[jenjen]

[wamtngal]

Well, looks like WTF should be formed and we hikers should get our acts together...there's no reason why we can't be a more vocal group.

[WTM]

[WTM]

WAMTNGAL wrote:

[Tom]

Singing the same song leads to group think and incestuous "victories" that feel like kissing your sister. The MFK closure was a prime example. Enough of that.

[Dayhike Mike]

[Quark]

Before sending off my letter to MBSNF, I sent an email to Peter Forbes, District Ranger, Darrington District with questions regarding the impact of Green Mtn road as maintained for passenger vehicles vs. the proposed re-classification of Level 2 maintenance. Regarding the classification in general: "Generally speaking, the only difference between maintenance levels is the frequency of routine maintenance, like brushing or blading. So, for example, instead of being ditches cleaned, brushed or bladed every three years, it might be four years. What that means to the user is that after a couple years, as the brush re-grows or the road surface gets beat down from use that it may be a less comfortable drive in a low clearance vehicle. It doesn't mean that the road is impassable." Regarding it's impact on the watershed: "As far as sediment is concerned, as long as the culverts and ditches are functioning that there should be no increase in sediment between the different road maintenance regimes. If we identify a potential problem where a culvert is plugged or there is some potential for failure, we try to correct the problem when it is identified so that it doesn't cause more damage." Mr. Forbes also discussed the decline of the FS budget as a result of decreased timber sales and their dependence upon Congress appropriations. He advised that the FS realizes the need for continued access for not only forest management, but for public access/recreation. They are continually trying to find ways to satisfy both the water and land resources while managing the road system for other users as well, given the budget allocated them. He was very emphatic that the intent is NOT to eventually close the Green Mtn road - they're just trying to satisfy all issues. Mr. Forbes also wanted to clarify that the Letter of Proposal is a proposal, and that the proposed actions may not be the actions they choose.

[Snowbrushy]

[Malachai Constant]

It is hard to tell, if it says 4x4 only to me that is pretty hard core and buru's and Rav 4 need not apply. These are eastern CA/Nev standards. I do not use low clearance cars i.e Cameros/TransAms for hiking.

[WTM]

[touron]

[JimK]

Today is the deadline for comments on the Suiattle River access proposal. I just sent in my comments. Please take the time to add your comments. Let the Forest Service folks know that people actually do care. Page one of this thread provides links to the proposal and who to contact. Edit: Heck, I'll make it even easier: Phyllis at plreed@fs.fed.us

[wamtngal]

Sent in my comments...hopefully the Forest Service will listen.

[Magellan]

It just breaks my heart to watch the district I grew up hiking and camping in going down the dumper. Road after trail after road after trail is being abandoned. I understand decomissioning roads that really do nothing but give you a view. What I don't understand is thinking it's OK to shut down a place as cool as Boulder and Pear Lakes, and all the surrounding ridges, peaks, etc. Green Mt should be able to be driven to in a Porsche. That hike has more bang for it's buck than just about anywhere else in Washington. I want people to ogle those views forever. When they give us driving access to Circle Peak area (I hope it's the Boundary Bridge) they wont shut down that access road until the new trail or brushed out road to Crystal Lake is done. One of the best thing about the road to Rattrap Pass was people who don't hike (like my mom) could make a one way drive including all the roadside highlights from the Suiattle to the Whitechuck. I fear I will never unexpectedly meet her at the pass again. (That really happened once!)