Mountain Loop Fiasco

[sirwoofalot]

Just to update my last post:

 

The girl has been found deceased.

 

Very, very sad.

 

The location of the trail they took is really close to the one in the original post. I for one am now quite curious if any more vehicles were towed today in the area and if (or not) such an action could have made things worse in this incident. I hope not, but if it did, someone should pay big time for it.

 

I saw this on the news last night, and saw the sign for the Lake 22 TH.

 

[spotly]

Sheriffs are elected? Do they have to have any education in law of any kind?

 

No, but in Snohomish Co, both outgoing Sheriff Rick Bart, and especially new Sheriff John Lovick are very well qualified.

 

Would you vote for a County Auditor or Treasurer who wasn't a CPA? Voters (often) have common sense

 

Yes, because the choice is which is "most" qualified. Too bad there isn't a choice of "Neither" on the ballot! If all of the candidates sucked (the case in many elections) one will still get elected.

[cfire]

Just to clarify some earlier questions. This was not the "end" of the road. It was an abitrary place the Sno Co sheriff closed the road due to excessive snow and treefall. The plows continued through during the day the cars were there. The odd thing is they closed the road about 100 yard before there was a much more logical place to do it at the intersection to the Mt Pilchuk Rd where there would be ample parking off of the main road.

 

I have talked to the Deputy in charge of that area after he talked to the deputy that was there. The County road crew had called the sheriff and asked that they remove the cars as the road was down to one lane which posed a safety hazard. This is somewhat laughable as the road was choked to one lane 50 feet past the closed sign due to work on the bridge. Even so, I mentioned that the safety hazard of having 18 car loads of people stuck on the road with no transportation in the dead of winter was a much greater safety hazard than a one lane road in the mountains. He did state that there was a ranger station only 3/4 of a mile away. "But they're closed and I don't want my kid walking down a dark road after a full day of hiking just to get to a closed ranger station". "Yeah, but they have a phone"??? Now I'm laughing, although it wasn't a funny funny laugh. "If you all didn't want cars there, why didn't they put no parking signs up?" "Well that's up to the road crew".

 

 

He did state that he directed his ranger to not tow cars in the future if there were safety hazards.

 

...letters have been written, and not just by me...

 

[high_on_rock]

Most of the people in our system are not "evil," merely often have a different viewpoint and believe that they are right. Like dealing with some of the stronger personalities on this board, once they think they are right, they put their back against the wall and fight. If you can deal with them rationally before getting their backs against the wall, try to educate them, most problems are solvable. If that doesn't work, shoot the bastards and ....

[cfire]

Most of the people in our system are not "evil," merely often have a different viewpoint and believe that they are right. Like dealing with some of the stronger personalities on this board, once they think they are right, they put their back against the wall and fight. If you can deal with them rationally before getting their backs against the wall, try to educate them, most problems are solvable. If that doesn't work, shoot the bastards and ....

 

I thought that is what I was doing by rationally talking to the Supervisor, letting him know my concerns and the reasons, allowing him to investigate before taking it any farther, and letting him state his case, which I found to be weak in the end. The next step is taking higher up.

 

I never thought they were "evil" or doing it to be asses, but there is a definate lack of clear risk management practices in this case in my opinion.

[high_on_rock]

I'm sorry cfire, my comment was not aimed at you, more of a general response toward some of the other comments. Bad on me.

 

my point is merely that most people are not of evil intent. Whenever we start thinking in life that someone is acting purely without care or remorse, it is probably a misunderstanding that merely needs better communication. Sounds to me like a letter writing campaign is underway to further the communication, it will probably all be worked out soon.

 

Good on you for getting it done.

[Bill_Simpkins]

When the government makes a decision, they should make it in the best interest of the people. This decision was clearly not in the best interest of the people and was probably more motived by money. When there is 18*$193 involved there is clearly a motive, other than the best interest of the people, to tow those cars.

 

It is upsetting when the government, on any level, makes decisions against the peoples will. There is a law against that, and it is called the constitution. Every chance they get, they try to soften this law so they can get away with more. I am glad people are going after this towing matter because on a moral level, towing the cars was wrong. People NEED to hold on to whatever dignity we have left. Don't just blow things like this off. Please.

 

[cfire]

I'm sorry cfire, my comment was not aimed at you, more of a general response toward some of the other comments. Bad on me.

 

my point is merely that most people are not of evil intent. Whenever we start thinking in life that someone is acting purely without care or remorse, it is probably a misunderstanding that merely needs better communication. Sounds to me like a letter writing campaign is underway to further the communication, it will probably all be worked out soon.

 

Good on you for getting it done.

