Permit for Enchantments

[North_by_Northwest]

To answer Hiromi's second question: if you are caught camping overnight you get a $100 fine. (Hint: if you are carrying a sleeping bag or pad, or just a really large pack you're going to get harassed.)

You also might be walked out by the ranger. If you resist they will call the Law Enforcement Ranger and follow you until the Tools arrive to cuff you and drag you out.

 

 

[Cpt.Caveman]

The helicopters and trash around the dams (Snow, Colchuck and Klonaqua esp.) are from the irrigation companies.

 

Well if the deforest service is allowing them in there then they are to blame and that was the entire point. It doesnt matter who owns the land it's on if it fucks up the wilderness. They seem concerned about bolting in some places but a nice shitload of crap in the wilderness is ok.

 

The idea that climbers don't impact the Enchantments (or anywhere) as much as other users is false and conceited.

 

It may be true. But I have seen more hikers leave trash than I can imagine in a lot of places.There's no facts on it that I have seen. I admit that it can be true from your argument but to back it up with facts is a real argument. I have none.

 

Don't confuse the different branches of the FS. Larry the Tool and his fatass Law Enforcement Ranger friends get big comfy SUVs with cameras and all that bullshit, but they are not the ones who are enforcing the Enchantment Permit system. Larry and friends (these guys truly are assholes, I had to work with them,) only enforce camping and parking. Whoever said they don't have the balls to enforce crime is right.

 

If they are not enforcing regulations in the backcountry how do multiple folks here get the fines for it at the roadside. I understand there is a difference between the groups and that is not what I am arguing that one is more respectable than the other. It's all Deforest service to the public's eyes. It's not seamless.

 

Now, the Enchantment Permit system (subject of this thread) is enforced by the wilderness branch of the Leavenworth USFS. These guys are underpaid, underfunded and sent in to the backcountry with old shitty gear.

 

Nobody cares when they are getting harrassed. It's all the same govt to anyone out there. Nobody resents any good work they do. But lets talk about where the major faults are

 

If you get caught you get caught.

The purpose of the Enchantment fines is to deter people from breaking the rules: if the fine was soft everyone would be back there every weekend and the place would be too trashed to ever clean up.

 

 

Very True if you get caught. What's to get "caught" if you really didnt do anything that bad? Educating people is ok but to harrass them is different. There are better ways of dealing with this. If they want to enforce what the public needs do it. JUST DO IT RIGHT. Consider the theft and other issues as a priority if we want to charge people to camp AND park back there. There is no sense that the Deforest Service cares about anything other than collecting money. This sends a message to the public People want results that are reasonable.

 

For the last two seasons the wilderness program has only had one vehicle, one full time year-round employee, and a pile of shitty worn out gear from the early 90s.)

 

Like I mentioned before- nobody resents a respectable honest person working for them. We all just judge them on personal experiences. There is no real excuse for harrassment if it is not warranted.

 

I don't like to pay it either, and I often times don't, but at least I don't lie to myself and others about why I don't pay.

 

There are no lies here on my side. I understand you have some insight. Dont be too self righteous since you have worked for them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[slothrop]

The helicopters and trash around the dams (Snow, Colchuck and Klonaqua esp.) are from the irrigation companies.

 

Well if the deforest service is allowing them in there then they are to blame and that was the entire point. It doesnt matter who owns the land it's on if it fucks up the wilderness. They seem concerned about bolting in some places but a nice shitload of crap in the wilderness is ok.

 

I think NxNW's point was that the USFS *isn't* letting them dump all that shit. They try to catch them doing it, but it's impossible with the number of staff they have. It's helicopter vs. ranger on foot.

 

Thanks for the insight, NxNW. I wondered why the tool got nice SUVs and computers, etc., while the stuff that really matters, backcountry maintenance, gets little funding. Bad policy decision, especially when you see that only fine collection, not real law enforcement, gets done with that money.

 

I wonder why the USFS cops have such a bad reputation for being meter-maids who are useless for tracking down real criminals? There are LE officers who aren't assholes like that and do get the dirty work done -- why don't any of them work for the USFS?

