Cannon Mountain - Environmental Damage, Hiking Prohibition, and SB217

[rocket21]

This has been mentioned in a previous thread, but I know some folks wanted to see more about it. I don't intend to debate the bill here. Rather, since this relates to the environment, hiking, and current legislation, I figured I'd give folks an FYI.


As some may now know, New Hampshire Senate Bill 217, relating to Cannon Mountain, has been introduced. The bill would:
- Change the name of Franconia Notch State Park to Franconia Notch Veterans' Memorial State Park. The state park was originally named 'Franconia Notch Forest Reservation and Memorial Park' back in 1928.
- Start the process for building a Veterans Memorial. Aside from initial scoping and landscaping, construction of the memorial would be privately funded.
- Require the New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development (DRED) to request information from potential entities interested in leasing Cannon Mountain ski area. This bill does *not* lease Cannon Mountain ski area.
- Develop two designated hiking routes on the ski area, including one to Mittersill Peak (Mt. Jackson).
- Require DRED to fix erosion and remove waste from the Mittersill area.

SB217

 

[rocket21]

Mittersill - Now State Owned and Closed to Foot Traffic Year Round

"Mittersill" was once a standalone ski area that operated on the shoulder of Mt. Jackson into the early 1980s. Much of the area was located on the White Mountain National Forest. After the closure of the ski area, Mittersill became a popular place for backcountry skiing, as well as for hiking.

Views from Mittersill Peak:

Past VFTT Trip Reports using Mittersill ski trails:
M. Cannonball & NW Cannon 10/07
NE Cannonball via Mittersill 10-21-07
Mittersill Peak via Mittersill Ski Trails 11/07
Cannon Mountain and a Mittersill Whack 4-26-09
Cannon the quiet way 9-26-09
Kinsmans, Cannonballs, Cannon 10/17/09


After years of trying, the State of New Hampshire was able to swap Sentinel Mountain Forest with the USFS for Mittersill. A dedication ceremony was held on March 28, 2009. The most expensive double chairlift in New England history was installed in 2010. With its installation, the Mittersill area was added to Cannon's hiking prohibition. In theory, someone hiking the Tuckerbrook Trail would have to turn back prior to reaching Mittersill Peak and the now-state-owned Taft Trail. As noted by some VFTT users, there are signs lining the bottom of Mittersill that prohibit any foot use.

Cannon is the only ski area on public property in the White Mountains that bans foot traffic on ski trails year round. This prohibition therefore means that anything within the footprint of the ski area (aside from the portion of the Kinsman Ridge Trail that overlaps the Kinsman Glade) is off limits. According to a Google Maps/Daft Logic estimate, 730 taxpayer-owned acres are effectively closed to foot traffic, including the very scenic Mittersill Peak.

SB217 would develop two routes for foot use on the ski area, including one over Mittersill Peak. The no hiking signs and ropes in these areas would be removed.

 

[rocket21]

Environmental Damage

While the re-development of Mittersill was allegedly supposed to be limited to the old ski area, and while significant sums of money were spent to install the chairlift via helicopter, numerous trails were being damaged by machinery.

The Mittersill Double Chairlift was load tested at the end of December 2010. By the time, the lift line had been resurfaced and seeded.

As snow started to recede in the spring of 2011, some very troubling things were revealed. The list is too long to describe here, but the Taft Trail (above the chairlift) was damaged and transformed from a soft, moss-covered bowl into a somewhat muddy, rutty mess. The old Skyline Trail was in places eroded down to bedrock from machinery. The top lift shack of the old chairlift had seemingly been knocked over, with old building materials left to slowly rot away. At least one brook showed signs of sedimentation adjacent to an access road. The access road up the ski area had minimal waterbars busted out and rendered non-functional presumably from ski area four-wheeler use, resulting in significant erosion.

Nothing was done by the ski area to mitigate the damage until they were called out in a hearing in Concord. A few months later, they indicated that the issues were resolved. While some work was done, it appears to be minimal and sloppy in nature.

