Fairweather

I was talking about both rangers combined, and it was just a guess that I used for illustration. Not sure if these guys are seasonal, but I guess that would make more sense in a place like Leavenworth. My bad.

I think history is on the side of the cynics here when it comes to the USFS and its penchant for new rule-making. If the Icicle is, as you say, "as beautiful and free as ever," then why is there a need for two new rangers? And, as Coldfinger and Water suggest, the annual $150-200k in professional-level salary and benefits in question here could probably be better spent on a few pit toilets placed strategically throughout the area. Hell, it could even be spent repairing a road, or two.

I agree here. I guess I don't understand why the USFS claims it has to close 75% of its roads--including many popular trailhead access avenues--and yet can still find money for two new positions. You're absolutely right, Coldfinger, I suspect that fees are coming soon--to pay for enforcement of said fees. A self-serving bureaucracy. Wilderness = Management. Our escape becomes more and more an extension of our prison with each passing year. I guess I'll wonder out loud here and propose that we can interpret USFS motives right now by looking at the educational and experiential backgrounds of these two new rangers. Do they come from the biosciences? Quotas, permits, fees, and dogmatism coming soon. From law enforcement? Angst and fines headed your way. From the humanities, social sciences? This might be better news as it would indicate an attempt to find an informed balance between nature and human needs in our local mountains is underway. Unfortunately, I suspect it's choice #1. Sol?

No bears this time, but as we entered the lower meadows of Cameron Basin we did happen upon two young nymphs frolicking in an icy cataract, their boots and clothing strewn haphazardly alongside the trail. Sorry, no pictures.

Trip: Lillian Ridge High Route - High Alpine Traverse - Date: 9/1-9/3 2012 Trip Report: Ok, a year after the fact, but I never posted this one as I was too busy to write it up last year. In any event, it was a September trip and I imagine conditions are similar right now. Greg and I did this traverse--another one of the routes listed in the Olympic Mountains Climber's Guide--and it is a very nice three day XC adventure. The trip begins at the Obstruction Point trailhead, but leaves the trail as it traverses over the Moose, descends to the headwaters of the Lillian River just beneath the now-gone Lillian Glacier, and then climbs to Lillian Lake. From the lake, the route follows an abandoned boot path into a born-again perennial snowfield, traverses beneath McCartney Peak, travels along a beautiful flower-covered ridge, and then skirts into Cameron Pass. From the pass, we dropped down the trail to Cameron Basin, dropped further into Cameron Creek Valley, climbed 3000 feet over Grand Pass, gave it all back by dropping into Grand Valley, then climbed another 3000 feet or so back to Obstruction Point. The trip loses and gains about 8700 feet. The route finding is generally easy, and the views of Olympus and the Eel Glacier on Mount Anderson are incredible. Anyway, here are some pictures: Lillian Lake Basin: Snowfield above the Lake: Behind McCartney Peak: Mount Olympus: Cameron Pass: Mount Anderson, West Peak, and the upper part of Eel Glacier: The Euro-trail down into Cameron Basin: Cameron Basin: Looking across the valley to Grand Pass: Cameron Glaciers: Grand Valley: Gear Notes: Ice Axe useful above the lake. Also, if there were snow below Cameron Pass an ice axe and crampons would be essential. Luckily, it was bare for us this time.

We're thinking just the lower flat-water part, of course. Looks like lots of views--and bears. I took some pretty cool video flying up the lower Stikine, the Chief Shakes area, and Shakes Lake/Glacier, and even though I was going up to take a look at Kate's and Devil's Thumb, I came away more inspired by the beauty of the river. Getting the canoe back to Telegraph Creek is the trick.

Actually, the wife and I are thinking about a 165 mile canoe trip down the Stikine from Telegraph Creek to Wrangell--with a stop at the Shakes hot tubs and a couple of overnights in the nearby USFS cabins, of course--maybe within the next year or two. Has your brother ever jetted all the way back up to Telegraph Creek? BTW, Wrangell is a really neat place. Your brother is a lucky man.

Spent two weeks in Alaska with my Dad back in July. Not a climbing report, but I've thrown in some good mountain porn of our flight up the Stikine Icecap to justify the [TR] status. We drove to Hyder, Ak., and then back-tracked to P Rupert to catch the ferry to Ketchikan, Wrangell, Petersburg. Hyder Alaska - A really cool place: The only place in town: The town is infested with bears: A nice fixer-upper. $400 or best offer: The best halibut on Earth. Caught two hours ago, not breaded, seasoned lightly: Fish creek just outside of town: The road up to Salmon Glacier is stunning: Dad meets "The Bear Man" Near the GranDuc Mine: Meanwhile, on the Canadian side of the border: And they also have a really cool toaster museum in Stewart: Me and Dad heading north: Along the Zimovia Highway, Wrangell Island: There's gotta be a reason I love this town. Can't put my finger on it... Looking down on Wrangell from Mount Dewey. John Muir was here: Wrangell cemetery. There were a half dozen "Unknown Soldier" headstones here. Question: If the soldier was unknown, how did they know where to bury him? Did some poor homesick Bostonian's mortal remains end up on a remote island in Alaska? Going for a plane ride: Fly up the Stikine River, turn left at Shakes Slough: Kates Needle: Devil's Thumb: Burkett Mtn. and Needle: ...and exit the LeConte: Not our boat. Our boat arrived 5 hours late...but that's another story: Oh yea, almost forgot: Ketchikan sucks. Not the same place it was twenty years ago

1. Black Diamond Kilowatts - 173cm with Marker Baron bindings Garmont Axon boots (you'll have to buy your own liners) BD skins All in great shape - $650 2. K2 Shuksans - 167cm with Silvretta Pure Freeride bindings in great shape - $350 Send me a PM if interested

Congrats to the kid--and his parents. These are my favorite kind of TRs.

Thanks. I could probably spend the rest of my life hiking and climbing only there and I would be happy. Still, there are so many other great places to go...

I agree. The USFS roads were built to support consumerism (logs, mines) and recreation was just a side gig with a little designated wilderness thrown in after 1964 to placate the hippies. But the roads remain, and I think they now serve just as valuable a public purpose. One of my favorite enviro-philosophers, Holmes Rolston III, points out something I think is worth considering in this regard when he says “wildlands absorb a kind of urban negative disvalue and provide a niche that meets deep seated psychosomatic needs.” And Baird Callicott considers wilderness recreation to be an "escape valve" for our capitalist malaise. Anyway, all kinds of value in wilderness. Too bad we can't all agree on what it is. Best metaphor I've read in a long time.

I think you're mostly right. While "front country" use has increased, back country use has leveled off or, in some areas, begun to decline. Part of the problem is demographics. As minority populations in the US continue to grow, interest in hiking/climbing/camping drops commensurate with. The USFS has made much of this--you may have noticed the new billboards promoting the benefits of wilderness to children of color. In any event, it seems to me this is likely more of a socioeconomic issue than a racial one, but it's a sensitive subject for sure. Part of the problem remains, I believe, a betrayal of wilderness recreationalists by dogmatic environmentalists. It's ironic that you mention Harvey Manning, because the end-of-life feud between he and his longtime friend, Ira Spring, sums up the issue pretty well and is at the core of the roads debate. Here is a quote from Ira Spring's autobiography: “We may be appalled at 3,000 or more people a day walking the Paradise trails at Mount Rainier or 30,000 a year hiking to Snow Lake in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, but if that is what it takes for the support of trails to the year 2015, so be it. It is up to us to figure out how to accommodate so many people without harming the temple.” I spent a few days in Olympic NP earlier this week and it was sad to see not a single sole at Royal Basin--a supposed "quota area"--or on the trail over Constance Pass. In fact, the trail up from the long-closed Dosewallips is badly in need of maintenance and the boot path toward Mount Mystery has faded away. Some would say this is a good thing. I think it's kind of sad.