[mattp]

NbyNW-

I agree that the primary reason all of us are griping about the fees (both parking fees and wilderness fees) is that it is inconvenient and annoying. I also agree that we climbers often expect special privileges in our use of public lands. But you and Rat suggest that we should appreciate the fact that forest practices have improved in recent years, and that there are hard working and underpaid wilderness rangers who truly care about the mountain environment, and somehow you both imply that this should affect our overall confidence in the United States Forest Service. Again, I will repeat myself to say that the USFS has presided over the full-scale rape of our national forest land, and I will note that even Rat, in his well-written defense of modern forest practices alluded to the fact that changes in the institutional program have primarily come about not through the efforts of the "good guys" within the agency, but through the effects of lawsuits and other political pressure from outside the organization. The vibrant mountain forests have almost entirely been removed and replaced with tree farms, and this had been overseen and facilitated by the USFS. It is not inaccurate to call it deforestation, and while it may not be nice, I believe the moniker "deforest service" may well be more accurate than "forest service."

 

I am glad there are some good people there and I am sure there always have been. I attended a thoughtful presentation on the use of funds generated by the Fee Demo program in Mount Baker Snoqualmie National Forest and I believe that this program probably is, as you say, an important source of funding for trail maintenance and wilderness management programs. But as you know, the law enforcement officer who enforces that program in the Leavenworth Ranger District is a complete jerk and every encounter with him only further's our anger over the fees and our mistrust of the District management. You are right, that change will not come from playing games with Larry the Tool, but can you blame anybody who feels that this is an appropriate response to being harassed by him?

 

I acknowledged in my first post that the permit system has led to some meadow recovery in the Enchantment basin. But I have already stated how I think it is not the right tool for the job, and I think there is some validity to the idea that the system places a particular burden on climbers who may require flexibility so they can go when snow or weather conditions will be favorable and may require a permit that will allow them to camp near their objective. Most climbers that I know are simply NOT able to hike in and climb, say, the South Face of Prussik Peak or Backbone Ridge on Dragontail and then hike out in a single day. And I bet that, on average, climbing teams in the wilderness are probably smaller in number and less likely to want to have a campfire or to dig trenches around their tent or to leave trash behind than are those who go there to hike and hunt and fish. In wilderness areas around Leavenworth, climbers almost certainly do have less overall impact than hikers, hunters, fishermen, and horse packers.

 

For thirty years, I have found the Leavenworth rangers to be hostile to my climbing objectives while the forests around there have just about all been carted off to the mill. A weekend backpacking trip costs $70.00 and I am liable to get a ticket for even an inadvertent violation of some rule because the employees think they have heard it all and therefore cannot cut anybody any slack. I'm sorry, but I cannot really find much to appreciate about the fees or the way in which they are administered in the Leavenworth area.

[Geek_the_Greek]

A few facts (and the odd opinion) to clarify some issues here:

 

In the thirties and earlier, the big timber companies (with their own private land) pressured the forest service to limit cutting. They knew that they were competing for wood buyers and didn't want the market flooded. Later, during the fifties, the FS was under pressure from smaller companies (who needed access to the public timber), and increased cutting steadily, under the auspices of "community stability" (jobs for local logger-types). This was perhaps a bad move, since it was never mandated, and set a precedent that remains to this day (that the FS is somehow responsible for maintaining jobs for local loggers).

 

The "high point" of logging on National Forest land came in 1989, when 12 billion board feet of timber were cut, much of it from around here (WA, OR, etc.). In contrast, about 2 billion a year are cut nowadays, a number the W administration is making clear they want to increase.

 

Since 1897, when the Organic Act was passed, management of NF land was heavily regulated at the national level. In 1966, 1976, and 1994 (locally), additional national level acts were passed regulating logging practices and forest management on NF lands. None of these laws has ever been repealed, so that now, effectively, self-contradicting laws are under effect. The result of this is clear: since the passage of the NW forest plan in 1994, EVERY SINGLE timber sale in the NW has been contested in court. And yes, these days, timber sales, the framework for which are mandated by law, usually lose money for the FS.

 

The take-home message for me is that, if you're concerned about logging on public lands near you, don't bug the forest service - they can't do anything about it. Contact your local member of congress, senator, or whoever. The big issues are out of the hands of the local FS workers on the ground, and has been for a long time. Of course they often implement the law in their own ways, and can tweak it here of there, but ultimately they answer to the folks in DC.

 

The other thing to keep in mind is that we're not talking about big companies here. The Weyerheausers and International Papers don't give a shit about FS land - in fact, they were big supporters of the NW forest plan - because their dollars come from private land. If you talk about rules for manging private land (like the recent Forests and Fish agreement in WA), that's the stuff that affects them. The companies that log NF land are smaller and mid-size companies (like Simson, for example, out in the Olympics, who were hit hard by the NW forest plan).

