Beacon Rock MIGHT Close

[10497]

See the following article by Terry Richards in the Oregonian. Also a similar article in the Columbian.

 

http://blog.oregonlive.com/terryrichard/2009/03/washington_ponders_closing_som.html

[pink]

no biggie, soundds like ivans going to be too busy teaching little bratz.....

[ivan]

man, that'd be terrible if there were no rangers around to enforce the climbing ban...especially after i lose my job anyhow to massive school-cuts

 

the article was a trifle unclear - sounds kinda like just the campgrounds would be closed? i doubt they'd be keeping the gate on the hiking trail locked, probably just locking the bathrooms and gating the road up to the campground. the fisherman would probably go fucking beserk if they were somehow prevented from putting in at the dock there, no?

[JosephH]

I talked with Viv about it - link to details here:

 

Washington State Parks - Current News

 

This was the second park cuts list that was put together by WSP. Beacon missed the first cut, but made it onto the second cut as they only make enough in fees to cover half their operating revenue:

 

Location: Beacon Rock

Annual Park Expenditures: $503,848

Annual Total Revenue: $245,914

Cost Savings per year if mothballed: $257,934

% Total Revenue / Park Expenditures: 48.81%

Full Time Employees (FTEs): 7.87

Annual Visitation Total: 91,289

Visitor per FTE Annual: 11,596

Park Expend / Visitor: $5.52

 

But part of reason it's on the list is traffic numbers which are inaccurate. The traffic numbers were only from the campground road going up from the parking lot, and did not include the group campground, boat launch, or main parking lot numbers.

 

The closures are closures as in completely shutting down operations. This would be a disaster at Beacon (and Maryhill) where fishermen will raise hell about it relative to the boat launch. From a climbers' perspective things it very much puts climbing at risk from an outright ban from the outset to bigger issues related to the tourist trail. The problem there is do they leave the green gate open or closed on the park's closure. In either case, with the gate closed and people swinging it, or with no maintenance on the tourist trail bridges, sooner or later someone is going to die and the result would likely be a closure in that scenario as well. It is possible they'd try to shift the operation of the park to Skamania County, but the impact scenarios to climbers would probably not change a great deal in that case even if Skamania County could come up with the funds to keep it open on some basis.

 

Shutting down the BRSP wouldn't affect the Peregrine closure at all other than enforcement - but, if we started poaching because the BRSP staff isn't there then the WDFW would then move to ban climbing entirely. Beyond all that, even if Beacon is spared, there is a good chance Viv and Ben may lose their jobs as more senior folks from closed parks pull rank and take their jobs. New senior rangers unfamiliar and uninterested in climbing would in no way be in our best interest.

 

I have a call into Erik, who is working in Olympia in the finance department of late and hope to hear back from him. In general, however, nothing will be known or decided until the state legislature votes on some hard numbers. It's a bummer for climbing all the way around and so I wouldn't get too carried away with fantasies of poaching-gone-wild as poaching during the closure would just lead to a ban in the course of the first closure after the park shut down. If the BRSP did shut down, then that would be when folks had better self-police effectively or the place would simply be shutdown as too much of a hassle.

 

 

[ivan]

seems odd they would consider closing beacon and NOT bringing back the old day-use fee? (that was so neatly avoided for climbers by parking 30 yards down the road )

[JosephH]

Ivan, those were parking fees and when they did them in they did so as part of a state law forbidding them in the future. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Could be the fishermen are the ones that keep it open, but who knows at this point. It's possible we may lose Viv and Ben (and even Erik if they keep him in Olympia) regardless and it would then be a drag to try and educate and bring around a whole new crew who may or may not be climber-friendly.

[denalidave]

Speaking of trail maintenance, a big Tree came down near the beginning, just before you get to the first stone bench and some rocks also took out a few planks again in the same spot as last year (by the little arch window not far past he green gate).

 

 

[JosephH]

Good to know. It wouldn't take too long for the bridges to be pretty suspect all the way around. There's also a 'Friends of Beacon Rock' trail maintenance group that's pretty well organized and I suspect they'll be weighing in on all this over time.

[denalidave]

Yeah, seems like the trail takes a good beating in the same few spots every year.

[pink]

Ivan, those were parking fees and when they did them in they did so as part of a state law forbidding them in the future. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Could be the fishermen are the ones that keep it open, but who knows at this point. It's possible we may lose Viv and Ben (and even Erik if they keep him in Olympia) regardless and it would then be a drag to try and educate and bring around a whole new crew who may or may not be climber-friendly.

 

 

i'm sure you'll have em brainwashed in no time Joeseph

[JosephH]

Ivan, those were parking fees and when they did them in they did so as part of a state law forbidding them in the future. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Could be the fishermen are the ones that keep it open, but who knows at this point. It's possible we may lose Viv and Ben (and even Erik if they keep him in Olympia) regardless and it would then be a drag to try and educate and bring around a whole new crew who may or may not be climber-friendly.

 

i'm sure you'll have em brainwashed in no time Joeseph

 

Never know - a whole new staff would kind of suck in terms of there likely being no good overlapping handoff of the park's operations let alone just the climbing aspects. Would do my best, but it would depend entirely on who we got dealt. Hopefully Erik would just come back, but I'm beginning to have my doubts about that.

 

[el jefe]

thanks for your hard work in this regard, joseph. losing access to a climbing area is always a bad thing. hoping this turns out okay in the end.

[JosephH]

The best outcome would be BRSP doesn't close and Erik comes back to run it fulltime, though again I'm worried about Viv and Ben even if it stays open.

[kevbone]

I would say the best outcome would be for the rangers to let the climbers manage themselves and never step foot on the climbers train again. IMO

[JosephH]

I would say the best outcome would be for the rangers to let the climbers manage themselves and never step foot on the climbers train again. IMO

 

Given climbers have a lousy track record doing that at Beacon I suspect you can for sure count on that not happening.

[kevbone]

I disagree JH. Climbers have a lousy record of working with the land mgr’s. That is different than managing ourselves.

[ivan]

"mother of god, i thought, here it comes!"

[JosephH]

I disagree JH. Climbers have a lousy record of working with the land mgr’s. That is different than managing ourselves.

 

Uh, that's sort of like saying you have a lousy track record as a lover, but are great at masturbating...

[denalidave]

I'm good at BOTH!

[kevbone]

I'm good at BOTH!

 

 

You are good at managing the land and the climbers?

[ivan]

I'm good at BOTH!

 

 

You are good at managing the land and the climbers?

he must be - b/b i have it on good authority from all girlfriends, past n' present, that he can't....fix cable.