Here are a few photos - many more can be seen at http://www.taxpayersforcannon.com/environmental.php. Photos were taken by me and other VFTT users.

A before and after of the upper Taft Trail (this is above the chairlift):
April 2009:

September 2010:

A source of brook sediment (June 2011):

The access road (June 2011):

A busted waterbar on the access road (June 2011):

Some corrective measures were taken on the access roads, however it will likely take a lot more work to prevent further erosion of it, as well as to reclaim lost soil.

The remains of the old chairlift top terminal (June 2011):

Some of the waste in the above photo was cleaned up, but much remained (October 2011):

The Skyline Trail (June 2011):

After 'corrective' efforts (September 2011):

Continued erosion of the Skyline Trail (October 2011):

More photos here: http://www.taxpayersforcannon.com/environmental.php

SB217 would require DRED to fix erosion and remove waste from the Mittersill area.

 

[Becca M]

scary pics!!!! I've never been to Mittersill but, it looks like my window closed a few years ago!!!!

 

[MichaelJ]

Where's the bill to remove the remains of the old tower from the top of Carter Dome or from Bemis? I can think of numerous more structures left to rot all over the Whites.

How many on this forum really want to be able to hike on ski trails? I find ski trails, by their nature, design, and steepness to be pretty miserable hiking. I certainly don't see a need for creating another separate hiking trail given that there are already three designated hiking trails up Cannon (Hi-Cannon and the two sides of Kinsman Ridge Trail). I've heard the argument "but those trails are difficult and suck." Well, so? It's not supposed to be a sidewalk.

If someone needs a hiking trail up Mittersill for their personal agenda, it doesn't belong on the ski area proper. One need only look at the current Wildcat situation to see what has happened when hikers have taken advantage of their access to ski trails. In fact, nobody is going to lease Cannon unless they have sufficient control over the property to manage similar situations.

PS - the argument "it's taxpayer-owned so I have a right to be there" never flies. There are a lot of taxpayer-owned structures and real property out there that you don't, and never will, have a right of access to.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

SPSAC meeting Mon 2/6 1 PM @ Franconia Notch SP

FYI:
I read in this morning's Manchester Union Leader that there is to be a meeting of the State Park System Advisory Committee at the Franconia Notch State Park HQ at the Flume at 1 PM on Monday February 6. The meeting is open to the public and it seems to be the custom to ask attendees who they are and what group if any they represent, especially if the public is invited to ask questions and you want to do so, they like to know who they are dealing with. Bear in mind this is NOT a public hearing, and the Chair does not automatically have to invite remarks from the public.
Tomorrow the articles from today's paper can be read at unionleader.com, they are replaced by new ones in one week. You can also probably find minutes of earlier meetings of the SPSAC and the agenda for this one at the state park website, which I believe is www.nhstateparks.org

 

[mtnpa]

In all fairness to Cannon the Mittersill area has been under their jurisdiction only recently. Prior to that it had been abandonded for a couple of decades by all but out of bounds skiers and the occasional hiker. They can't be expected to throw a switch and turn it into Disney.

 

[sardog1]

Presuming to speak for someone else who can undoubtedly take care of himself --

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I have a hard time not believing that is exactly what is going on here.

 

[una_dogger]

Presuming to speak for someone else who can undoubtedly take care of himself --

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I have a hard time not believing that is exactly what is going on here.

I had the same inkling.

 

[RoySwkr]

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I disagree. It makes perfect sense to me that if your ski area bans hiking, any extension of the ski area would also ban hiking.

I may have climbed Cannon via Tucker Brook in winter and descended via Mittersill in summer long enough ago that the statute of limitations applies. These were interesting routes precisely because they were not used very often. I believe that if Taft was officially opened to summer travel there would be serious erosion without expensive preparation.

Many ski areas allow summer hiking via the graveled service roads but not the spongy ski trails, I would like to see that at Cannon. In particular, people who rode the tram up would have a relatively safe descent option even considering the footwear some of them have.