 

Note that I'm not talking about permit enforcement at all here, which I have little experience with. I buy permits now and then, and occasionally don't, and haven't had any real mishaps surrounding these.

 

Don't get me started on fire issues. The type of thinning that works for forest protection is the type that costs money, and doesn't give any revenue (because it involves cutting non-commercial saplings and shrubbery and pruning low branches). Bush's plan for forest health is a total smokescreen for increased logging, which is mostly planned in the form of clearcutting and salvage, which do nothing to help forest health.

 

[edited to change a few dates]

Edited February 5, 2003 by Geek_the_Greek

[allison]

Geek, you took the words right out of my mouth.

 

My dad is a log scaler for Puget Sound Log Scaling and Grading Bureau. He has worked there for 30 years. They grade everything that is logged, in the whole state now, if I am not mistaken, and he tells me that there is virtually nothing being cut in NF land right now.

 

With W's thugs working hard now, this too could change. In spite of egregious overcutting in the 80s, there are some mature stands in non-Wilderness areas in this state.

 

As far as the permit issue, I have to once again express my frustration with climbers in general thinking they are somehow better users than others. Sorry folks, there is no difference between people climbing and people not climbing in the Wilderness. They still carry loads through the woods, and eat, sleep, and poop, whether there is a rope in their pack or not. Fees and permits are a nuisance, but aside from the $30 parking pass, special permits and fees are only required in a small part of the Cascades, one that would be severely impacted by an unlimited number of hikers and climbers.

[Attitude]

A few facts (and the odd opinion) to clarify some issues here:

 

Hey dude,

 

Let's not let a few facts get in the way of good spray...

 

Rock on!

 

[Winter]

Geek -

 

Where did you get these facts?

 

1. The Forest Service got out 2 billion board feet last year. How much of that was in the PNW?

 

2. Every single timber sale since the NWFP has been litigated.

 

I think its wrong to discourage people from working with the local districts on logging and old-growth protections. I've seen it done on both the Siskiyou and the Gifford Pinchot, and it can work if done right. My congressional delegation, democrats included, has screwed us every step of the way for the past couple years.

[Jim]

Latest PNW Forest Plan report say the USFW sold 87 million board feet in CA, OR, and WA combined.

[Winter]

You can get NF sale figures here.

 

NF volume figures

 

Keep in mind that volume sold is far different from volume cut.

 

Region 6 is the Pacific Northwest, but some of these forests are east side and not manageed under the Northwest Forest Plan.

[Geek_the_Greek]

Volumes cut and sold per fiscal quarter are posted here (FY 2002: ~1.7 billion board feet cut nationally if you add up the 4 totals).

 

The bit about every timber sale being challenged in court was verbatim from a professor of mine (and come to think of it, I don't remember what region he was referring to), so maybe I should have qualified that before posting it.

[Geek_the_Greek]

I think its wrong to discourage people from working with the local districts on logging and old-growth protections. I've seen it done on both the Siskiyou and the Gifford Pinchot, and it can work if done right. My congressional delegation, democrats included, has screwed us every step of the way for the past couple years.

 

I agree. Especially things like encouraging local FS employees to view climbers in a positive (or at least fair?) way are really valuable, I think. I just think that if anyone's expecting any sort of huge change to FS mandate ("stop raping the forest" kind of stuff), it's the DC folks that need to hear it (including FS headquarters), not the local district or research station or seasonal employee or other small peon.

[allison]

There is one thing about the Enchantment permit district thing that I am curious about: Why is it such a big area? To include the Lost World Plateau, Edward Mesa, Druid Plateau, and Temple Canyon, well, I just don't see why they did. There is not a lot of traffic back there, and of course there is no trail or any possible way anyone could get there either.

 

Anyone know why all of that was drawn into the protected area?

[North_by_Northwest]

I don't think anyone who cares about the environment at all can argue that the Enchantments don't need to be managed as a recreation area. The place would be destroyed if it wasn't for a system limiting use: the Enchantment Permit system.

 

Nobody cares when they are getting harrassed. It's all the same govt to anyone out there. Nobody resents any good work they do. But lets talk about where the major faults are

 

The point here is that the Enchantment Permit fees go to fund the management of the Enchantments. If you pay the fees you are not donating money to deforestation or asshole LE Rangers, you are donating money to restoring alpine meadows and protecting the Enchantments through permit management. Money from the Fee Demo goes to rec and wilderness projects and money from the Enchantment Permit system goes to the management of the Enchantments. More specifically, money from the Enchantment Permits goes to pay one wilderness ranger to be in the 'chants every weekend for the season, and to pay the administrative costs of the permit system (printing permits, etc.)

