Peshastin Pinnacles Gettin' Mothballed

[rbwen]

WTA

 

Here we go again. To comply with mandated budget cuts, Washington State Parks proposes mothballing six parks, including Squak Mountain, Federation Forest, Fort Ward, Peshastin Pinnacles, Tolmie and Flaming Geyser.

 

With a budget deficit north of $3 billion, Governor Christine Gregoire has required agencies to plan for a 10% budget cut. Since only about 30% of the state budget can be cut due to constitutional and federal requirements, state land management agencies like State Parks, the Department of Natural Resources and Fish and Wildlife are first on the chopping block.

 

State Parks has responded to the current budget situation, which translates to about $8.1 million in cuts between current and future biennium, by proposing to shrink administrative staff, reduce some park services and mothball six parks.

 

If you want to save these parks, now is the time to act.

 

The option to close these six parks was chosen over another one that would have mothballed 13 parks, so this situation could have been much worse. You can read the detailed commission reports here and check out each individual park here.

 

Why these parks? These were the six with the lowest percentage of revenue to expenses. That was the criteria, plain and simple. But only Flaming Geyser and Federation Forest will actually save the agency more than $100,000. The other four cost very little to keep open.

 

Losing these parks for a season or more will hurt. And that pain will extend not just to the hikers who love these places, but to the landscapes themselves. We've seen time and again that when land management agencies gate parking areas and trailheads, all sorts of undesirable activities flourish, including dumping, unsanctioned target shooting and meth production. Trails and facilities deteriorate. All of these impacts make opening these areas back up much more expensive in the long run.

 

Still, given our current situation, keeping these places open will take a lot of work. If you love one or more of these parks, please take a moment and call your State Representatives and Senator and let them know that you want them to take action to keep these parks open. You can find your members here. WTA will keep you updated on this issue as it progresses.

[summitchaserCJB]

What's to keep people from renegading?

Edited October 9, 2010 by summitchaserCJB

[num1mc]

What's to keep people from renegading?

 

Fair question, and the answer is that it is not recommended. And not because it may reflect poorly on climbers, or any of that Socialist drivel. It is not recommended because you'll probably get caught, fined and possibly thrown into the Greybar hotel.

 

Since its inception, the Chelan County Sheriffs Department has enforced the closure of the Peshastin Pinnacles with marked Draconian glee. It is almost a certainty that you will be caught.

 

The actions of the Chelan County Sheriffs Department played a huge roll in how the WCC approached the State Parks in their recent negotiations over the Index land purchase. If I understand correctly, Index is to be referred to as the "Stimson Bullet State Rock Climbing Reserve", and hopefully will avoid much of the land closures and heavy handed management that has befallen the Pinnacles

[curtveld]

Appreciate the heads up, rbwen.

 

So even though costs must be minimal (occasional garbage and porta-potty maintenance), the Pinnacles generates zero revenue, unlike state parks with campgrounds. I wonder if there is any way they could reduce the maintenance load (remove garbage cans) or possibly let a climbing group fund it or take it on themselves?

[summitchaserCJB]

I find it pretty frustrating that this area was saved, the government charges us to go there, they revoke the fee, we enter a crisis, then they decide to close it again. Thanks, Government. So much for by, for, of.

[chris]

The actions of the Chelan County Sheriffs Department played a huge roll in how the WCC approached the State Parks in their recent negotiations over the Index land purchase. If I understand correctly, Index is to be referred to as the "Stimson Bullet State Rock Climbing Reserve", and hopefully will avoid much of the land closures and heavy handed management that has befallen the Pinnacles

 

It's my understanding (and maybe Matt P can back me up), the Stinson Reserve will have a trust attached to it to ensure funding independent of the State Park budget, so that if cuts like this happen in future Index can't be effected.

[chris]

I am confused as to what, exactly, my fee at the Pinnacles is paying for. Its been several years since I've been there, but isn't the lot dirt, there's one toilet, and the trails are all built by volunteers?

 

If that's it, how costly would it be to simply lock the bathroom, post no camping signs, and have the Sheriffs ticket illegal camping instead of illegal access?