 

It's all good

 

[needtoclimb]

When the government makes a decision, they should make it in the best interest of the people. This decision was clearly not in the best interest of the people and was probably more motived by money. When there is 18*$193 involved there is clearly a motive, other than the best interest of the people, to tow those cars.

 

What? You confuse me. Who was motivated by money? The $193 was a towing fee, most likely to a private tow company. The deputy does not get a dime, the sheriff department does not get a dime, and the county would make a pittance, if anything. No, it was not about money, not at all. It was for the reason the deputy gave, though I agree that it was a pretty weak arguement without much though involved.

 

Unless, you think it was a vast conpsiracy with the tow company? Maybe the tow truck driver called into the county to set the whole thing up? OF course, that must be it.

[Bug]

Chill.

This is about people being stranded and hypothermic.

Work the problem.

If every one of us writes to the sherrif dept and gets one other unrelated person to do so, they will get the message.

 

Anybody happen to have the address?

[Bill_Simpkins]

When the government makes a decision, they should make it in the best interest of the people. This decision was clearly not in the best interest of the people and was probably more motived by money. When there is 18*$193 involved there is clearly a motive, other than the best interest of the people, to tow those cars.

 

What? You confuse me. Who was motivated by money? The $193 was a towing fee, most likely to a private tow company. The deputy does not get a dime, the sheriff department does not get a dime, and the county would make a pittance, if anything. No, it was not about money, not at all. It was for the reason the deputy gave, though I agree that it was a pretty weak arguement without much though involved.

 

Unless, you think it was a vast conpsiracy with the tow company? Maybe the tow truck driver called into the county to set the whole thing up? OF course, that must be it.

 

I am simply stating that there is a motive to do such a thing. I didn't say that WAS the motive. However, based on this discussion, there doesn't seem to be many other possible motives for doing such a irrational thing that may outweigh this one, other that sheer stupidity or ego. Thus, it may be worth looking into. Having the tow truck operator put $1000 in the pocket of the deputy for hooking him up with the business isn't that unrealistic. Should be considered. It wouldn't be a vast conspiracy, but lining peoples pockets like this goes on every day all around you at every level since the beginning of time. Most people doing something like this on such a small level would probably assume no one would ever dig far enough or even consider such a thing, thus they think they can get away with it.

 

“Follow the dirt and it leads to money. Follow the money and it leads to power. This maxim has rarely let me down.”

-- Simon Jenkins

 

 

[needtoclimb]

 

I am simply stating that there is a motive to do such a thing. I didn't say that WAS the motive. However, based on this discussion, there doesn't seem to be many other possible motives for doing such a irrational thing that may outweigh this one, other that sheer stupidity or ego. Thus, it may be worth looking into. Having the tow truck operator put $1000 in the pocket of the deputy for hooking him up with the business isn't that unrealistic. Should be considered. It wouldn't be a vast conspiracy, but lining peoples pockets like this goes on every day all around you at every level since the beginning of time. Most people doing something like this on such a small level would probably assume no one would ever dig far enough or even consider such a thing, thus they think they can get away with it.

 

Wasn't meaning to jump on you like that Bill, was just having a bad day. However, you are mistaken. Having the tow truck driver give a kick back to the deputy is possible, but implausible. As much as the media likes to portray, there is very little law enforcement corruption on the west coast. LE out here is seen much more professional as say, Detroit or New Orleans. Several months ago the Seattle PI did a huge investigative report on officer corruption. What did they come up with? A couple of officers may (may have, wasn't proven that they did) have lied on a report. That is the extent of it.

 

Most LE over here is not going to risk a $70k a year job for a measly kickback from a tow operator. Every meet a tow truck driver? Trust him to keep his mouth shut about something like this? No way. It just isn't plausible.

 

The reasoning that you discounted, sheer stupidity or ego, is actually much more reasonable. Every get into an argument with some who is blatantly wrong, but refused to see your point? That is human nature. Or how about plain ol' ignorance? That is usually the case. The deputy doesn't understand the implications because he has never set foot on a trail. (Much like how the layman can say the cop is being dumb, having never seen it from the perspective of the cop.)

 

This is what I meant to say the first time, but was a little frustrated and pressed for time. Hope this makes more sense.

 

P.S. To have things looked into, you need to have a reason to look into it. Otherwise, it is just a fishing expedition.

[Bug]

Mailing Address:

Snohomish County Sherriff

3000 Rockefeller, M/S 606

Everett, WA 98201

 

 

Main Phone: 425-388-3393

[riverdweller]

I heard about this forum and when I read the comments and I just had to register and give my input. I live on the Mt Loop Hwy in Verlot, less than a mile east of the spot where people parked on the road on New Year’s Eve. We got so much snow between Christmas and that day that the snow plows couldn’t keep up most days. It’s typical for people to travel to the end of the road at Deer Creek and park there. However, the roads were hazardous and trees were down at Red bridge, blocking the road there. On Sun. 12/30, a road closure sign was put up at the Verlot Ranger station.

