandana4me said:

The herbicides where used. Does it REALLY matter WHO did it? This is not all about one map. It is a combonation of these things.

Click to expand...

No, of course not. However, the land owners are citing recent trail maintenance and herbicide use as a direct result of TB's map. The herbicide damage carole found pre-dates the map by at least 2.5 years so the map is totally unrelated to this incident.

Well....

In all the newspaper reports and the WODC publication, I do not recall or see any reference to a specific date. It states that hebicides were used!

Does it really matter though?

The land is off limits! It will remain off limits.

Who are the ones losing out?

bandana4me said:

Was this trail maintenance done with or without the landowners permission? Note pic #2
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=26297
The trail clearing of established trails and “old trails” was established here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=30146&page=2
post #18
Along with the use of herbicides, established here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13775&highlight=spray
and here:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13359
Its not ALL about the map! The map was the final straw.

Click to expand...

In post #13, dated 11-17-08, of this link noted above by bandana4me, http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=26297, Jazzbo shows two inline pictures of blazes painted on trees and rocks, one underwater, comments on their number ("what the blazes"), and in the next inline picture, of Mr. Garrison, says "thanks for sharing" to the "artist himself," Trail Bandit. Thanks for sharing what? What does all this mean?

Waumbek said:

the next inline picture, of Mr. Garrison, says "thanks for sharing" to the "artist himself," Trail Bandit. Thanks for sharing what? What does all this mean?

Click to expand...

I can't speak for Jazzbo, the author of those quotes, but it's my understanding, or impression, from when I first read the trip reports from this group hike that TrailBandit was the guide on this group hike. "Thanks for sharing" probably implies thanks for sharing his time and knowledge of the area for leading this hike. No clue about the "artist himself" quote, it could mean anything and only Jazzbo can answer that as it's his statement.

Many of the trails in the Ossipees are heavily blazed, especially the ones on Castle property. I noticed this myself when I went on my first hike in the area. I've said "What in blazes?" many times so there is nothing surprising about seeing this quote in Jazzbo's post and I'm not sure what you are implying.

bandana4me said:

The land is off limits! It will remain off limits.

Click to expand...

I, optimistically, doubt the closed areas will remain off limits permanently. Bureau of Trails Chief Chris Gamache said "We support the landowner’s decision in this matter and will work with them to get public access granted back on these properties.” so there is some hope there that all of this can be resolved.

Tobit said:

..."Thanks for sharing" probably implies thanks for sharing his time and knowledge of the area for leading this hike. No clue about the "artist himself" quote, it could mean anything and only Jazzbo can answer that as it's his statement....and I'm not sure what you are implying.

Click to expand...

As you say, only Jazzbo can answer what "artist himself" and "thanks for sharing" mean in the context of his statement about so many painted blazes. So we'll either hear what he meant or not. Way too much "probably" speculation in these threads, especially when actual authors are available to explain what they wrote or meant or did or did not do, if they care to.

bandana4me said:

In all the newspaper reports and the WODC publication, I do not recall or see any reference to a specific date. It states that hebicides were used!

Click to expand...

This part is strange. I saw herbicides years before I even heard of TB, rocket, or the map. And I haven't seen evidence of spraying in years. At least for the Gorilla and Banana trails, the trails look better than I recall in the past.

I have to admit that when I first saw the herbicides I was more than a little worried. In some places, stumbling on herbicides could mean that you've actually stumbled onto a (heavily guarded) illegal pot farm. That seemed unlikely this far north. But since the Ossippees weren't hiked much back then, I weighed my options and turned back. (By the time I hit the trailhead, I had rationalized to myself that it was probably left over from the equine trail maintenance by Castle In The Clouds.)

Anyway, some landowners may have had similar concerns about this sort of growing, or even the implication of growing, especially if spraying is still going on elsewhere on their land. There's also the worry that they could get in trouble for failing to protect endangered species by not stopping the spraying, etc... .

Somehow, I don't think the spraying is the major issue, but instead it was just another straw on the camel's back.

We have to WORK to get public access back?

It seems to me that if you remove the map the access will be granted. Wait maybe that’s too easy. I know battle it out in court that should take years!

Maybe the early responses were correct. It is ALL about money. Somehow a few people here feel that the money bought them the right to do whatever they please to the land, regardless of who OWNS it.

One more thing

Going back to this link:

http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=26297
Post # 15

There is a link to pics by the poster:

http://amicus.smugmug.com/gallery/6575071_5bTid#418619437_tGVsK

Here is the introduction:

Amicus > Hiking > 2008 > Big Ossipees Hike (Nov. 16)

rocket21 came up with the idea of inviting any and all who visit VFTT or RoT to join Trail Bandit, Mary, himself and me on a loop of wonderful trails the four of us have hiked together in the southeast Ossipees, taking in the summits of Sentinel, Flagg, Shaw (including Black Snoot) and Big Ball (a/k/a Tate). These trails, including the Gorilla and the Banana, are old ones that had fallen into disuse and were fading away, before Trail Bandit and Mary set out to rescue them over a decade ago. They have put a lot of work into this worthy undertaking, so we owe them a big Debt of Gratitude.

Read this carefully:

These trails, including the Gorilla and the Banana, are old ones that had fallen into disuse and were fading away, before Trail Bandit and Mary set out to rescue them over a decade ago. They have put a lot of work into this worthy undertaking, so we owe them a big Debt of Gratitude.

What has happened and is happening is becoming more evident! Does this thread really need to be discussed any more?

bandana4me said:

It seems to me that if you remove the map the access will be granted. Wait maybe that’s too easy. I know battle it out in court that should take years!

Maybe the early responses were correct. It is ALL about money. Somehow a few people here feel that the money bought them the right to do whatever they please to the land, regardless of who OWNS it.

Click to expand...

No one is saying that removing the map will be the cure-all. But removing/revising it and modifying its copy on Rocket's site are about the only things we, as a public face of the hiking community, can do at this point. I believe Rocket and TB are well-meaning but their products continue to promote, from the landowners' viewpoint, the actions leading to the closures.

A meeting with the owners sounds good but who could speak for us? In this thread, there is a range of attitudes from conciliatory through self-important indifference to belligerence. Pulling the map would not be intended to forever suppress the information, a fool's errand, but would end the active promotion of the trails by a shiny map for sale and an enthusiastic website.

And again, as we froth over the Chocorua Forestlands' closure, let's not forget Larcom Mountain, another loss with no such public funding involvement.