[CPOly]

I am confused as to what, exactly, my fee at the Pinnacles is paying for.

 

There is no longer a parking fee for "day use" in Washington State Parks.

 

The question also needs to be asked, what exactly does "mothballing" look like at Peshastin Pinnacles State Park? When this idea came up during the legislative session of 2009, those parks proposed to be mothballed would still be available to public access. There would be no services (garbage, restrooms, mowing, etc.) and the gate would be locked with a ranger "checking in" less frequently, but you could still access the site.

[Mr. Hands]

Bummer! I really enjoy climbing at Peshasatin. Will access still be availible?

[AlpineK]

Locked bathrooms and water sources for sure. I imagine they want to cut off garbage pickup too.

 

Prior to it being a park you could access it as long as you didn't piss off the farmers nearby. No walking through the orchard especially during harvest. Since there is a way to avoid the orchard on foot that isn't a problem now.

 

The orchard folks didn't like people parking on the street near the rocks. If people started parking on the street nearby they might get annoyed enough to report your vehicle and get the sheriff on you.

 

I suppose you could climb there if you parked near the highway and walked in, but then again maybe not.

Edited October 10, 2010 by Feck

[chris]

I am confused as to what, exactly, my fee at the Pinnacles is paying for.

 

There is no longer a parking fee for "day use" in Washington State Parks.

 

The question also needs to be asked, what exactly does "mothballing" look like at Peshastin Pinnacles State Park? When this idea came up during the legislative session of 2009, those parks proposed to be mothballed would still be available to public access. There would be no services (garbage, restrooms, mowing, etc.) and the gate would be locked with a ranger "checking in" less frequently, but you could still access the site.

 

Thanks CPOly- that tells you how long I've been gone! I think I would have no problem with "mothballing" or "suspending amenities," providing that there was roadside parking permitted near the gate and access was allowed.

Edited October 10, 2010 by chris

[Rafe1234]

Washington is in a large budget deficit situation, plain and simple. Their choice in closures is logical. The spectrum of public funding cuts is broad, and the parks are part of that.

 

I'd say if climbers and hikers are worried about the impact of closures they need to take action beyond calling state representatives and senators, which will not likely have much effect, and organize to raise the money themselves.....because the state is broke.

[rat]

there are plenty of "no parking" signs along the road. these are magnets for the sheriff. park elsewhere and walk/bike if you intend to poach. "access" may not be allowed and if you get bull-horned off the rock, being a dick won't help....that means don't try to ditch the pig and don't talk back (i've seen it).

[mark1980]

Appreciate the heads up, rbwen.

 

So even though costs must be minimal (occasional garbage and porta-potty maintenance), the Pinnacles generates zero revenue, unlike state parks with campgrounds. I wonder if there is any way they could reduce the maintenance load (remove garbage cans) or possibly let a climbing group fund it or take it on themselves?

 

Agreed, instead of closing the park, let a non profit manage it. The state is already overburdened with all the other services they provide.....

[chris]

Appreciate the heads up, rbwen.

 

So even though costs must be minimal (occasional garbage and porta-potty maintenance), the Pinnacles generates zero revenue, unlike state parks with campgrounds. I wonder if there is any way they could reduce the maintenance load (remove garbage cans) or possibly let a climbing group fund it or take it on themselves?

 

Agreed, instead of closing the park, let a non profit manage it. The state is already overburdened with all the other services they provide.....

 

Hmmm - this sounds like a WCC Project to me!

[chris]

OK, I just emailed Freeman Keller, the WCC's point-man for Peshastin, the following:

 

Hi Freeman,

There's a thread over at cc.com about the potential closure of Peshastin Pinnacles State Park, and there are two comments that caught my attention and made me think of contacting you/WCC:

 

1. Could shoulder parking be created at Peshastin to allow people to use the park when the gate and amenities are closed?

2. Could the WCC assume some sort of stewardship status of the park, taking care of the bathroom/trash/parking maintenance, from State Parks?