 

Matt -Whether or not your moniker for the FS has any truth behind it has no relevance to the Fee Demo or the Enchantment Permits. The branches of the FS that deal with timber sales and such do not recieve money from the Fee Demo or the Enchantments Permits.

True, the permit system is not the most convenient for climbers, but we can all work around it. There's lots that can be done in a day, and plenty of opportunity to get permits. Maybe those who don't want to get permits should wait until they can do it in a day.

If FS people have had negative responses to your climbing goals it is probably because climbers are always trying to find exceptions to the rules and many feel they are better or cleaner than other users. When I worked I often got the cold shoulder from climbers who passed me on the trail, and usually I was just interested in what route they were doing, what conditions were, etc., not harassing. (For the record, I never gave out a ticket when I was a ranger, but dealt with a whole lot of shit from people.)

The situation would be better if climbers were a little more friendly to the FS.

 

 

I wonder why the USFS cops have such a bad reputation for being meter-maids who are useless for tracking down real criminals? There are LE officers who aren't assholes like that and do get the dirty work done -- why don't any of them work for the USFS?

 

Because being an FS LE Ranger is a cush job-no danger, just pissed off climbers. It attracts cops who can't cut it in the big city. Larry the Tool probably took his current position after being politely excused from the LAPD for beating innocent children or something. It would be nice to get a few good cops in the woods-there is one in Lworth, an old retired Scandanavian guy who's pretty decent to deal with. He doesn't work much though.

 

Dont be too self righteous since you have worked for them.

 

I'm not trying to be self righteous Ray. I just find it really frustrating when people don't know the facts. I'm not saying we should all pay the parking fees, as I said: I don't always pay. I just get so sick of people saying they are protesting the Fee Demo for whatever reason-it's a weak argument.

The fact is we just don't want to pay. And that's alright with me as long as we all know why we're not paying-it's an inconvenience and a pain-and not getting the facts wrong about where the money goes.

 

I didn't mean to flame so much in my original post, I hold much respect for both Matt and Ray as climbers and as good company. I just find this situation really frustrating-I think there is a lot of misunderstanding everywhere.

[ScottP]

Like I mentioned before- nobody resents a respectable honest person working for them. We all just judge them on personal experiences. There is no real excuse for harrassment if it is not warranted.

Amen to that.

 

"We cannot expect people to have respect for law and order until we teach respect to those we have entrusted to enforce the laws."

-HST

[North_by_Northwest]

That's a nice HST quote ScottP.

 

I agree that Larry the Tool and most of his Law Enforcement Rangers are serious cocks with a big hard-on for anyone they can bust.

He's not the one enforcing the Enchantments Permit system though, the people who do are the honest and hard working ones that have the best interest of the area in mind.

 

 

[allthumbs]

Rangers can't cut it as real cops, hence the attitude.

[North_by_Northwest]

Way to paraphrase Trask...

One clarification though:

 

Law Enforcement Rangers can't cut it as real cops, hence the attitude.

 

 

[allthumbs]

whatever professor

[Pencil_Pusher]

There are exceptions I'm sure. While on an un-named outing up the W Ridge Forbidden, we couldn't get a permit so we each carried something miniscule for a bivy "if it came down to that". No sleeping pads to make us look suspicious. Leaving the TH at 8am was how it began. We bivied and damn if that wasn't the best bivy conditions a climber could ever ask for with what little we had.

On the way out we met Mr. Ranger with the badge on his chest and gun on his hip. He scoped out our small packs, asked us if we bivied up there and if we had a permit. We told him we bivied up there due to the late hour and that we did not have a permit. Well the guy was pretty damned nice about it and said he'd been in a similar position a couple of times. He let us go with a, "Have a good day," as we fled for our lives from the biting flies.

We knew the difference between right and wrong and, as stated in this thread, convenience was the reason we chose to break the law.

[Dru]

if they dont see you bivy, just tell em you are doing or have been doing a single push style ascent and on the go overnight with no bivy. no evidence = unprovable case = no fine

[Weekend_Climberz]

This is where I messed up, I should have just told the chode that we were day hiking or something. We had stashed our overburdened packs near Lake Viviane and kept hiking with just day packs, but I was ignorant enough to think he was just chit-chatting.