Ready to Pay for NoCa Visits?

[Blake]

It looks like next year the NCNP will be going to a reservation-with-fee system for overnight stays. The current plan is for the costs to be $10 per person per Permit, and I'm not sure on the maximum time for the permits. I expect enforcement and ticketing to increase as well, now that there is a monetary incentive. NPS employess with whom I've talked are not happy, but the decision was made at a higher level.

[knelson]

Do you mean that they are going to a reservation system, with a reservation fee, but there will still be free day-of-climb permits available? Or ALL permits will cost $$?

 

I'm guessing their just copying Rainier's policy - the overnight permit is free, but if you want it earlier than 24 hrs before, you pay a "reservation" fee. Or am I wrong on this?

 

-kurt

[Blake]

The current plan is that you will pay for the mandatory overnight permits, $10 for each person, whether it's one night or 5 nights. Instead of only getting permits the day of, or the day before you start camping, you will be able to reserve them before in some capacity. As I understand, it wont matter whether you get your permit reserved, or "day of" you still pay the fee.

[klenke]

Will the fees collected stay in the park? That would be nice and I'd be more apt to pay the fees if they were. It would be nice if they could then afford to do something like, oh, I don't know, say REMOVE THE WINDFALL FROM THE BOSTON BASIN TRAIL. That windfall--especially through the old avy slide area--has obviously been there a while. But nooo, can't clear that. Too busy finding people to hassle and cars to ticket.

[graupel]

Blake, you sure you have that right? Didn't Rainier drop fees for backcountry camping (while still retaining the summit fees)?

 

Just the notion of $10 for camping regardless of whether in advance or not sounds like a huge change in policy. I would understand it if they were mimicing the advanced permit system like for Rainier.

[philfort]

Will the fees collected stay in the park? That would be nice and I'd be more apt to pay the fees if they were. It would be nice if they could then afford to do something like, oh, I don't know, say REMOVE THE WINDFALL FROM THE BOSTON BASIN TRAIL. That windfall--especially through the old avy slide area--has obviously been there a while. But nooo, can't clear that. Too busy finding people to hassle and cars to ticket.

 

Or too busy rebuilding the parking lot. What is up with that? They've done all these renovations at the Cascade Pass parking lot. The dirt path connecting the two parts of the lot is now wide gravel walkway with stylish stone walls. In fact the whole parking lot has stone walls, and the beginning of the trail has been re-routed (I suppose the first 10 feet of the trail was too steep or something ). They really moved some earth around. Who knows what that cost - what a freaking waste of money.

Edited July 25, 2005 by philfort

[marylou]

I asked the Park Superintendent about this last night at the fish stocking public hearing in Bellevue. He said that if they ever do fees for backcountry camping, it won't be until 2007 at the very earliest, and it would be rolled together with a more sophisticated reservations system that would no longer require being at the Marblemount RS at 7 am to get a permit.

[AlpinistAndrew]

Yeah, 2007 at the earliest. I personally don't like the idea. I don't know about the rest of you, but I generally don't plan ahead usually. More spur of the moment trips dependent on weather. I like the current system, though in some situations the reservations might be nice.

[kurthicks]

It would be nice if they could then afford to do something like, oh, I don't know, say REMOVE THE WINDFALL FROM THE BOSTON BASIN TRAIL. That windfall--especially through the old avy slide area--has obviously been there a while. But nooo, can't clear that.

 

this would happen if it were an "official" trail, but it's just a climber's path. Same thing with the parking area. Cascade Pass, on the other hand, is an offical NPS trail and, as such, recieves funding for maintenance.

[dbb]

this would happen if it were an "official" trail, but it's just a climber's path. Same thing with the parking area. Cascade Pass, on the other hand, is an offical NPS trail and, as such, recieves funding for maintenance.

 

Yes, but they still require you to have a trail park pass at that "trailhead" (along with Eldorado too). I think the real reason they don't clear a trail through the windfall is b/c it's in a wilderness area.

[sobo]

...I think the real reason they don't clear a trail through the windfall is b/c it's in a wilderness area.

 

What's that supposed to mean? I see these groups of kids every summer in wilderness areas all over WA that are out clearing/rerouting trail all summer long. I've even run into the same group of kids several times in the same year in widely separated wilderness areas. No, they are NOT volunteers (although the pay is miserable by any standard), so I think it's probably a money issue more than a wilderness issue. And no, they don't get to use powered machinery. It's all sledge hammers, hand saws, and machetes for these kids. I give them a great big

[AlpinistAndrew]

Boston Basin route is not an official trail, it is just really heavily used, so they will not do any trail work there because its not a actual trail. it is in the wilderness, but that doesn't really matter, most of the trails in the park are in wilderness and they do trail work on them, but just the "official" trails

[sobo]

well, that makes more sense than the "because it's in a wilderness area" argument.

[klenke]

What Sobo said regarding wilderness trails. You will note many wilderness trails have been cleared of windfall in the past. The evidence is right there on the ground before you (sawn logs).

 

Regarding the Boston Basin "trail" I seem to recall some evidence of prior maintenance, just not through the old avy swath. BB is worthy enough to put in toilets and station a ranger, so why not clear the trail? For an unofficial trail it sure does look pretty official...especially considering what has been stated before that they require a "TRAIL"park pass to park there.

 

The number of people going up there is pretty significant {over 1,000 people in 2003 alone}. The bad thing is clearing the trail would only increase the touron traffic.

[chris]

I thought North Cascades had a cap on total trail mileage in the park. If it starts to officially maintain the Boston Basin trail - which it never has - than it would have to stop maintaining an equivalent amount of trail somewhere else. The lower Boston Basin trail was originally a road leading to a prospect mine and cabin. The maintenance evident on the trail is clandestine.