Forum Index > Stewardship > Hidden Hikes in Western Washington - more places to explore
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
#19
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 2206 | TRs

#19
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 5:56 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Brian,  75 Scrambles was mentioned on the WTA Trail Talk.  

It doens't matter what the intent of the guidebook is. Intent does not make or assure success. Why would Hidden hikes be more successful as drawing people to a specific location if other guidebooks that have been in print for years haven''t been?  Especially since it will never sell at anywhere near the rate of other well established guidebooks?

Benjamin,  We aren't talking about Lake 22 or even Image Lake. We are talking about lakes that are difficult to reach.  Often requiring bushwacking and more route finding skills than many summits.
It has little to do with elevation gain. And I never said these summits receive less traffic.  I said, for the fourth time, THAT NON-LAKE DESTINATIONS RECEIVE LESS CONCERN FOR IMPACT RECEIVED THAN LAKE DESTINATIONS DO.

Clearly, most of the people on this forum that have shown the most concern for increased visitation at these high lakes, have over time, identified themselves as fisherman.  Not always, but most often.

catwoman, which peak did you get lead down the garden path on?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Brian Curtis
Trail Blazer/HiLaker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 1511 | TRs
Location: Silverdale, WA
Brian Curtis
  Top

Trail Blazer/HiLaker
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 9:41 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Just because it was mentioned on TT doesn't mean I saw or read that particular thread. I only found TT shortly before its demise. But why do I have to be defensive? I hadn't heard of that book.

Other guidebooks haven't written up the Bathtub Plateau as a specific destination. In the 100 hikes series it was mentioned in a one sentence blurb as a side trip from the summit of Pilchuck. Well, that certainly isn't the shortest or easiest way to get up there. Now a guide book comes along, describes the area in glowing terms as a primary destination and gives a different route in. Do you honestly believe that the area will receive NO more traffic?

Quote:
I said, for the fourth time, THAT NON-LAKE DESTINATIONS RECEIVE LESS CONCERN FOR IMPACT RECEIVED THAN LAKE DESTINATIONS DO.

The first time you mentioned this you said that *YOU* had more concern for lake destinations then mountain destinations and asked why. I attempted to figure out a reason why you might have more concern for one type of destination and answer what, I thought at the time, was an honest question. Now I realize otherwise. Somewhere along the line your internal dichotomy got transferred to everyone else despite repeated protests to the contrary. You can repeat it all you want but that doesn't make it so. I absolutely, 100%, have just as much concern for summit type destinations. Does that clear that up? Now, if I express concern for a specific destination then it is almost certain that I have been there and know that it is a fragile destination. I mostly go to lakes so if I am to talk with some knowledge of a destination it is likely to be a lake. If I went to waterfalls it would be waterfalls. If I went to mountain tops it would be mountain tops. I've been to Rainy Lake and I've been to the Bathtubs. I have *specific* knowledge of those places and reasons to be concerned. As I've said over and over, don't send people to x-country destinations in a guide book. I *never* said don't send people to lakes in a guidebook.

Quote:
Clearly, most of the people on this forum that have shown the most concern for increased visitation at these high lakes, have over time, identified themselves as fisherman.  Not always, but most often.

Your implication here is that anglers show more concern for the degradation of the wilderness then non-anglers?

--------------
that elitist from silverdale wanted to tell me that all carnes are bad--Studebaker Hoch
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Benjamin
Member
Member


Joined: 20 Dec 2001
Posts: 146 | TRs

Benjamin
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 9:56 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Quote:
101 Hikes in the North Cascades at the end of the Pilchuck write up it says, "an easy way trail decend east along the rdige to a group of small, picturesque tarns.."

Notice that the name of these picturesque tarns was not disclosed.  Was there a map drawn up or precise directions given?

Quote:
.  I said, for the fourth time, THAT NON-LAKE DESTINATIONS RECEIVE LESS CONCERN FOR IMPACT RECEIVED THAN LAKE DESTINATIONS DO.

NON LAKE DESTINATIONS receive less concern for impact because they flat out receive less impact.  As I already pointed out, lakes receive more traffic for various reasons.  Also I would suspect that most hikers, backpackers, and many climbers spend a large percent of their down time at lakes for reasons that include water availability,  the lake being the destination, and just the beautiful setting in general.  This is where the brunt of the impact comes from.  With that in mind, why should I be MORE concerned with areas which receive LESS impact?  It seems logical to me to be most concerned with locations that receive the most impact.

