Jump to content

Eric T

Members
  • Content count

    209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Eric T

  • Rank
    enthusiast
  • Birthday 02/10/1971

Converted

  • Occupation
    Dirtbag
  • Location
    Mountlake Terrace, Wa

Recent Profile Visitors

407 profile views
  1. Paradise Parking Lot

    The NPS was called America's best Idea by Wallace Stegner in 1983, he didn't see what happened in the 30 years that followed and i'm sure Mr. Stegner would have a much different take on today's park. It's not just Chongo, Bob and I that have a strong wilderness ethic; please read the below article detailing where the park lost it's way and was corrupted by corporate interests. Bottom line, there was a core group of Park Employees who wanted a strong wilderness effort and they were ran off by some corporation that, to this day, peddles the gate and sells lodging and knick knacks to make a buck on our nations most treasured places. It's a multi billion a year industry. Do you think the Delaware Corp cares if there's a traffic jam in Yosemite? Have you ever slowed down to consider that they want those traffic jams in our National Corporate Parks??? THE PARK THEMSELVES WANTED MORE WILDERNESS!!!!! http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article55465600.html The commercialism of the Yosemite name grab by Delaware North is getting national publicity, but the battle for the heart of Yosemite National Park was lost decades ago. For much of the late 1970s, the National Park Service went to extremes to draft a master plan that would guide Yosemite National Park through the years. Thousands of park loyalists were involved in that effort, and hearings and planning sessions were held throughout California. Yosemite Valley was the spiritual home and cradle of the American preservation ethic. Countless suggestions were advanced, including banning cars, removing buildings and restoring natural systems. The park was a national shrine and citadel, and it was no place for small dreams. After much hand-wringing and controversy, the 1980 general management plan was adopted with the aim of “de-urbanizing” the park and providing the guidelines for a more natural park experience. Under then-Superintendent Robert O. Binnewies, several buildings were removed. It was an auspicious start. Then things went terribly wrong. The Yosemite Park & Curry Co., the park concessionaire and MCA affiliate at the time, saw the management plan as a threat to its bottom line – and Binnewies was terminated under some spurious, trumped-up charges. After that, it was downhill for the management plan and the concept of a more natural park. Today, the de-urbanized Yosemite is in shambles. Echoes of “Disneyland North” or “Yosemite World” once again rumble through the land. Some park veterans admit that Yosemite Valley is a “lost cause” and they are just trying to preserve the rest of the park. What happened? After spending countless millions of dollars and a couple of decades of dreaming and planning, MCA and the Reagan White House – and a compromised National Park Service – torpedoed the dream of a restored Yosemite. Gradually the dots came together. Binnewies and his stewardship were sent packing, and the Yosemite Master Plan was shoved to the back burner. AFTER SPENDING COUNTLESS MILLIONS AND A COUPLE OF DECADES OF DREAMING AND PLANNING, MCA AND THE REAGAN WHITE HOUSE – AND A COMPROMISED NATIONAL PARK SERVICE – TORPEDOED THE DREAM OF A RESTORED YOSEMITE. Back in his Hollywood days, Ronald Reagan had Lou Wasserman as his agent. Now, fast forward to the Reagan White House. Wasserman and his MCA hirelings didn’t need an appointment to see the president. Today, Yosemite Valley lies far removed from the vaunted general management plan. Instead of removing facilities, the park service adds more. Through a succession of park superintendents and an indifferent public, the “nibbling away” at the Yosemite dream continues. Those concerns are evident today as one walks through the urban jungle of Yosemite Valley. A more natural park has become little more than wishful thinking. The ongoing construction of a new restroom facility near Ahwahnee Meadow is a case in point. While the project ostensibly complied with the management plan, the prolonged review transcended the intent of the plan. The transformation of the area across from Camp Four into an unplanned parking lot is a blight upon the land. The relocation, instead of removal, of the tent cabins from the rock fall area is another indignity to the spirit of the master plan. More facilities will only demand even more. A more natural park … dream on. The new concessions contract with Aramark – with an estimated value of $2 billion – underscores that premise. Against ever-increasing park visitation, that new contract should have required a gradual reduction in the number of overnight units – a staged reduction – that would, perhaps in a century, offer a more natural Yosemite Valley. Overnight accommodations need to be moved outside the park to the gateway communities. Back in 1990, Herb Ewing, a third-generation “Park Service brat,” saw the gradual erosion of the preservation mission. Park use and visitation began driving park management. He believed that the Park Service had become lost in the wilderness of Washington, D.C., and had become part of the bureaucracy. Money and commerce became the master plan. The park’s founding mission of preservation was pushed aside. TODAY, PARK APOLOGISTS CLAIM THAT THE AGENCY SUFFERS UNDER A DUAL OR CONFLICTING MISSION, THAT IS, PRESERVING THE PARK WHILE PROVIDING FOR VISITOR USE AND ENJOYMENT. THE PARK SETS QUOTAS FOR ITS WILDERNESS AREAS BUT NO LIMITS ON ITS ITS CASH REGISTERS. It was a hundred years ago when Stephen Mather and Horace Albright – both graduates of the University of California and Yosemite advocates – lent their collective energies and personal wealth toward the creation of a new American institution: a National Park Service. As the first two directors, they saw the future – and it was the preservation of the best of America. Yosemite was central to their efforts to create a greater national park system of the nation’s most significant lands and cultural areas. Essentially, the park charter was to hold these national treasures inalienable for all times while providing for reasonable public use. Today, park apologists claim that the agency suffers under a dual or conflicting mission – that is, preserving the park while providing for visitor use and enjoyment. The park sets quotas for its wilderness areas but no limits on its cash registers. Binneweis’ heart is still in Yosemite. In his book, “Your Yosemite,” he maintains that the national parks have become the pawns of the politicians and money changers. Later this year, the National Park Service will mark its 100th year under the lofty banner that it was “The best idea this country ever had.” With the approaching centennial, the Park Service need to revisit its stated mission. That is: “to regulate the use of the … national parks … (whose) purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” Unimpaired – Yosemite is not. Compromised – the National Park Service is. Gene Rose is a former Fresno Bee reporter and photographer who covered the Sierra and has written several books on Yosemite. Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article55465600.html#storylink=cpy This http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article55465600.html The commercialism of the Yosemite name grab by Delaware North is getting national publicity, but the battle for the heart of Yosemite National Park was lost decades ago. For much of the late 1970s, the National Park Service went to extremes to draft a master plan that would guide Yosemite National Park through the years. Thousands of park loyalists were involved in that effort, and hearings and planning sessions were held throughout California. Yosemite Valley was the spiritual home and cradle of the American preservation ethic. Countless suggestions were advanced, including banning cars, removing buildings and restoring natural systems. The park was a national shrine and citadel, and it was no place for small dreams. After much hand-wringing and controversy, the 1980 general management plan was adopted with the aim of “de-urbanizing” the park and providing the guidelines for a more natural park experience. Under then-Superintendent Robert O. Binnewies, several buildings were removed. It was an auspicious start. Then things went terribly wrong. The Yosemite Park & Curry Co., the park concessionaire and MCA affiliate at the time, saw the management plan as a threat to its bottom line – and Binnewies was terminated under some spurious, trumped-up charges. After that, it was downhill for the management plan and the concept of a more natural park. Today, the de-urbanized Yosemite is in shambles. Echoes of “Disneyland North” or “Yosemite World” once again rumble through the land. Some park veterans admit that Yosemite Valley is a “lost cause” and they are just trying to preserve the rest of the park. What happened? After spending countless millions of dollars and a couple of decades of dreaming and planning, MCA and the Reagan White House – and a compromised National Park Service – torpedoed the dream of a restored Yosemite. Gradually the dots came together. Binnewies and his stewardship were sent packing, and the Yosemite Master Plan was shoved to the back burner. AFTER SPENDING COUNTLESS MILLIONS AND A COUPLE OF DECADES OF DREAMING AND PLANNING, MCA AND THE REAGAN WHITE HOUSE – AND A COMPROMISED NATIONAL PARK SERVICE – TORPEDOED THE DREAM OF A RESTORED YOSEMITE. Back in his Hollywood days, Ronald Reagan had Lou Wasserman as his agent. Now, fast forward to the Reagan White House. Wasserman and his MCA hirelings didn’t need an appointment to see the president. Today, Yosemite Valley lies far removed from the vaunted general management plan. Instead of removing facilities, the park service adds more. Through a succession of park superintendents and an indifferent public, the “nibbling away” at the Yosemite dream continues. Those concerns are evident today as one walks through the urban jungle of Yosemite Valley. A more natural park has become little more than wishful thinking. The ongoing construction of a new restroom facility near Ahwahnee Meadow is a case in point. While the project ostensibly complied with the management plan, the prolonged review transcended the intent of the plan. The transformation of the area across from Camp Four into an unplanned parking lot is a blight upon the land. The relocation, instead of removal, of the tent cabins from the rock fall area is another indignity to the spirit of the master plan. More facilities will only demand even more. A more natural park … dream on. The new concessions contract with Aramark – with an estimated value of $2 billion – underscores that premise. Against ever-increasing park visitation, that new contract should have required a gradual reduction in the number of overnight units – a staged reduction – that would, perhaps in a century, offer a more natural Yosemite Valley. Overnight accommodations need to be moved outside the park to the gateway communities. Back in 1990, Herb Ewing, a third-generation “Park Service brat,” saw the gradual erosion of the preservation mission. Park use and visitation began driving park management. He believed that the Park Service had become lost in the wilderness of Washington, D.C., and had become part of the bureaucracy. Money and commerce became the master plan. The park’s founding mission of preservation was pushed aside. TODAY, PARK APOLOGISTS CLAIM THAT THE AGENCY SUFFERS UNDER A DUAL OR CONFLICTING MISSION, THAT IS, PRESERVING THE PARK WHILE PROVIDING FOR VISITOR USE AND ENJOYMENT. THE PARK SETS QUOTAS FOR ITS WILDERNESS AREAS BUT NO LIMITS ON ITS ITS CASH REGISTERS. It was a hundred years ago when Stephen Mather and Horace Albright – both graduates of the University of California and Yosemite advocates – lent their collective energies and personal wealth toward the creation of a new American institution: a National Park Service. As the first two directors, they saw the future – and it was the preservation of the best of America. Yosemite was central to their efforts to create a greater national park system of the nation’s most significant lands and cultural areas. Essentially, the park charter was to hold these national treasures inalienable for all times while providing for reasonable public use. Today, park apologists claim that the agency suffers under a dual or conflicting mission – that is, preserving the park while providing for visitor use and enjoyment. The park sets quotas for its wilderness areas but no limits on its cash registers. Binneweis’ heart is still in Yosemite. In his book, “Your Yosemite,” he maintains that the national parks have become the pawns of the politicians and money changers. Later this year, the National Park Service will mark its 100th year under the lofty banner that it was “The best idea this country ever had.” With the approaching centennial, the Park Service need to revisit its stated mission. That is: “to regulate the use of the … national parks … (whose) purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” Unimpaired – Yosemite is not. Compromised – the National Park Service is. Gene Rose is a former Fresno Bee reporter and photographer who covered the Sierra and has written several books on Yosemite. Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article55465600.html#storylink=cpy
  2. Paradise Parking Lot