Trip: Royal Basin to Constance Pass - High Alpine Traverse Route Date: 8/20/2013 Trip Report: Greg and I did another one of the Olympic Guidebook's "high alpine traverse routes" earlier this week. Traveling from our camp in Upper Royal Basin, we crossed over the divide into the incredibly beautiful meadows of Deception Basin, then down Deception Creek and around the back side of Mount Mystery--through nightmarish slide alder--where we emerged in the valley and snowfields north of Gunsite Notch. From here we descended the south side of the notch to a nice meadow campsite at the source of Twin Creek. In the morning we ascended DelMonte Ridge, then dropped down steep, hard scree to Sunny Brook Meadows where we picked up the trail to Constance Pass. From here, we hiked out the Dungeness Trail. The loop is 27 miles total, with 8 miles of off-trail. Also, the route does not climb Mystery Glacier to its head, rather, it drops below and around Mount Mystery, completely encircling it. Surprisingly, we saw no evidence of recent passage between Deception Basin and Sunny Brook--cairns, boot tracks, etc. Contrary to what I had thought earlier, I don't believe this route is very popular. It doesn't look like Mystery has been climbed much since the Dose Road washed out years ago. I will say that Deception Basin is one of the most beautiful mountain places I have ever been--particularly the wet, flowery meadow below the Mystery Glacier moraine that is fed by the glacier's terminal lake seeping through its own till. This would be a great place to spend a few days. In any event, I would advise anyone traveling this route to exit the basin on the right side of the creek (below Mount Deception) and then avoid traversing directly over to the hanging valley below Gunsite Notch since we spent more than three hours negotiating less than a half-mile of thick Slide Alder. Instead, I'd recommend giving up another 1500' on talus by descending all the way to the confluence of the two creeks, and then climb back up toward Gunsite. Also, it is nearly impossible to stay on DelMonte Ridge around Point 6666, so you'll have to give up 1200' or so by dropping to Sunny Brook Meadows and then climbing again to Constance Pass via the trail. In short, this route is more challenging than I thought it would be, but it was really neat to be in such beautiful places that few others see. Total gain/loss is about 9000 feet and there is lots of steep side-hilling on scree/talus, and a lot of big boulder-hopping too. Heavy boots work nice. Ice axe or crampons would be helpful for the snow below the notch, but aren't absolutely necessary. Marmot in upper Royal Basin Mount Clark emerging Mount Deception shoulder Mount Mystery and Deception Basin Mystery Glacier still breathing Lower meadows Deception Basin Looking across the "shortcut" (not) Three and a half hours of this shit Below Gunsite Notch Looking up to Gunsite Notch Camp at head of Twin Creek The Brothers' other side Sunny Brook Meadows Olympus from Del Monte Ridge The other side of Mount Stone Greg at Sunny Brook Meadows Yours truly at Constance Pass

I'm sure the USFS's plan to strangle off access to popular trailheads (aka: Minimum Roads Analysis) will help to mitigate this problem.

The Washington Trails Association seems to have moderated their position on roads and access over the last five years or so. Where they once advocated the closing of the Dosewallips and the Suiattle roads, they have done an about-face and now support their repair. They may have purged the more radical members of their board who, at one time, were quite vocal and public about celebrating new washouts. No matter the reason, they may now be worth partnering with in some capacity. I visited their site just now, and I can't find a position statement on this new 75% plan. They do, however, have an outstanding 26-page mission statement on roads and access that is very well thought-out. http://www.wta.org/action/road-access-to-trails

You nailed it.

I don't think they're looking at closing any of the popular-paved avenues, rather, they are just looking to include these thoroughfares in the "total miles" that remain in their budget when this process is finished. In the end, I'm not really sure how much weight these meetings will carry. MBSNF is doing a really good thing by getting ahead of the public-input requirement, but these meetings are not part of the NEPA process--which has yet to begin. I'll bet that groups like Audubon and NCCC are not going to stand for this round of unofficial scoping/public input being allowed to carry water in the final EA/EIS. Not sure how this will fly in 2015.

