A public forum was held at the Stateside Lodge of Jay Peak Resort on Saturday December 15, 2007 regarding restricted skier access to Big Jay. The decision to restrict skier access to Big Jay during the current ski season was made by a panel of organizations and managers including the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation, the Green Mountain Club, and Jay Peak Resort who were all represented at the meeting. Commissioner Jonathan Wood of the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation conducting the meeting with assistance from Ben Rose, executive director of the Green Mountain Club. Jay Peak Resort President Bill Steiger represented the ski area showing strong support for the action. Approximately seventy-five to one hundred people attended the meeting including backcountry skiers, Green Mountain Club members, locals, Jay Peak Ski Patrollers, and Jay Peak Resort employees.
The meeting began with opening comments from Jonathan Wood who stressed the importance of sharing view points without criticizing the opinions of other people. Wood presented background information on Big Jay including a historical perspective about how how the state acquired Big Jay and integrated the mountain in the Jay State Forest. Details about the Green Mountain Club easement were also covered with assistance from Ben Rose. Another Green Mountain Club representative provided a multimedia presentation showing a variety of photos detailing not just the destruction involving “The Scar” (as the illegal cut was called) but also extensive thinning and cutting else where on Big Jay. The presentation concluded with a description and photographs of the trail work conducted in October shortly before the ski season began.
An ecologist hired by the Green Mountain Club to assess the damage and direct restoration efforts provided background on the Big Jay environment and impacts of the cut. Erosion had already begun by the time the Green Mountain Club’s restoration team visited the site to install water bars and place blow downs and slash in key places to reduce run off. Effects on wildlife including Bicknell’s Thrush were noted including how the cut might effect predator and prey relationships.
Concluding the presentation portion of the forum was the response to the cut. Both Wood and Rose were adamant that the response was not a punishment to the community but rather a protective measure to ensure time for the cut to heal and so restoration efforts would not be harmed. The stance of the three parties involved in restricting access all cited limited time to make a decision combined with strong early season snow fall requiring an immediate decision. Ben Rose and Bill Stenger noted that just two weeks prior to the meeting, a pair of skiers tracks had been found skiing out to Big Jay via the Saddle and heading straight towards and down the illegal cut. Essentially, it had been agreed that skiers could not be trusted to avoid the cut and eliminating ski traffic on the cut was a top priority until it is healed. Restricting Big Jay to earned turn access via hiking up from Route 242 was the best compromise to allow backcountry access while restricting traffic on short notice. Additionally, the backcountry skiing community is far more likely to respect the request to avoid the cut than corresponding sidecountry skiers accessing Big Jay from the Saddle.
The forum was then opened up for questions and Jonathan Wood announced that everyone would have a chance to speak before the meeting ended. Wood did an admirable job of taking questions, responding to concerns, reiterating and clarifying positions, and curtailing any overly harsh or hostile remarks while redirecting comments in a more beneficial direction when appropriate.
Many commenters pointed out that the three parties involved are reaching out to the Backcountry community only after the access decision had already been made. Further, the Backcountry Community was not partnered with regarding possible solutions to the problem. However, the decision makers now want partnership only after making a very unpopular decision without consultation or partnership with the community. A lack of education and awareness was addressed which Wood agreed with. A variety of possible alternative solutions involving having Big Jay partially opened and eliminating access only to the cut were postulated but Wood and Rose stuck to their guns that the decision for this season had been made and other alternatives might be considered going forward.
A big sticking point with the community was the length of this “temporary” solution. An ecologist suggested that the cut may take as many as fifty or more years to completely regenerate. If the regeneration of this area will take dozens of years, how long would restricted access last? Certainly the cut would not heal during one year of restricted access. The panel was non-committal to what actions would be required in future seasons leaving open the possibility of continued restricted access. The threat of a complete ban on access to Big Jay if the community violated the dictated terms of access was also suggested.
One suggested solution coming from a gentleman with an environmental degree was to limit access until six feet of snow was measured in the area of the cut. Evidence was cited that ecological damage was extremely minimal to non-existent when snow pack reaches six feet deep using Tuckerman Ravine and the Alpine Garden as examples of sensitive ecological areas that receive high levels of recreational traffic during winter. The panel did not address nor completely dismiss this proposal but rather tried to side step the suggestion by returning to the crux of their argument, that traffic on the cut would hamper the restoration process.
Jay Peak Ski Patrol members suggested that the patrol, especially volunteers, did not want to police the Saddle trail access area and were not going to guard the gate. Jay Peak Ski Patrol director raised concerns that the decision makers had made an unpopular decision without soliciting opinion or meeting with the community and were now dictating strict unpopular terms. It was suggested that the community was being treated like children.
The idea of organizing the backcountry community was raised both by a Jay Peak Ski Patrol member and by Wood himself who regularly works with Mountain Biking and Snowmobiling organizations. The concern that organizing the backcountry ski community would be like herding cats was suggested. However, it seemed the overall consensus was that organization was a good idea who’s time may have finally arrived. Already, internet forums are buzzing with the idea of organizing to protect and expand backcountry skiing.
A major issue of contention was that the state did not have specific numbers showing how much usage Big Jay received from either backcountry skiers or from Saddle access. The state suggested that limiting access via the Saddle would substantially reduce the number of skiers accessing the cut. However, specific numbers were not available regarding the number of people currently accessing Big Jay via the Saddle.
Alternatives to restricted access were suggested including signage, fencing, remote video, and self policing. The panel seemed to believe that signage and self policing would fail without even trying the options. Fencing and “filling in” the cut were not viewed as viable due to liability issues. The six foot minimum snow depth suggestion as previously discussed was discounted despite by the panel without commitment to review data and studies that might support such a limitation. The consensus of the people speaking was that the state had given short change to these possible solutions and opted for the most restrictive option without involving the community. The state, the Green Mountain Club, and Jay Peak Resort all maintain fast action was needed and the parties involved did not have time to address the nuance of issues surrounding the unpopular decision. President Bill Stenger delivered an excellent speech reflecting his strong belief in a management philosophy that gives skiers access and freedom. But went on to request the community come together to find a solution to the problem.
Other illegal cutting activities were also discussed including such locations as the cut on Madonna at Smuggler’s Notch and the Hellbrook Trail on Mansfield amongst other locations. Wood specifically noted that cutting would no longer be tolerated. The state knew such operations were happening but previously had not taken action. However, the Big Jay incident has apparently changed the state’s approach to illegal cutting which will no longer be tolerated in any form in the state.
The main point that Wood and Rose kept returning to was that immediate action was needed to protect the restoration work done on the trail and ski traffic on the cut would endanger regeneration efforts. With three parties involved and the restoration work happening mid-October during the first snow of the season, a decision was reached within two months time of that work day during which time Jay Peak had received over one hundred inches of snow and skiers were already beginning to access Big Jay. Wood challenged the backcountry skiing community to work with the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation, the Green Mountain Club, and Jay Peak Resort to propose additional solutions and discourage use of the cut for skiing.
TheSnowWay.com will be providing on going coverage of the Big Jay access issue including news, opinion, action alerts, community issues, press releases, media coverage, and proposed solutions. A special category for Big Jay Coverage has been created for this important issue to backcountry skiers. Expanded coverage to other New England backcountry locations may also be featured as these issues continue to develop.