 

[rocket21]

Presuming to speak for someone else who can undoubtedly take care of himself --

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I have a hard time not believing that is exactly what is going on here.

A VFTT member, who shall remain nameless unless s/he chooses to chime in, observed that the latest no-hiking signs posted throughout the bottom of Mittersill appeared shortly after photos of the environmental damage were posted online and sent to officials in the state government last year.

I disagree. It makes perfect sense to me that if your ski area bans hiking, any extension of the ski area would also ban hiking.

I may have climbed Cannon via Tucker Brook in winter and descended via Mittersill in summer long enough ago that the statute of limitations applies. These were interesting routes precisely because they were not used very often. I believe that if Taft was officially opened to summer travel there would be serious erosion without expensive preparation.

The erosion in the photos was caused by continued use of machinery on the trails.

The Taft Trail was part of the AMC White Mountain Guide for many years. For instance in 1948's guide:
"A racing course for expert skiers, this trail may be reached by a short side-trail from the top of the hill on NH 18 about ¾ m. N of the junction of that road and US 3. There is space for parking cars at the top of the hill. The trail ascends S and E for 2,200 ft. in 2.1 m. to the main (W) summit of Cannon Mt. There is a shelter half-way up.
Although primarily a ski run, this trail offers the summer climber magnificent views, especially of Mt. Lafayette and the Mount Washington Range."

 

[JacobH]

I'm definitely with Unadogger, sardog1, rocket21 and others on this. If they are so concerned about an "environmentally sensitive area" why was it destroyed in the first place?

Whether you believe people *should* be hiking on skiing trails is a different issue. It's pretty obvious this is off limits to hide the damage. You can't claim you are doing something in the name of "green" when your "hiking ban" is effectively hiding an environmental catastrophe. That's about as hypocritical as it gets.

 

[RoySwkr]

The erosion in the photos was caused by continued use of machinery on the trails.

"...Although primarily a ski run, this trail offers the summer climber magnificent views, especially of Mt. Lafayette and the Mount Washington Range."

I was there prior to the machinery, there was an eroded rut in the moss going over the peak presumably from hikers - this is going to happen in those sort of semi-Alpine conditions unless you install waterbars, etc.

This peak was briefly on the NH100 list as "NW Cannon" until it lost its col on newer maps, while hiking the lower Taft Trail may have been legal then approaching it from Cannon via ski trail wasn't.

And the views are fine - in fact very similar to those from Cannon

 

[Barkingcat]

Presuming to speak for someone else who can undoubtedly take care of himself --

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I have a hard time not believing that is exactly what is going on here.

Ditto; same here.

 

[skiguy]

Presuming to speak for someone else who can undoubtedly take care of himself --

The issue is not whether hiking is allowed at Mittersill. The issue is whether the Cannon management closed the area to "hiking" in order to prevent the public from seeing, documenting and publicizing what is being done to the environment under the auspices of the state of New Hampshire.

I have a hard time not believing that is exactly what is going on here.

I am going to disagree. Yes damage has been done. Although IMO the continued use of these trails by hikers would have exacerbated the problem. I'm with MichaelJ and Mtnpa on this one.

....and to quote the Tax Payers for Cannon's web page. "Within weeks of online postings of environmental damage at Mittersill, Cannon's management responded by posting a new sign, claiming that foot access is prohibited due to "environmental and safety concerns."

Personally I agree with and support the proposed Bill. As mtnpa pointed out this is a very new era for this area. To expect perfection immediatetly is nit picking. Also playing the blame game does not solve anything either when IMO there has been obvious acknowledgement by Cannon that there are environemental issues. I hike and I ski. I donot expect as a hiker to ski everything I hike. As a skier I donot expect to hike everything I ski. This project was approved by the NH State Taxpayers to begin with. A conscious decision was made to expand the recreational activities that the State of NH could offer. I do support multiuse but in this situation the tweaking of the project is going to take some more time. This effort has been ongoing for some time. In it's initial phases many were skeptical it would make it this far. Again I support this Bill and look at it as a constructive step in the overall tweaking process. In the meantime pointing fingers with only unsupported speculation is futile and a waste of energy. So that's my rant from one NH Taxpayer's point of view.