I attended the 11am meeting in Enumclaw today along with about 30+ other folks--mostly off-road vehicle supporters, but with a few deep-green types mixed in. I did not sense that climbers or skiers were represented at all. For their part, the USFS folks were great. My suggestion that the $30 annual fee be used exclusively to support road and trail maintenance was well received by the south unit director. In fact, he knew exactly how much extra revenue he would receive for this purpose if it were properly allocated. So here's the short of it: The USFS has been directed (by whom is not clear) to close 75% of the roads under its authority by 2015. In the MBSNF, this means that only about 683 miles of road will remain open. This sounds like a lot, but this total includes many paved and trunk roads that we don't typically think of as USFS--like Crystal Mountain Blvd, Baker Lake Highway, Mountain Loop, etc. Additionally, many of the roads being counted as existing miles have already been closed for decades--like the West Fork of the White River, White Chuck River, etc. So, like Matt and Quarry have described above, each member of our four groups chose eight "favorite" roads on table-sized maps. This data, in turn, is supposed to be analyzed by "social scientists" at Portland State University and superimposed upon other unspecified hard environmental and GIS data that they probably have no business interpreting. This has me particularly worried, since the soft sciences, in my experience, too-often rely on flawed assumptions regarding motives and intent--in this case, the motives of the public citizen placing his or her marks/choices on the map. I got the impression that even the USFS folks were skeptical of this complex decision matrix and will not likely rely on this university interpretation too much. Matt, I am sad to report that no one else chose your Darrington area crags access as a preference. Of course, I wouldn't really expect folks in the southern part of the MBSNF to be dialed in to that area. The choices at this Enumclaw meeting were overwhelmingly along HWY 410 and Carbon River. Curiously, the Suiattle River seemed to be a popular choice too. In the end, I'm not sure that managers will be able to divide the pain equitably. They certainly don't have the money to properly decommission these roads, so "environmental concern" claims are dubious, at best. I suspect that this is a battle between wilderness-as-public-park versus wilderness-as-ecological-preserve. In other words, it's philosophical. Popularity/use will probably determine which roads remain open for now, but is anyone really under the illusion that our friends at NCCC won't be agitating for another round of closures a decade from now? My suggestion at this point is to remind USFS that the Forest Pass revenue generated by hikers, climbers, mountain bikers, skiers, and yes, even motorheads, represents an understanding that reasonable access to public recreation will be maintained. To just roll over and accept this 75% plan and squabble over what's left is giving in too soon, IMO. So that's my report--and .02 worth of my blather too.

That's the best West Buttress TR I've ever read. In addition to your success, it looks like you guys had a great time--and that's what really counts. :tup: Thanks for sharing your adventure.

This map might help clarify the management boundaries for everybody: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MEDIA/stelprdb5342056.jpg

Thanks Matt, I'll include your roads in my letter and participation session. Regarding wilderness expansion, I'm thinking about what the NCNP folks did when they permanently closed the Upper Stehekin Road. They simply "erased" the non-wilderness corridor that had exempted the road from Wilderness Act rules, and banned bicycles. Since these road "corridors" were created without Congressional approval, it's just as easy for USFS and NPS managers to declare them invalid. I'd like to think that even if a road is closed to car traffic, it can still continue to provide modest access by bicycle. West Side and Carbon River Roads are great examples of this. Ditto, the Upper Middle Fork Snoqualmie. Wilderness purists, however, don't like the idea of wheels, period.

Matt, Was there any talk about the fate of these soon-to-be decommissioned roads? In other words, will the abandoned grades be enclosed into the surrounding designated wilderness? (Bicycles banned.) Or will the 100-foot wilderness exclusion buffer remain intact? (Bicycles allowed) Also, I'm having a hard time finding your Darrington road number(s)? Do you know them off-hand? I'm also curious: were the MBSNF folks talking about major trunk roads as a "single closure?" or are they counting secondary roads as stand-alone closures? Is the 75% based on miles? or raw road numbers? My "save these" list exceeds the eight-road limit: Hannegan Pass #32 Glacier Creek #39 (Heliotrope access) Suiattle #26 (Screw the NCCC and fix it, for God's sake! A judge has already ruled on this.) Baker Lake Road #11 Mountain Loop FS #73 and Suntop (Huckleberry Creek off of Hwy 410) Cayada Creek #7810 (aka Coplay Lake just before the Carbon entrance to MORA) Schreibers Meadow #13 Middle Fork #57 (and reopen the Upper Road while you're at it.) Foss River #68 (and Foss River West Fork #6835) Cascade River Road #15 !!!!! (Don't give Harvey his dying wish. Listen to Ira and keep this road open!) BTW, thanks for the summary.

I agree, but I think the 30 bucks does make us stake-holders, and the $$ are now a significant portion of the USFS budget. As for the right-left thing, well, I think there are plenty on the right who wonder why federal $$ are being spent on the pursuits of a few--and many on the left who wonder the same albeit for very different reasons. We need to face the fact, right or wrong, that what we are asking the USFS to do is spend taxpayer $$ to repair roads that only a relative few will ever use. I'm willing to live with this conflict in my value system because I think outdoor recreation serves a valuable public function, and because humans still have a role in the places we perceive to be wilderness. Plus, I just enjoy the status quo access to the outdoors in this region. Anyhow, I hope you'll post comments regarding the meeting tomorrow night; I'm anxious to hear how it went.