 

In the end, the thread seems to repeat one key fact over and over: even those of us who don't climb often at Peshastin don't want to see it close, and we're trying to brainstorm ideas that will allow it to remain at least accessible for climbing, if not open outright. This seems like a project for the WCC.

 

LINK to thread.

 

Thanks

Chris

 

[DPS]

Thanks for taking the point on this Chris. I occurs to me that some sort of non-profit (Friends of Peshastin State Park?) could raise enough to fund the basic necessities (restroom, parking lot maintenance, open and close the gates in the morning and evening, and grabage maintenance) and volunteer to do provide the labor to do the rest (trail maintenance, etc). Perhaps if the state park system was approoached by a cohesive group or organized and funded volunteers, backed by other recognized groups (WTA, WCC, Access Fund) they might be more receptive to alternates to moth balling the park.

Edited October 11, 2010 by danielpatricksmith

[sobo]

I'm curious about something... As I understand the series of events, Peshastin was purchased by the Access Fund back in the 90s and reopened. The AF then gifted the park to the WS Parks & Recreation Dept., with the proviso that Parks was to operate the park for the benefit of the citizens (to include climbers) "in perpetuity."

 

So fast-forward ~20 years and now the State says it can't afford to keep the park open anymore. What is the AF's position/obligation/suggestion on what happens now? I mean, if the State can just sit there and acquire resources (as in donated to it by the AF), then "decide" to close that resource whenever they want to for whatever reason (or for no reason), what purpose does it serve for the AF to win these resources for us, just to have them taken away after their mission is complete? That doesn't seem to make very much sense to me.

 

Isn't there a clause in the AF gifting agreements that should prevent the loss of a resource once it's won, bought, and paid for? Like if a resource is in danger of being closed/lost, the resource reverts back to the AF for them to figure out who takes care of it next? That would seem to make much more sense to me...

[ARob]

Thanks again for bringing this to the climbing community's attention. I run an adventure / eco-education non-profit that will be setting up programs in Leavenworth next year and Peshastin was out go-to spot for taking kids climbing. Even as a low-key education focused program, the jungle of red tape to take kids anywhere is worse than 'shwaking through dense slide alder. Forget about ever setting up some ropes in the Icicle for a half dozen under served at-risk youth a few times a year. Peshastin was our go to place because it was $50 for the year and it's pretty easy to stay out of people's way out there. This is just sad that we have to fight so hard to enjoy the natural beauties of places we love so much. Programs like ours focus on LNT, responsible recreation, and positive impact.

 

It would be great to get the WCC in the fight as an organizational leader, but letters and phone calls from individuals under their own volition goes far. Here's some contact info below. If you were planning on just looking at Trip Reports for another few minutes, consider giving them a call.

 

Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

1111 Israel Road S.W.

Olympia, WA 98504-2650

 

pao@parks.wa.gov

 

360-902-8561

[pink]

I'm curious about something... As I understand the series of events, Peshastin was purchased by the Access Fund back in the 90s and reopened. The AF then gifted the park to the WS Parks & Recreation Dept., with the proviso that Parks was to operate the park for the benefit of the citizens (to include climbers) "in perpetuity."

 

So fast-forward ~20 years and now the State says it can't afford to keep the park open anymore. What is the AF's position/obligation/suggestion on what happens now? I mean, if the State can just sit there and acquire resources (as in donated to it by the AF), then "decide" to close that resource whenever they want to for whatever reason (or for no reason), what purpose does it serve for the AF to win these resources for us, just to have them taken away after their mission is complete? That doesn't seem to make very much sense to me.

 

Isn't there a clause in the AF gifting agreements that should prevent the loss of a resource once it's won, bought, and paid for? Like if a resource is in danger of being closed/lost, the resource reverts back to the AF for them to figure out who takes care of it next? That would seem to make much more sense to me...

 

 

you mean the "access fraud"

[pindude]

you mean the "access fraud"

 

Hardly. Pink, save your spray for another thread, and stay focused on the topic.

 

Thanks Sobo, for pointing out what needed to be.