On the day in question, a neighbor came to my house and was ranting about people parking right in the roadway. I left with her and was completely shocked to see that it was true. The entire eastbound lane, going around a blind curve, was blocked with a long line of vehicles (heading westbound in the eastbound lane). They were not on the shoulder because no shoulder had been plowed (and never was that day because the plow couldn’t do that side of the road thanks to the cars). I don’t know if the people claiming to be on the shoulder innocently mistook the double yellow line they were parked on as the marking for a shoulder? The road was reduced to one lane around a curve and pretty scary to drive around – I just had to hope that no one was coming around that curve in my lane.

We have lived up here for 15 years and I have never seen such an outrageous thing. The people that were towed made a choice to travel beyond a road closure sign and then chose to use an entire lane of travel for parking. They put themselves and those of us who live here at risk. The Deputy who responded is being trashed on this forum because people can’t seem to take personal responsibility for their actions. If you are up here and have an accident or some other problem, it is that Deputy that is likely to respond and help you. He responded to a call I made when there was a very scary person sneaking around my property and was very helpful. When I read all of the comments here I promptly contacted the Sheriff’s office with my story and offered to be a witness and I am asking my neighbors who appreciated his response on that day to call and write in as well. He has a hard job and serves our community up here well, and I do not want to lose that resource because people who made poor choices are angry about the consequence.

 

Aside from this one incident, I also want to add that there were other issues during that snowy week that were annoying. People were having their driveways blocked daily by people trying to get to the snow. Someone said that they should have closed the road at Mt Pilchuk because there’s parking there. People that live up that road need to get in and out, and not just when people coming up to play decide they are done parking there. I do not understand where this sense of entitlement comes from. I can’t imagine coming down into neighborhoods in the cities and just deciding that I will park in or across someone’s driveway and then go off to play. Or that I will just park my car in a lane of travel on someone’s street because I want to get somewhere and there isn’t any parking available. I think that people coming up for recreation see those of us who live here as props, or somehow unworthy of the same respect and consideration that they expect where they live. I don’t think it’s much to ask to not have our roadway or our driveways blocked, even if it is more convenient to do so.

 

[MarkMcJizzy]

. Having the tow truck operator put $1000 in the pocket of the deputy for hooking him up with the business isn't that unrealistic. Should be considered.

 

This statement seems way out of line

Edited January 12, 2008 by Markmckillop

[dmuja]

..The Deputy who responded is being trashed on this forum because people can’t seem to take personal responsibility for their actions. If you are up here and have an accident or some other problem, it is that Deputy that is likely to respond and help you. He responded to a call I made when there was a very scary person sneaking around my property and was very helpful. When I read all of the comments here I promptly contacted the Sheriff’s office with my story and offered to be a witness and I am asking my neighbors who appreciated his response on that day to call and write in as well. He has a hard job and serves our community up here well, and I do not want to lose that resource because people who made poor choices are angry about the consequence....

 

riverdweller,

 

I don't think the intent (by most) is to "trash the deputy" for doing his job, some people do feel strongly about how the problem was handled however and are likely just venting a bit. I think the strong reaction is because most of us have parked in questionable positions at some time to gain access to the back country and just the thought of "dying because my car got towed" kind of rubs one the wrong way a wee bit. Most of us though are just imagining the scenario because we wernt there. Maybe the its the DOT or FS that could handle things better with clearer signs and more sensible closings or directions and so forth. People make mistakes - cops, recreationers/campers alike. Maybe some better communication is in order by all parties.

 

Thnks for your post

[Bug]

Thanks for your side RD.

It pretty much clears the deputy in my mind.

Still have to wonder what would happen in an emergency.

But it sounds like there was poor judgement used by the people parking.

[needtoclimb]

They park on the side of the road at the road closure along with several other cars at the red bridge on the side of the road and head up the pilchuk road.

 

If the Tool had a real problem with the cars there on the side of the road, write a ticket and be happy that you made the county some cash. The road was not blocked.

 

 

Hmmm, riverdweller seems to directly contradict what you told us. So, were they or were they not parked directly on the road? You said your friend took pictures. Look close to see if they were off the road or not.

 

That makes it real tough. If there was an emergency and all the cars are towed, then what? But if there was a head-on collision because the cars were taking up a lane, would this have become a 7 page forum? I'm not sure what middle ground action could have been taken. If the only way to clear the road was to tow them, then that was the appropriate action. I was under the belief that all the cars were parked on the shoulder, and that the road was clear both directions.

 

The best course of action is always hindsight.