Quote:
Clearly, most of the people on this forum that have shown the most concern for increased visitation at these high lakes, have over time, identified themselves as fisherman.  Not always, but most often.

Attribute that to the fact that like others, fisherman surely spend their down time at the lakes.  Many fishermen have seen destruction take place at numerous lakes, and certainly would like to hinder the degradation of other lakes.  Things that we see make a bigger impression on us than things that we hear from others or from elsewhere.  Therefore, it only makes sense that fisherman will be more concerned with lakes since they see impact at the lakes.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
McPilchuck
Wild Bagger



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 859 | TRs
Location: near Snohomish, Wa.
McPilchuck
  Top

Wild Bagger
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 9:57 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
What Ben has said here is the point of this entire discussion, whether one wants to admit it or not for whatever reason, and he is right. I think very pristine little areas don't belong in ANY guide book of how to get there. And as someone else eluded to previously, authors should have some discreation.  Fact is, pristine areas are just that, but it dosen't mean we need to exclude ourselves, just limit our impact. With said instructions therefrom a book it's hard to imagine how much longer it will stay pristine.

"How true!  Many do not want the promulgation of their own out of the way places of solitude.  Most certainly the Bathtubs WERE just such a place for some, but not any longer.  I am not implying that the area should be limited as to who can use it; anyone who wishes to go to such a place is free to do so.  I am pointing out that having this hike published in a guide book deteriorates the magnificence of the destination.  With the excessive traffic already in the area (Pilchuck, Lake 22, Heather Lake, Pinnacle Lake, Bear Lake, Ashland Lakes, Twin Falls Lake, Beaver Plant Lake, Lake Evan, Bordman Lake, and the cutthroats) I would anticipate that the Bathtubs will soon become a heavily trampled high-use destination like the others that I just mentioned.

One more thing that I remember reading in "Hidden Hikes in Western Washington" was something along the lines of "this is a very pristine area so keep your party small."  IMO this type of statement will only attract more people.  I can't remember if it was a lake or a waterfall or whatever, but what is the point of small groups if there will be many of them?  The number of people visiting this "very pristine area" will certainly increase generating an increase in human impact.  Maybe a "very pristine area" does not belong in such a book."  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------
in the granite high-wild alpine land . . .
www.alpinequest.com
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
catwoman
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 892 | TRs
Location: somewhere near Tacoma
catwoman
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:13 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
ARE YOU ALL DONE YET?! lol.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11167 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:34 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Not by a long shot.

I agree that telling friends can increase impacts, which is exactly why only very select people get any sensitive info I know about routes or destinations. If they don't share the same view about the benefits of closed lips, no data no beta.

But contending that this has the same impact as a book, well, I'm not sure about that at all. In fact I doubt it entirely!

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MCaver
Founder



Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Posts: 5123 | TRs

MCaver
  Top

Founder
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:37 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Catwoman, if you really want to see the fishermen go off, question the practice of stocking naturally barren lakes with non-native fish, thus drawing more traffic to and impacting pristine lakes.  tongue.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
-lol-
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 771 | TRs

-lol-
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:43 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Quote:
question the practice of stocking naturally barren lakes

Many are wondering, few are brave enough to ask...
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11167 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:46 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Or question the practice of allowing anyone at all in the backcountry, anywhere, which undeniably damages pristine areas. There is no reason whatsoever anyone "needs" to be at peaks, meadows, or lakes for that matter.

Personally, I've made it clear my stance is not an absolutist reduction of all impacts, but their *dispersal*.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16013 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostWed Mar 13, 2002 10:50 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
With all this talk about the bathtubs and Summit Lake I've decided to push them up on my list for this year from the "may do" to the "will do" category - just to clarify they were on the list well before I discovered either book had written them up.  I hope to experience and document the pre "hidden hikes" state (or as close to "pre" as is possible) and then return every 3-5 years to do the same for the post "hidden hikes" state.  Of particular interest and scrutiny will be Summit Lake since it is not necessarily on the "way" to Pilchuck.  Since I am not a fisherman, I won't evaluate the fishing, but as I've already stated, I don't believe the fishing impact is necessarily relevant.  I'm not going to make any up front hypotheses or assumptions.  The book is already published.  IMO, further debate will only lead to additional impact on these lakes.

P.S.  I have closed this thread because the imfamous problem with the disappearing initial posts have started to occur shakehead.gif.  Feel free to continue the discussion here.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > Hidden Hikes in Western Washington - more places to explore
  Happy Birthday elkendo, nuclear_eggset!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy