Alex_Mineev Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Has anybody been there recently? Should I expect lots of snow? I've been around Chinook pass this Saturday and there was about a foot of fresh snow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 The snow level has been below that lake since Friday, and it was a little wet over there this weekend. I'd expect at least SOME snow. Probably not much, though, and you might still find bare ground under some of the trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klenke Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 I was climbing in the area southwest of Stuart yesterday. The new snow level started at about 5,000 ft. About two inches on the ground at 5,800 ft. Snow was wet and, except for in shaded areas, proceeded to melt in the next few hours I was up at that level. I'd expect you'd find lingering patches of snow at Lake Colchuck (5,570 ft) if it has been sunny. If it has been shaded (overcast), I'd expect two or three inches on the ground. Keep in mind though that where I was by Cle Elum Lake may be totally different to the Colchuck Lake area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted October 15, 2003 Share Posted October 15, 2003 Here's the conditions as of Sunday. I don't think things have changed much since then because the snow level doesn't seemed to have dropped much lower than it was on Sunday, but I'm sure the upper enchantments have a few more inches of snow though. There were knee deep snow drifts in places in the upper enchantments, but overall there was only a few inches of snow on the ground. Colchuck Lake and Aasgard Pass on Sunday October 13th, 2003 Upper Enchantments, 7,800', Isolation Lake, just over and to the SE of Aasgard Pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
specialed Posted October 15, 2003 Share Posted October 15, 2003 Nice pics Tod. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted October 15, 2003 Share Posted October 15, 2003 So this mean that you can now drive up to the colchuck lake trailhead once more, or is the forest diservice still fucking around with the bridge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted October 15, 2003 Share Posted October 15, 2003 Bridges are done, paved and look beautiful. Road and trails are STILL closed from Eightmile trailhead to the Colchuck Lake trail junction. It's frustrating and stupid that the Forest Service would close the trailhead when it's an easy walk from the Eightmile trailhead, particularly now when the bridges are done and there seems to be no reason to have the road and trailhead closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To_The_Top Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I think that they are still closed because they have yet to be inspected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Do they have to have an inspector when they make a creek crossing for foot travel (i.e. log bridges on trails)? They could have designated the road "trail" during the construction period, thrown log bridges across the creeks for foot traffic. As for now, I agree that they need inspectors for the bridges, but not for foot traffic. The bridges are fine and there is no reason to have the road/trail closed to foot access. My two cents.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I their mind, they figure, "who would want to walk a road?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klenke Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Heck, if you're on foot, who needs the bridges anyway? Both creeks can be stone-hopped, or forded if necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Caveman Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 klenke said: Heck, if you're on foot, who needs the bridges anyway? Both creeks can be stone-hopped, or forded if necessary. I agree and implied that weeks ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 klenke said: Heck, if you're on foot, who needs the bridges anyway? Both creeks can be stone-hopped, or forded if necessary. That's a given, but when your the FS, nothing is a given. Regardless of whether there is an incomplete, vehicle bridge, completed vehicle bridge, foot bridge, or a boulder hopping ford the road/trail should never have been closed. The FS screwed up on this one big time. You've got one of the most popular sought after backcountry areas in the country closed off for 2 miles because two 100' sections are under construction. Since this virtually closed off access to the Colchuck and Stuart Lake area it shut down abot 1/4 of the area for an indefinite period of time. The only detour available is a 14+ mile hike. Give me a break! This is the backcountry, how hard is it to let people detour around 200' of bridgework and up 1/2 mile of road on foot? When a busy highway is underconstruction they rarely close the highway. If they do close the road they do it for short periods (night time) or offer a realistic detour. In this case they should have offer a detour... I guess it's pointless arguing this here since we are all frustrated for the same reason. Too bad there's no one here from the Leavenworth RS to respond... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HRoark Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Tod, I would presume that the FS looks at the logistics of rescue, as well, when they close the road. I agree with you, but looking at the other side that's what I come up with. Granted, they could helo all the way into Colchuck Lake if they had to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 I just called the ranger station to attempt some follow-up after last weekend's ropeup, and the guy at the main reception desk told me that the Eightmile / Mountaineer Creek road reopened today at noon. I asked him about why it had been closed so long and he pointed out that it actually reopened ahead of schedule, but he also explained that the project was complicated by the fact that the bridges were not rated for heavy construction equipment so they couldn't get all their equipment over to both sides of the creek, and they had to replace the lower one first, and the upper one second. Also, he noted, they had to wait something like 3 weeks for the footers to set up each time they poured a new one. I asked him if there was any reason they couldn't have allowed hikers through the area in the meantime, and he said that it was part of the contact that they not allow it. He said that the contractors do not want the liability for possibly having the public around the construction activity, and this is a standard contract provision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klenke Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 "...he said that it was part of the contract that they not allow it. He said that the contractors do not want the liability for possibly having the public around the construction activity, and this is a standard contract provision." This is what I was thinking may be the case: that, if the road wasn't entirely closed, they'd have way too many people traipsing past the construction site(s). A road closure would deter such abundance of hikers. They could have built a temporary trail around the construction sites but this would have damaged the environment. Or, if they would be driving equipment trucks and the like up and down the road at regular intervals, then they wouldn't want to have to worry about pedestrians on the road that might get run over, etc. Maybe that's why the contract was written like it was. Either way, sucks to be someone trying to access Colchuck Lake, Stuart Lake, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marylou Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 That's a gorgeous shot of Colchuck/Aasgard, Tod. Nice to hear the road is open again already. That didn't take long at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.