Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Private for profit huts on Mt. St Helens?
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9488 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostMon Sep 11, 2023 10:14 pm 
Anne Elk wrote:
I might be wrong, but it seems like a lot of what we've lost are facilities that are available for free or cheap to the average person. This is on public land and this private enterprise will not likely be affordable; so it's kinda comparing apples to oranges.
How does the presence of these huts built on sites accessible by road in the summer subtract from free camping opportunities summer or winter?

treeswarper
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
altasnob
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 1366 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tacoma
altasnob
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 6:16 am 
Ski wrote:
If the areas in which these facilities are to be located are currently being used by the snowmobilers during the winter months, what is the objection to the installation of these facilities?
I don't have strong objections. I just want the public to be involved in the decision rather than huts just popping up over night all over the place. And if the only factor is whether you can snowmobile to the location, I can think of hundreds of other locations in Washington where a private business would like to stick a commercial hut. I am most concerned about the slippery slope. If we allow it here, are we going to allow huts in or near ski areas? Huts on the non wilderness parts of Rainier, Oly, and N Cascades (like at the parking lots). Huts up every single forest road that is closed in winter? And then before we know it, we are BC, Europe, and Colorado/Utah with an abundance of ski in/ski out lodging.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
altasnob
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 1366 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tacoma
altasnob
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 6:24 am 
Randito wrote:
Anne Elk wrote:
I might be wrong, but it seems like a lot of what we've lost are facilities that are available for free or cheap to the average person. This is on public land and this private enterprise will not likely be affordable; so it's kinda comparing apples to oranges.
How does the presence of these huts built on sites accessible by road in the summer subtract from free camping opportunities summer or winter?
I was up at Climbers Biviouc (one of the proposed locations) last Sunday. School started and Sunday afternoon, so crowds were light. But I imagine the lot is packed full on peak weekends. There was designated bivouac sites, and a few rouge overflow sites in the woods. The entire lot is pretty small and it does not look practical to make it any bigger. Parking seems to be the limiting factor on peak weekends. If you add a few vehicles for those using, and caring for, the hut, you are taking away parking spots for other users. So I don't see this hut as increasing use in the summer, but just changing use from those who are bivouacking in the woods, to those who are paying a private company to stay in the hut. I like the Mt. Adams yurt proposal (removed in the summer) better because I don't really see a need for huts in these locations in the summer. Just put temporary winter only yurts in parking lots and you avoid the permanence problem. This also allows the yurt to use the existing pit toilets rather than having to construct a new pit toilet off in the woods somewhere.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
altasnob
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 1366 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tacoma
altasnob
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 6:35 am 
The current best comparison to the Adams and St Helens huts/yurts is the Tam McArthur Rim Yurts near Brockentop near Sisters, Oregon. They are privately run yurts operating on Forest Service land catering to backcountry skiers. I just checked and the yurts are totally sold out for winter 2024. You essentially have to book your trip the moment reservations open up and even then, you may not be able to reserve (just like Enchantments). Cost is below and each yurt holds 6 people: Thurs -Sun $2190/yurt, Sun-Tues $1440/yurt, Tues-Thur $1440/yurt (All shuttles included) The Adams/St Helens operations are even closer to the Portland/Seattle population centers so expect them to be in even greater demand and cost more.

Anne Elk
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11249 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 8:40 am 
altasnob wrote:
The current best comparison to the Adams and St Helens huts/yurts is the Tam McArthur Rim Yurts near Brockentop near Sisters, Oregon. They are privately run yurts operating on Forest Service land catering to backcountry skiers. I just checked and the yurts are totally sold out for winter 2024. You essentially have to book your trip the moment reservations open up and even then, you may not be able to reserve (just like Enchantments). Cost is below and each yurt holds 6 people: Thurs -Sun $2190/yurt, Sun-Tues $1440/yurt, Tues-Thur $1440/yurt (All shuttles included) The Adams/St Helens operations are even closer to the Portland/Seattle population centers so expect them to be in even greater demand and cost more.
Does this not show that there is a demand for them? Slippery slope? It's already slipped. People are moving here to "live in or close to the mountains" so what do you expect? Build a bigger parking lot, which is deforestation of the worst kind, and it will fill up. You can't build yourself out of traffic. I'm not a winter camper so I really don't care. Oh, and in the Methow, they've just announced areas off limits to all recreation and entry by humans in order to help out the deer during the winter. I think they did that last year too. You can access this in the Methow Valley News.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 7646 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
Faster than light
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 8:40 am 
Randito wrote:
Anne Elk wrote:
I might be wrong, but it seems like a lot of what we've lost are facilities that are available for free or cheap to the average person. This is on public land and this private enterprise will not likely be affordable; so it's kinda comparing apples to oranges.
How does the presence of these huts built on sites accessible by road in the summer subtract from free camping opportunities summer or winter?
Where do you think she said that? shakehead.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
altasnob
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 1366 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tacoma
altasnob
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 9:18 am 
treeswarper wrote:
Does this not show that there is a demand for them?
There is a demand for a lot of things. There is demand for heli skiing and luxury accommodations on mountain tops. But does that make it a good use of the land?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16075 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 9:42 am 
There is a demand for Fentanyl, Heroin, and Cocaine also so what?

