By Gwendolyn Craig
Owners of the Adirondack Mountain Reserve said they may test out recreation limits on a portion of the property this Columbus Day weekend, and they plan to definitely place restrictions on the entire reserve next year.
The AMR is privately owned by a group of trustees, who are also members of the Ausable Club. They allow public access through their property via easements with the state. The AMR is 7,000 acres and is a gateway to a number of High Peaks and iconic trails like Rainbow Falls and Indian Head.
Ausable Club President Roland Morris said the club has kept detailed records of hiker traffic over the years, and it has increased. Within the last decade, the club trustees have talked about imposing some sort of restrictions to protect the natural resources.
“We’re trustees of that property,” Morris said, “and we have an obligation to protect that property in partnership with the DEC (state Department of Environmental Conservation). And it’s become clear, from our point of view, the AMR, that limits will have to be part of that program.”
Morris said the DEC had suggested testing a recreation limit program this season, but “they subsequently had second thoughts about it.” Morris said he thought it would be a good idea to test something for Columbus Day weekend, but the club has not committed to doing that yet. He expects a decision will be made within the next week, and Morris said the public will be notified.
A DEC spokesperson responded Wednesday evening that the agency is working with AMR “on efforts to promote sustainable use over the Columbus Day weekend. Once we have made a determination, we can provide more information.”
If there are restrictions this Columbus Day weekend, Morris said it would not be on the entire reserve. Trustees are still working out details about limiting use next year, too, but Morris said the plan is for limits on the entire reserve at that time.
Asked about the state’s role in the club’s plans, Morris said that is still being worked out.
“But because of the point of entry, it’s something that we can handle ourselves,” Morris added. “We don’t need the state to commit resources, at least in our view.”
Parking restrictions are already in place at the AMR lot this summer, limited to 28 vehicles. The DEC had told Adirondack Explorer the reduction was due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Visitors who don’t get a spot at the lot on Ausable Road can park across the street at Roaring Brook Falls or on one of the pull-offs along Route 73. Competition for parking is fierce, especially on weekends, with the AMR lot typically closing before 6:30 a.m. and the closest pull-offs filling up shortly after.
From the lot on Ausable Road, hikers walk about a half-mile past the Ausable Club’s golf course and clubhouse to get to the AMR trailhead. From there, they walk down the road until they branch off to their respective hiking trails. Depending on where one is hiking, the trails can stay on reserve property or switch to state forest preserve.
The agreement between the Ausable Club and the state for public access dates back to 1978, Morris said. It includes a conservation easement and a public foot traffic easement. John Schuler, general manager of the Ausable Club, said the easement was donated. At the time of that agreement, according to an Adirondack Council analysis of trailhead registers, some 5,000 hikers a year crossed the property. By three years ago, the Council’s estimate had grown to 25,000.
Adirondack Explorer filed a freedom of information law request with the DEC in July to see the agreement, but it has yet to receive any records. The club said it would consult its attorney about sharing the documents.
“That was essentially a gift of ours,” Morris said. “The most important thing is that the agreements were to protect the resource, and unfortunately, what’s happened has sort of gone beyond that, and both parties, which are obligated to protect the resource, need to act to do that.
“And that’s really where we’ve arrived, and that action will start next season. It will be the whole reserve next season.”
Morris said hiker numbers this season have been consistent, but he called it “remarkable” that the visitation has been what it is with the Canadian border closed to nonessential traffic. Estimates have shown Canadian hikers account for around 30% of traffic during a typical season in the Adirondack Park.
“You can envision if the border had been open, we might have had numbers that would have been astronomical,” Morris said.
Overall, Morris hopes imposing limits will actually make visiting more enjoyable for the public while protecting the area’s natural resources.
“These are important for the current hiking public and for generations to come, and we’ve reached a point where at least in the AMR’s case we are seriously degrading the resource,” Morris said. “I’m a two-time 46er (referring to the 46 High Peaks). I’ve been hiking for over 50 year, 55 years. It’s such an important, just remarkable resource that we need to protect.”
The AMR news follows the release of a report suggesting recommendations for managing crowds in the High Peaks. It was written by the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics, and commissioned by the Adirondack Council and the Adirondack Mountain Club.