 

[MichaelJ]

These aren't the first eroded ski trails in the northeast, and they won't be the last. It was a work zone. Yes, it ought to be cleaned up, but I have to wonder how much erosion Irene caused?

Personally, I'd stay off the Cannon Trails in warm weather because they are a heavily-frequented bear habitat. That's pretty environmental and safety related. And if they want to prohibit hikers from the ski trails during ski season, as noted in the Wildcat discussion it's unfortunate, but justifiable, for safety.

I don't think there's a conspiracy here. I think someone said "Hey, these photos mean people are out on the slopes?" "I don't know, did we forget to sign it like the rest of the area?" "Yup, put some signs up."

How about we call it the Cannon Mountain Wildlife Preserve in the spring, summer, and fall?

Either that, or it's the lawyers again, and this bill says *nothing* about liability.

 

[rocket21]

- The erosion was a result of machinery going up Mittersill before, during, and after the chairlift installation. Mittersill did not look like this when it was USFS owned, or when it was state-owned backcountry.

- The environmental damage was discovered before Irene (and the photos posted here are noted by month taken). That area did not receive as much rain as other nearby areas, such as Waterville Valley.

- There's plenty of old stuff out there that dates back to the old ski area, however debris in the photos is from recent activity. Building materials from the top terminal of the old lift were presumably backfilled. Rebar was left exposed after footings were blasted. Cable spools were left behind.

For instance, this:

became this:

 

[sierra]

Personally I dont see the issues here that should be of that big a concern to the hiking community. It a ski resort, its thier mountain to trash. As far as banning hikers, its thier right to do so. I wont lose any sleep being banned from those slopes.

 

[JacobH]

Personally I dont see the issues here that should be of that big a concern to the hiking community. It a ski resort, its thier mountain to trash. As far as banning hikers, its thier right to do so. I wont lose any sleep being banned from those slopes.

It's the WMNF so really... it's public land they are trashing. Right? It's not theirs in the slightest. They are renting it and the NH taxpayers and FS pay for the cleanup. IMHO, "hiking community" doesn't have neat little boundaries that exclude hikers from caring about the trails and environment. Quite the opposite, most of the time, it would seem (and I would hope). I find it odd that anyone (especially in the "hiking community") would encourage ski resorts trashing mountains, nor do I believe the ski resort technically has the right to "ban" people from WMNF land, but I could be wrong there.

Straight from the WMNF flyer:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain/about/wmnf_flyer.pdf

What is a National Forest?

National Forests were established to provide clean water sources and continuing forest resources for the nation while protecting and managing the land for future generations. The Forest Service manages these public lands to conserve resources through a balance of activities and uses, including wildlife habitat, Wilderness, recreation, clean water, timber and forest products. Each National Forest is part of the larger National Forest System that includes more than 150 Forests from Alaska to Puerto Rico. Each is yours to enjoy.

Do these pictures show that Cannon/Mittersill is being "protected and managed" for future generations? One would think that "trashing the trails" on public land in a National Forest would be of GREAT concern to the hiking community. It's yours to enjoy.

 

[skiguy]

It's the WMNF so really... it's public land they are trashing. Right? It's not theirs in the slightest. They are renting it and the NH taxpayers and FS pay for the cleanup. IMHO, "hiking community" doesn't have neat little boundaries that exclude hikers from caring about the trails and environment. Quite the opposite, most of the time, it would seem (and I would hope). I find it odd that anyone (especially in the "hiking community") would encourage ski resorts trashing mountains, nor do I believe the ski resort technically has the right to "ban" people from WMNF land, but I could be wrong there.

Straight from the WMNF flyer:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain/about/wmnf_flyer.pdf

I do agree with the basic premises and commend your ethical stance. Although I do believe the land in discussion is owned by the State of NH and is not National Forest Land.