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Logbear
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 493 | TRs | Pics
Location: Getchell. Wash
Logbear
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 10:13 am 
Ski wrote:
considering how fast we are losing overnight facilities.
Where were these overnight facilities that were lost? Are we losing more of these overnight facilities? Where are they? Why are we losing them? I've stayed in two hike-in cabins over the years. One in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, and one in the Olympics, Both are in wilderness areas, and both of them are still there.. These are fully enclosed cabins with wood burning stoves.

“There is no such thing as bad weather, only inappropriate clothing.” – Sir Ranulph Fiennes
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11249 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 11:22 am 
Logbear wrote:
Ski wrote:
considering how fast we are losing overnight facilities.
Where were these overnight facilities that were lost? Are we losing more of these overnight facilities? Where are they? Why are we losing them? I've stayed in two hike-in cabins over the years. One in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, and one in the Olympics, Both are in wilderness areas, and both of them are still there.. These are fully enclosed cabins with wood burning stoves.
I will point out all the end of the road dispersed camping spots that were lost due to road decommissioning, gates, poor maintenance and washouts. Then there are quite a few small campgrounds that are no more due to budget. A more recently closed one--JR was on the Loup Loup highway but vandalized too much to keep open.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 7646 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
Faster than light
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 11:43 am 
Malachai Constant wrote:
There is a demand for Fentanyl, Heroin, and Cocaine also so what?
We're talking about winter recreation, not Keith Richards recreation!

Anne Elk
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
trestle
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 2093 | TRs | Pics
Location: the Oly Pen
trestle
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 2:10 pm 
altasnob wrote:
does that make it a good use of the land?
Shocker, I know, but many people like to do more than just look at public land. Disdain is distasteful, regardless of the blue smoke. wink.gif

"Life favors the prepared." - Edna Mode

Cyclopath
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
altasnob
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 1366 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tacoma
altasnob
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 3:52 pm 
trestle wrote:
Shocker, I know, but many people like to do more than just look at public land.
15,000 people climb Mt. St Helens every year. Thousands of people camp in dispersed spots on it's southern flanks in the Summer. It's one of the most heavily recreated National Forests in the US. Suffice it to say there is no shortage of people doing more than "looking at the land" regardless of whether these huts get built.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
trestle
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 2093 | TRs | Pics
Location: the Oly Pen
trestle
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 8:34 pm 
What then is your objection to a different form of access, particularly one that might earn the FS a tiny bit of revenue and might allow them to keep open or expand existing infrastructure? The reason you have repeated is that *you* won't have access due to a reservation system and the overwhelming popularity of the Enchantments. While the reservation system sucks equally for everyone, using it as a reason to oppose something new hardly seems a line worth standing behind. Allowing permitted access to public land for recreation helps prevent it from being overrun with those who don't care about rules or conservation. An interesting contrast in WA is the explosion of mtb and equestrian facilities on state DNR lands, simply because of access and the lead of groups such as EMBA. The buy-in from the users is huge, the benefit to local commerce is growing quickly, and the support for protection of forested lands for recreation purposes is growing even faster. Contrast it with the loss of access to the Carbon, Dosewallips, Elwha, and soon to be Dungeness drainages, and the impact felt by local communities.

"Life favors the prepared." - Edna Mode

Cyclopath, Kim Brown
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
jaysway
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Jul 2020
Posts: 344 | TRs | Pics
jaysway
Member
PostTue Sep 12, 2023 9:06 pm 
trestle wrote:
Contrast it with the loss of access to the Carbon, Dosewallips, Elwha, and soon to be Dungeness drainages, and the impact felt by local communities.
I might be out of the loop, but is there a threat to access on the Dungeness? Are referring to a scenario where NF-2870 washes out and then is never repaired? I do remember hearing about how the plan is to decommission the Tyler Peak spur road at some point, which I hope does not happen.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Private for profit huts on Mt. St Helens?
  Happy Birthday TravelHiker, jennmonkey, The Obscure Photographer, Wazzu_camper, Jordan, Sean T!
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