The report suggested a permit or reservation system limiting use could be an option. Willie Janeway, executive director of the Adirondack Council, had said in a news release that “the time has come to stop resisting” visitor limits.
DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos had told Adirondack Explorer during a July press conference that permits and limits were “the last place you go.”
In an interview Wednesday, Janeway said the AMR appears to be the perfect place to try out a pilot program for limits.
“We’ve tried everything else,” Janeway said. “It’s time to try this.”
Janeway added that his family were among the original purchasers of the Adirondack Mountain Reserve in 1887. Every generation of his family, including himself, has been a trustee of the property and a member of the Ausable Club. Janeway said he is only speaking for the Adirondack Council, however, and not the Ausable Club or the Adirondack Mountain Reserve trustees.
Michael Barrett, executive director of the Adirondack Mountain Club (ADK), reacted to the news on Wednesday.
“ADK is a strong proponent of public access to public lands, but we acknowledge that the Ausable Club is private property and are delighted that they are including data collection as part of their proposed limits,” Barrett said in an email. “The data gathered there will help inform future decision-making in the High Peaks Wilderness as the state and local partners, including ADK, work together to develop and implement management strategies in the region.”
In the meantime, the state-appointed High Peaks Strategic Planning Advisory Group continues to meet. The group released an interim report with recommendations on managing crowds in June. The report included a three-year pilot program for implementing limits on use. The group, which includes the Adirondack Council and the ADK, is expected to release a second report later this year.
I am hoping AMR and DEC can come up with a reasonable way to protect this important property into the future and continue to allow some hiker access without having to amend the easements. It will necessarily be a joint project.
I hope the state steps in with eminent domain if they have to in order to stop this.
Hopefully the state will defend our rights to access this property via the easement paid for with our taxes! It most certainly was not a “gift”!
I am curious as to why a FOIL request is necessary to review the 1978 easement – or why the Ausable Club needs to consult its attorney about sharing it. It is a public, recorded document easily reviewable online at the Essex County Clerks Office website.
The agreement was absolutely NOT a “gift” from the Club. It was definitely a business deal that helped the club stay open, and it was done using NYS public funding. The AE really didn’t need to pursue FOIL since the documents are already public here: https://www.searchiqs.com/nyess/LogIn.aspx
This is really all about Willie Janeway’s personal agenda to transform the High Peaks region into a place where only locals and wealthy elitists like AMR members can go. Its real gatekeeping, and he’s going to keep rattling cages with false narratives, out of context pictures posted to social media, and junk science until he gets his way. Its going to happen regardless of its negative impacts (and there will be many) on racial/economic/social diversity, local economy, and public land Rights.
Rights are not being denied, the state did not buy/ pay for the TRAVEL EASEMENT. When reading the agreement, it seems to me, the stated purpose of preserving the conditions as they existed when the agreement was signed is what is in question. Conditions today are clearly not the same as when this agreement was reached.
Example:
You owned a house and the lot next to your house and you sold it to the person who owned the house on the other side of your house with the understanding that the home owner and his family could cut through your yard to get to the lot he bought.
Then 15 years later the owner that bought the house tears it down and puts in a high rise apartment complex and tells everyone they can cut through your yard to get to the lot. Its not hard to understand that that was not the deal that was agreed upon.
It sure is ashamed that everyone is going through this,,,I myself have been coming up here since 1970 and boy things have changed so much
We should abolish all elitist reserves and preserves and get back our public lands funded by tax loopholes and eventually public monies.
These areas should not remain as a private backyard for a few privileged people.
I agree 100%, they operate motorized boats and quads to access the upper ausable to get to the cabins that surround it. Don’t dare claim hiker overuse while you deny The public.
That land should have been donated to the park when it was formed. It should be part of the park.
Perhaps close examination of the easement agreement is in order. I suspect significant land tax reductions were put in place in exchange for enabling hiker access to the trails within AMR lands.
I don’t believe there’s a “need” to restrict hiker access. Furthermore, recent parking restrictions have exacerbated parking problems along Rt. 73.
