Help protect one of our best Mtn Biking areas!!!

Taconic Hereford Park (aka 909) is about to be logged again, if you have been there recently you will see the markings. Some of the best trails in the park will be destroyed. Logging was only done 2 years ago in the upper area of the park, and you can see the devastation that was left. If you go farther down into the woods you will see even more. There are large piles of full trees and logs scattered in the woods and the "bridges" that where build have basically destroyed the streams.

Take action now and write to the DEP to stop this destruction of one of the best parks in Dutchess County.

Write to

skfarm@gw.dec.state.ny.us (the office that manages 909)

lflands@gw.dec.state.ny.us (the division of state forests)

and go to http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/about/emailform.html to write to the Commissioner of the DEP directly.

Help us save our park!!

I suggest you contact N.E.M.B.A. they have a similar problem with logging in the holyoke/skinner forest at the batchelor street trails. they were not able to stop the timber harvest but they did get them to modify the way they were going to go about it to minimze collateral damage to trails caused by heavy machinery.

check with the pioneer valley chapter of NEMBA.

Good Luck and I'll send my comments to the manager for 909

I put this post in the other forum, too. Let me know how else I can help since I meet with the DEC in Albany regularly as IMBA rep. However, please consider these suggestions. They are along the line of what surfer Mike was saying....

-----------------

Have you tried working with the DEC foresters on trail corridors? Timber harvests on our end of the state (Region 9) routinely provide a buffer along the trails that go through timber harvests. Sure it is ugly during the actual harvest, but the contractors don't get their performance bonds back until the DEC has determined that any and all tops are pulled off the trail. For the most recent harvest in our area the DEC left some nice big oaks that I am sure would have went for a pretty penny, but stayed because they were adjacent to the trail.

I think complaining about a timber harvest is going to hurt you in the long run. Most regions of the DEC want to work with cyclists; we should work with them. Typically, timber planning calls for no more than 5% of any state forest to be left with less than 15 years old, although I don't know directly how state forests are managed in Dutchess County. My experience has always been that they will work with the trails community to protect the trails during harvests. You just have to be involved with the planning processes. Fighting timber harvests doesn't result in getting more trails.

I've spoken to the rangers and came away with the understanding that forestry is a priority over recreation. One thing I've wondered though, maybe we can get the trails in the lower "gut" marked with state signs to preserve them? They came about after the last mapping was done by the DEC. Another issue that concerns me is that the trail markers all say "foot travel." The ranger told me they were "just what happened to be on the truck that day."I'd be interested in helping any way possible.
T.

here is NEMBA's responce in regards to logging at the holy yoke/skinner forest

cut and pasted from NEMBA.org

Gary Briere Massachusetts Forests & Parks PO Box 484 Amherst MA 01004 April 22, 2004 RE: Protection of Trail Resources during DCR-approved Forestry Operations Dear Gary, NEMBA believes and supports the use of forestry as a management tool for the preservation of our forests and parks. However, we strongly believe that the current forestry guidelines lack adequate protections for one of the DCR's greatest assets: trails. Trails should not be considered an amentity. Fundamentally, trails are the critical means to protect natural resources while allowing public access. The DCR's current guidelines jeopardize trail resources. NEMBA urges the DCR to evaluate two aspects of its forestry operations, and implement the following: 1) Create buffer zones that protect trails and trail systems from forestry operations 2) Require greater communication and supervision between forestry operations and park supervisors and regional supervisors Trail Buffer Zone: We believe that all trails on DCR properties should be protected from forestry operations by a minimum of 100 feet. This buffer zone would serve two important purposes. First, it would protect the natural experiences that trail users seek when using DCR property. Second, and more importantly, it will protect the trail's viability. In the past, forestry operations have destroyed the existence of trails, or have rendered them impassable due to the operations of trucks and skidders. The refuse left behind has also obliterated and obscured the trail's location. The 100 foot buffer is a minimum. There are other cases, such as trails of significant importance (recreationally and historically) where the buffer should be considerably greater. Major trails that form part of a park's core loop system should have a buffer of roughly 250', while nationally recognized trails (such as the Applachian trail, the MMM Trail and the Metacomet Trail) should have buffers up to a 500' buffer. Communication between Foresters, Private Logging Companies and DCR Supervisors The recent forestry activities at the Holyoke Skinner State Park caught both the park and regional supervisor off guard. There appears to have been little communication and no specific review of the cutting plan in the months prior to this operation. NEMBA urges the DCR to create communication protocols and safeguards that requires park and regional supervisors to review the cutting plan and require site visits before any cutting takes place. Contracts with private logging companies should specify site visits and review by both park and regional supervisors. Sincerely, Philip Keyes Executive Director

While NEMBA's reply is somewhat helpful, thats another state and the 909 needs more locals to get involved. Spread the word, I heard that WMBA is. Would be nice if interest picked up...
T.

While NEMBA's reply is somewhat helpful, thats another state and the 909 needs more locals to get involved. Spread the word, I heard that WMBA is. Would be nice if interest picked up...
T.

While it is always best to get involved *before* the crisis hits, you are on the mark that local interest needs to get involved. As I said above, trail corridors are *exactly* what DEC does in Region 9 (western NY), where we work very closely with DEC. They are not the 100-foot buffers that NEMBA asks for, but they are plenty wide enough to keep trees on both sides of the trail, and in many places, being able to "see the forest through the trees" so to speak opens up some nice vistas. Also, letting in some light helps dry the trails more quickly in the spring.

The way timber sales work is the DEC foresters inventory the timber and then solicit quotes from commercial harvestors. If the request for quotations has already gone out then it may be prohibitively expensive to add in a trail corridor option; the commerical harvestors will say it changes all their assumptions and will ask for a large decrease in what they pay the state. You have to work early with the DEC to get the trail corridor provision worked into the RFQ to have the best chance. DEC has put that requirement into the RFQs in our forests. I can give you references here in Region 9 if you want.

Even if it has already gone to bid, still try for the trail corridor option. The point here is to argue for trail corridors, not stopping the harvests completely. That will not work well. The DEC did do that before for Shindagin Hollow in Ithaca (even though most cyclists were only asking for corridors; however, some anti-timber-harvest-types from Ithaca lobbied for no cutting at all), but considered it to be extraordinary, and considered it to use up political capital in that area (they soon after came out with the very anti-bike Draft Recreation Plan - see http://www.nymbc.com/reg7-intro.html)

OK, long-winded enough...