[AlpineK]

I was under the belief that all the cars were parked on the shoulder, and that the road was clear both directions.

 

That's the impression I had too.

[Bug]

By the time the person telling the story got back, there were already a lot of cars towed. That could be cause for discepencies in the stories.

[mattp]

I don't understand the idea that there could have been a head on collision as a result of parked cars taking up one lane. Wasn't the whole point here that this was the end of the plowed portion of the road - and that is why there was question as to whether the snowplow could turn around? Assuming that somebody with a 4x4 was headed outbound from further up the road, just how fast do you think they might be traveling as they emerge from the snowbound portion of the road and drive on a single lane past a line of cars parked on a curve, or how fast might the inbound driver be going there? How many of us would not proceed quite cautiously in such a location? A head on collision is probably a lot more likely on the plowed portion of the road that did not have one lane blocked, where people might be driving fast enough that a bump or a bit of ice could send them into the other lane.

[ClimbingPanther]

If they were on closed roads or were blocking the actual roadway, then maybe the best course of action would have been to tow the cars to the nearest safe location (ranger station?), ticket them, and mail them a bill from the tow company? No matter how wrong the drivers may have been, it's still unacceptable to put their survival in question in this situation by completely removing their cars & leaving them with no way out. It's just not the same as a city driveway.

[mattp]

Riverdweller raises some valid complaints here, but in my mind they are slightly one-sided. Certainly the whims of somebody heading out to the mountains to play should not override concerns for safety or the ability of local residents to come and go from their homes, but really I'm not sure from that post that either one was really all that compromised.

 

The snow plow operator as well as County officials who decided where to close the road bear some responsibility here as well for setting up a situation where this was really a set-up for trouble. History on this and any other mountain road in Western Washington shows that recreational pressures are great and that people are going to drive right on by if you don't install a gate or at least a sawhorse (and some will ignore the sawhorse). They are idiots and irresponsible ones at that if they thought a "road closed" sign with an obviously plowed road continuing right on by was going to succeed in having recreational users park at the ranger station. Was there any other sign, barrier, warning? I don't know the reality of stopping plowing at some location where they could have plowed the shoulder for parking, but might this have been an option?

[waterboy]

CFire, Do you know if the officer was Michael Gardiner, Jr? If so, he drives a Sherriff's vehicle but actally works for the Forest Service and has been deputized by the county. He is usually the one patrolling up there. I've talked with him on several occasions and he is usually a pretty nice guy. He seems pretty professional and God knows he has a difficult job up there.

 

However, this brings up my beef with him and the Forest Service: He has unilaterally made the decision to permanently (each season) lock the gate for the road to Pilchuck at the Heather Lake TH at a time he determines. This year it was well before there was any snow on the road to Pilchuck. It used to be that the gate was left unlocked, which opened up many more winter recreation opportunities on Mt. Pilchuck. Now, because of the extra 12 miles of round-trip distance, it rules out day-trip skiing and scrambling for a lot of people.

 

I have asked the ranger in Verlot which user-group of the National Forest has advocated the locking of the gate (even before the road is covered in snow)? The Ranger said this was a unilateral decision by officer Gardiner. I asked officer Gardiner why he wanted the gate locked, and his response was it was difficult to Patrol the circus and the riff-raff that usually occurs in the winter time on that road. Seems to me like that is not right - to rule out a great winter recreation resource for thousands of people to make one person's job easier. Now, I realize that there are other (and better) winter recreation venues in western washington, but I do not see why this one should be ruled out. I have written to Officer Gardiner and I encourage you to do the same at mgardiner@fs.fed.us If this does not produce any results I encourage you to write your legislator. I believe the Forest Service's official policy is to manage public resources for the most prominent user-group, which in this case I believe is skiiers and scrambers. I'm sorry for your unpleasant experience and I don't mean to hijack your topic, but I believe that area is being totally mismanaged by our public servants.

 

Thanks

Edited January 13, 2008 by waterboy

[mattp]

Any more thoughts on this?

 

My sense of things is that we are steadily losing recreational access as more and more roads are gaited and enforcement aimed toward pedestrians on the road is stepped up. I think this is happening due to a variety of causes including safety concerns, lack of funding for maintenance or increasing development of homes and vacation property on former open forest lands or concerns for police problems or trash dumping, or just administrative ease like what waterboy is describing.

 

The snowmobile clubs are organized to keep the snowparks open, but backcountry skiers, boarders, and snowshoers don't seem to have much of a voice - something in common with rock climbers - so in some ways it should come as no surprise that the DOT, the Sheriff - and even to some extent the Forest Service - don't consider our concerns as much as we'd like them to. Regardless of who is "to blame" here, letters and phone calls to various public agencies are probably in order.