A new campground is very fine & dandy, but closing MUA to camping would be a significant loss ----regardless of any other factors.

I don't really see how state could justify shutting the MUA without making some debatable assertions glomed from local real estate broker-types -----and I also don't see how a new facility would change these potential arguments.

This sounds like the same chunk of land the AMC tried to develop into a campground. As I recall, there was significant local opposition. Some of it actually had some merit.

I, for one, have no confidence that the AAC will have any better luck -- or competence -- navigating the thicket of local regs than anyone else.

I hope I'm wrong. We need some sort of decent camping facility and the AAC does a pretty good job running the Climbers Ranch in the Tetons.

Stay tuned.

Joe Antol

The difference being - this time, the Mohonk preserve is a partner. Should it not make some difference?

Question: What will happen to the MUA land once(if) the new campground opens? Would it be possible/feasible for that land parcel to somehow transfer over and become part of this new campground?

And , Camp Slime is on Mohonk Prserve land, isn't it? Id so, then the MP probably has an idea as to what will become of Camp Slime if the new campground opens. I think it is within reason for the public to know the intent....

Terrie,

Yes, I suppose having the Preserve on board will help. They are certainly adept at working the levers of local government. However, it's one thing to take a parcel of land "off the market". Most people are quite happy to have permanently undeveloped land next door. A camp ground is another kettle of carp.

My understanding of Multiple Use Areas is that free camping is one of the approved uses. I suspect (although I am not an authority on this) that it would require the state legislature to change this.

This was one of the hangups when the AMC was trying to develop the land. The MUA would continue to have camping and right along side, more camping. This did not make adjacent property owners very happy.

Joe

It would be really nice if the campground were within walking distance of the trapps. The experience is alot better if you dont have to drive from your tent to go climbing/hiking.

It would be really nice if the campground were within walking distance of the trapps.

IF my memory serves me correctly and IF this is indeed the same parcel of land which the AMC had intended to develop as a campground there was supposed to be a connecting trail up to the Trapps. A lot of IFs, sorry, and also quite a hike.

Yeah...20 minutes is way to long far to expect outdoor enthusiasts to walk.

RR

The vast majority of climbers are hardly "outdoor enthusiasts". The cliffs closest to the car park are the first ones developed, pretty much everywhere. Even way back in the day. What was the first route at the Gunks? Old Route at Millbrook. Why? Millbrook was the first cliff reached when driving north. Where did the next major development take place? Skytop, 'cause it was real easy to get to and you could get a room almost at its base.

20 or 30 minute approach in the Gunks just to get near the cliffs? Are you nuts? It so impinges on the NYC attitude* of squeezing 29 hours into every 24. GottaClimbGottaClimbGottaClimb-don'tgetinmyway,Noob.

*Yeah, even if you're not from NYC and you climb at the Gunks, it's still the prevailing attitude. Contagious almost.

Whatever your high holyness.....

I heard in Utah that the locals hike 10 miles and leave the 3 star roadside classics for us fat and lazy easterners....how nice of them..

Quote:

---

...

I heard in Utah that the locals hike 10 miles and leave the 3 star roadside classics for us fat and lazy easterners....how nice of them..

---

Wheras in New York, the locals 10 miles and don't climb, leaving the 3 star roadside classics for us fat and lazy downstaters?

hee hee hee. How nice of THEM!