[num1mc]

I'm curious about something... As I understand the series of events, Peshastin was purchased by the Access Fund back in the 90's and reopened. The AF then gifted the park to the WS Parks & Recreation Dept., with the proviso that Parks was to operate the park for the benefit of the citizens (to include climbers) "in perpetuity."

 

So fast-forward ~20 years and now the State says it can't afford to keep the park open anymore. What is the AF's position/obligation/suggestion on what happens now? I mean, if the State can just sit there and acquire resources (as in donated to it by the AF), then "decide" to close that resource whenever they want to for whatever reason (or for no reason), what purpose does it serve for the AF to win these resources for us, just to have them taken away after their mission is complete? That doesn't seem to make very much sense to me.

 

Isn't there a clause in the AF gifting agreements that should prevent the loss of a resource once it's won, bought, and paid for? Like if a resource is in danger of being closed/lost, the resource reverts back to the AF for them to figure out who takes care of it next? That would seem to make much more sense to me...

 

I believe that it was the Trust for Public Lands which became the primary group which brought on the purchase of the Pinnacles. But I could be wrong here.

 

But my points are:

 

1) I believe groups have learned from the Pinnacles experience, and that is why Index was approached differently

 

2) I don't know if it is reasonable to think that all a group has to do is gift some land to the Washington State Parks, and then the parks assumes the responsibility to maintain the land forever. Future budget problems were something that neither the SP's and TPL thought about in 1991.

 

All these ideas about Community Groups taking over management of the Park is a good idea, as is the fact that early plans allowed for the continued public use of mothballed parks. The Chelan County Sheriff, and their shoot first policy will have to be notified in no uncertain terms. And be ready to listen to whining about "206ers". But what is clear is that the demographics if the Peshastin Pinnacles has radically changed since the '70's, and the primary user of this park is Chelan County locals having a picnic and pleasant hike

[pink]

you mean the "access fraud"

 

Hardly. Pink, save your spray for another thread, and stay focused on the topic.

 

Thanks Sobo, for pointing out what needed to be.

 

 

i wasn't spraying fool

[sobo]

I believe that it was the Trust for Public Lands which became the primary group which brought on the purchase of the Pinnacles. But I could be wrong here.

I seem to recall very clearly back in 1990/1991, as a dues-paying member of the Access Fund, that my money was going towards the purchase of Peshastin Pinnacles. I joined and contributed to the AF specifically for that reason, since I felt that this resource was worth acquiring/preserving, and I always enjoyed climbing there immensely, despite the rep the place has for crumbly, run-out routes. I just like climbs like that...

 

But my points are:

 

1) I believe groups have learned from the Pinnacles experience, and that is why Index was approached differently

 

2) I don't know if it is reasonable to think that all a group has to do is gift some land to the Washington State Parks, and then the parks assumes the responsibility to maintain the land forever. Future budget problems were something that neither the SP's and TPL thought about in 1991.

 

All these ideas about Community Groups taking over management of the Park is a good idea, as is the fact that early plans allowed for the continued public use of mothballed parks. The Chelan County Sheriff, and their shoot first policy will have to be notified in no uncertain terms. And be ready to listen to whining about "206ers". But what is clear is that the demographics if the Peshastin Pinnacles has radically changed since the '70's, and the primary user of this park is Chelan County locals having a picnic and pleasant hike

You make some excellent points here. All very valid.

[iampam]

I was at the State Parks Commission meeting a few weeks ago where they made the decision to mothball 6 parks. As mentioned earlier, they chose this option, which meant closing less parks and eliminating more staff positions over the option that would mean closing more parks but better staffing for the existing parks.

 

It was mentioned several times that they do not intend to ticket or fine people who visit mothballed parks (obviously assuming they are not doing anything else illegal). In the case of Peshastin, it sounds like part of the issue is a lack of legal parking if the parking lot is closed? I suggest working with the rangers at Wenatchee Confluence to try to find a solution, and if they're not helpful try the Commissioners.

 

I think the toilets at Peshastin are just vault toilets, no? Maybe if a group could raise money to have them pumped when needed, and come up with volunteers to man them they could stay open. It takes some pretty dedicated volunteers to clean toilets though... people do NASTY things in park restrooms.