Perhaps close examination of the easement agreement is in order. I suspect significant land tax reductions were put in place in exchange for enabling hiker access to the trails within AMR lands.
I don’t believe there’s a “need” to restrict hiker access. Furthermore, recent parking restrictions have exacerbated parking problems along Rt. 73.
C’mon Willie…come clean, recuse yourself from this issue…Eminent Domain should be used to rightfully take what should be public land to be included in the park with wilderness protection. Give the AMR permission to retain a reasonable amount of land around their bldgs and golf course and make the rest available to the public. It’s inevitable. Like the Whitney property… these holdings are a left over from the robber baron days. Likewise with the Whitney property. These properties are way too precious to be enjoyed only by an elite cabal.
Maybe those “46ers” are the problem.
That’s totally wrong. The 46ers do more good for the High Peaks than the state or anyone else. Do you have any idea how much volunteer trail work they do? And they also build and fix lean-to’s and bridges, etc, all for free. On top of that, the 46ers raise a lot of donation money for the Adirondacks. But they dobn’t draw attention to themselves and that’s why people like you come up with these wrong assumptions.
Jimmy Bee is not totally wrong, nor are the 46ers totally absolved of blame because of donations and trail-work. For a half-century, they have been a force directing hikers to the HPW specifically. As a 46er (by number only), I feel the 46ers need to reassess the goals the organization requires.
I would like to see membership requirements modified to perhaps ANY 15 high peaks (5 in winter), 15 remote hikes elsewhere in the Park (including winter), 10 paddling requirements, and 6 days of trail-work. Complete those and you get your number and patch. These are suggestions I brought up 30 years ago and was ignored, so I left the fold. I no longer wear my patch.
That’s really interesting, @boreas. Imagine a 46er program as a part of the wilderness management strategy, where the challenge is designed to produce the behavior that helps sustain or heal the natural resources. It seems important to make use of the difference between human-made systems or policies that can be changed or adapted when they cause harm, and natural systems that can’t be flexible resist human exploitation.
I live outside the blue line, am not a 46er, but am absolutely drawn to participating in that challenge. I am ready to accept limits if they’re legit and truly in the public interest. The gatekeeping is a scam and we can’t be expected to cede access to the same old privileged white folks who miss more exclusive times.
…be flexible *or* resist exploitation.
Thanks for not wearing.
Hard to believe you’re a 46er. Do you realize your own irony? You did the 46 and you want to close everything down so nobody else can get theirs.
Range Rover.. or sorry, Land Lover. You and Janeway are disingenuous at best, and perjerous at worst. The sky is not falling and there is no crisis necessitating these restrictions. “We tried everything,” right? Wrong! Absolutely nothing has been done to maintain or improve the trails for the expected usage. Even so, they are not much different from how they were twenty years ago, and certainly do not threaten the resource. If I were the State Attorney General I’d haul AMR and the Ausable Club into court so fast and seek an injunction to restrain any restrictions and enforce public access under the easements. Perhaps private citizens can sue them to maintain access. Perhaps the property assessments should reflect the true value of the land and bankrupt the AMR/AC and the lands would become public instead of the preseve of the wealth few.
And Boreas, it just becomes more self-evident with every comment that you make that you are an idiot with too much time on your hands.
As a NYS licensed Adirondack guide, It has always bothered me to see a golf course in the middle of the high peaks. Golf courses are widely known to have a massive carbon footprint, use many fertilizers and pesticides which wind up in public waterways, and the people who maintain these golf courses have some of the highest cancer rates in agriculture. The Ausable club, and the Adirondack mountain reserve, are playgrounds for the 1%. Their private preserves are not for the “great unwashed” except for their occasional sense noblesse oblige. The same family has been ensconced in their wealth and privilege for 7 generations? This is America, we don’t do nobility here… right?
The idea that they are protecting the high peaks from the taxpayers, after seeing that golf course… is insulting. Protection of public lands is the purview of the state, through the administration of the DEC.
Let’s ban golf courses in the park, watch them loose members since they don’t have enough people actually interested in real wilderness to keep it going… and they can sell the property to the state, plant trees on the golf course, and return the property to forever wild. DEC should be in charge of parking, permitting, and regulations.