    Kirk, Please allow me clarify my statement on the NPS and our natural lands. I strongly feel that the National Park Service should be disbanded and all of the lands that they have been keeping made into Wilderness Area and protected under the 1964 Wilderness act. Num1mc pointed out that there're a number of Park properties that aren't wilderness like the Statue of Liberty or that granite mural project in the Dakotas or some civil war battle fields. However, all of the big parks out west should have every building and road removed. Parks like Arches, Zion and especially Yosemite. When we have traffic jams in Yosemite where it takes 3 hours to get from the gate to the first point you can turn around or a mile plus long line of motor homes waiting outside Arches these are strong indicators of mismanagement. People will still come to these places, they'll simply have to hike in. Making people walk in won't slow down use, look at places like the John Muir Trail as an indicator. The best thing that could ever happen to the North Cascades would for the Park service to quietly walk away and simply have far less access in the way of roads. Momma Nature doesn't need a hand managing wilderness. At some point in our distant past the Park Service was a good idea, times have changed and the park hasn't changed with them. We don't need hundreds of motor homes streaming into wild places we're trying to protect so the park can peddle the gate. It's disgusting. No person that works for the NPS can call themselves an environmentalist or naturalist. Anybody that works for the NPS peddles our most special natural places to make a living. That's my biggest issue, it's bigger than the harassment from amateur hour LEO's or some 20yo kid from Ohio trying to explain how my bag should be hung from bears or the dick that Kozak ran into. Basically, from a climbers perspective, the park isn't just zero value added, they're a problem and they've got to go. Ansel Adams said, "We should kick the money changers out of the temple."
  3. Paradise Parking Lot

    A 3 month school and riding around for 3 more in a park doesn't make a law enforcement officer. Working as a city police officer, a Sheriff's deputy or in the State Patrol gives you real experience. Real cops don't waste time on petty crap, that's the biggest difference. Real cops deal with real situations and have perspective on what's important and what's a waste of time. I spend months on end traveling in parks climbing and the things you see park and blm enforcement do is juvenile and annoying. I'm a middle aged white man saying this. The NPS has had issues getting minorities to come to the parks. And why would they? $$$ huge gate fees only to be harresed by some overly zelious amature wannabe "cops".
  4. Paradise Parking Lot

    In National Parks and more and more in BLM we come under what I call "Hyper-enforcement" You get these "federal law enforcement officers" who are literally the bottom of the barrel as far as federal law enforcement is concerned but what's more troubling is these people don't have the experience of being an actual working police officer in a town, city or sheriff dept. You endup with mall cops who think they're "Federal Agents" sneaking around with night vision devices trying to catch climbers puffing a joint. This is one of the main reasons that someone brings up expanding the north cascades national park and I freak out. I don't want to live in a hyper surveillance state where some super petty wannabe James Bond who doesn't have the balls to rotate to the war stalks me while I'm trying to climb and puff some herb. The national park service in its current state is a total disaster and the NPS should be abolished and all of the lands protected under the 1964 Wilderness Act. Happy 4th.
  5. I don't reccomend the trail to south cascade lake. It unmaintained and washed out 4 to 5 times making the trail a very steep brach belay sort of affair. Going in from cascade pass would be far easier. Doing dome peak and sinister in a day from white rocks lake would be quite a feat.
  6. As for the Ptarmigan the first ascent party did make a loop out of it by heading east from cascade pass and south on what today is called the PCT. I wouldn't recommend it as no one has seconded the original 13 summits in 80 years and no other party has ever made a loop out of it. Those cats were harder than a bin of coffin nails.
  7. Hood accident lawsuit

    Rad's right the 911 call was nonchalant and the caller even said "this call may be premature." It's hard to know if someone is bleeding out. I remember a guy got lower off the end of his rope at smith and was sitting up then walking within minutes. He packed his stuff, walked out and collapsed in the parking lot and later died. With the crowding and people in the woods these days a 911 disbatcher has to be prudent with resources so they don't mIss a real rescue.
  8. Hood accident lawsuit

    I feel bad for the family but can't understand the lawsuit. It reminds me of the Dennis Miller comment on Dale Earnhardt's death, he couldn't understand why people were suprised... "people were acting like, I can't believe it. One minute there he was bobbing and weaving among the other cars, on an oil slicked track and then....just gone." He was climbing on a snow and ice covered volcano. How safe does that sound? If you're going to go chase the creature, uummm...look out. That goes for anyone of us.
  9. Grant Money to police climbers+

    The last thing I want to see while I'm climbing is a government official trying to interact with me. Super lame. In fact it's hard to imagine something lamer. Put the money into making the areas more impact resistant by making clearly marked on and off trail areas, improved bathrooms and trash cans. Look how packed vantage was before the Washington climbers coalition stepped up and built the bathroom when the government wouldn't. Then one day a cop is writing me a parking ticket at Vantage and explaining to me this is how the bathroom gets paid for. The truth Is they site us and the money goes to a unicorn ranch to fund safe injection sites for homeless drug addicts. This is the same government that's cool with injecting tons of chemicals into the earth to get oil from fracking but we climbers need an environmental liason to interact with mama nature? Total horseshit!
  10. Grizzlies in the North Cascades?

    Here is a pic of the area...
  11. Grizzlies in the North Cascades?

    I have a copy of the EIS at home but won't be back for a week. They may be tweeking it, idk.
  12. Grizzlies in the North Cascades?

    Have you guys actually read the EIS? There's going to be around 800 helo sorties to get them in and more flights to monitor. So much for a wilderness experience .. Look at what gets shut down in Yellowstone every summer to prevent human grizzly interactions. So much for access... 28 million bucks to not even expand the range of grizzlybears in North America by half of one percent. This is environmentalism run amuck.
  13. One could hang another rope then wait for them to come back and finish said discussion on the top of the cliff.... I wonder if a video of them doing it would be attempted murder?
  14. What type of tent was it please? Do you remember the color? Please contact me asap about this. smithrock@gmail.com thanks, Eric
×