Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > MF Snoqualmie River Road Statement from FS
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 10:31 am 
Quote:
just wanted to see if I could get Goat to say things like "Seattle liberal" or "elite." I'm jerking on your chains here to an extent.
So you're trying to bait me into insulting you? What is the point?
Quote:
Yet I do believe that if you truly love the wilderness, you hate roads into it.
Then your belief is wrong, because I love the ALW yet don't want this road closed.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
greg
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2003
Posts: 1159 | TRs | Pics
greg
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 10:39 am 
Geez Goat, don't take everything so seriously. I'm funnin' you. Was that you up there at Serene?

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


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 10:43 am 
nope. i've picked up trash there too, but preferred the old trail. i'm serious because this is a serious issue. they are about to close many people out of access, and that's serious to me.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
greg
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2003
Posts: 1159 | TRs | Pics
greg
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 10:56 am 
It is a serious issue, but we can approach it in a good-natured fashion? I love the Alpine Lakes too, more than anywhere. On my first trip to Snow Lake, pre-wilderness, a helicopter landed there and some Viet vets on horses were shooting a shotgun out over the lake. We beat it out of there up to Gem Lake, where it was much more peaceful.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
jimmymac
Zip Lock Bagger



Joined: 14 Nov 2003
Posts: 3705 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lake Wittenmyer, WA
jimmymac
Zip Lock Bagger
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 10:56 am 
Guiran wrote:
Sorry to ressurrect this, but just had a thought this morning. So let's say the forest service says they'll no longer be maintaining the road past Dingford. And it seems like there is a cost arguement for this. Inholders need to pay to maintain the road. But if it's not gated, then the public is going to be putting wear and tear on the road and repairs for that use will not come from public $, but from the inholders. I can see why the inholders would want the road gated in this situation. If this is completely incoherent, it might have something to do with lack of sleep. Normally when I'm really zonked and think of something insightful it turns out to be rubbish after a good night's sleep.
Not this time. You bring up an interesting angle. I wonder if the inholders could maintain the road (observing all environmental regs) without a lot of the overhead costs that the FS has? A key fee charged to the inholders' *guests* could transfer the road maintenance cost directly to the school programs, the old folks, and the overnighters who would benefit from the corridor. Then each person could decide how much the easy DMG access is really worth to him or her.

"Profound serenity is the product of unfaltering Trust and heightened vulnerability."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 11:28 am 
Quote:
It is a serious issue, but we can approach it in a good-natured fashion?
Criminy greg, you taunted me about going by me and waving while I lose my traditional access to one of my favorite places! That isn't good natured IMO, that's gloating.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17852 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 11:30 am 
greg wrote:
I'll wave at you when they lock the gate and I'm hiking through.
Well, I'll be the one waving back at you after I put the key back in my pocket. wave.gif

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


Joined: 23 Jun 2003
Posts: 1159 | TRs | Pics
greg
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 11:35 am 
Goat, can't really gloat until it happens. Tom, since you're driving, you bring the beer, OK?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 11:52 am 
Since there is NO snow anywhere, can we think about a end of the road get together anytime soon? Oh yea, there is that washout to think of. Well, we could do a washout get together..... TB

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian Curtis
Trail Blazer/HiLaker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 1696 | TRs | Pics
Location: Silverdale, WA
Brian Curtis
Trail Blazer/HiLaker
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 12:42 pm 
Tom wrote:
I guess we all have our own views on what constitutes an incursion. To me the road that shortcuts Lillian feels more like an incursion, particularly if you've hiked 5+ miles from the official trailhead only to look down on a logging road a hop, skip, and a jump away. I've never really felt that way about the MFK. Sure, it offers a shortcut into some locations, but they are far enough removed from the road that I don't feel it to be an incursion.
I don't disagree. but you are defining the problem (incursion) from a purely recreationalist perspective. This is the same perspective that allows you to reduce the complexities of the issue down to one of only access reduction. I prefer a more holistic view that looks at other aspects like wildlife habitat and see wilderness as a place that allows recreation, but is not there to serve recreation. That didn't come out quite right, but I hope you get my meaning.
Tom wrote:
I suppose it depends on your definition of wilderness too. You know I'm not anti-stocking, but one could make similar arguments about the planting of fish in wilderness as being an incursion (or the building of trails for that matter).
You are absolutely right here, and in your later post were you say it is about where you draw the line. I see fish stocking maintenance and trail maintenance (I don't support the expansion of either practice in wilderness) as forms of recreation support that are compatible with the letter and spirit of the wilderness act and the concept of wilderness as I see it. But I draw the line at motorized vehicles. I don't see motorized vehicles as having a place in wilderness and the MidFork valley so obviously penetrates the wilderness so deeply it's an easy decision for me to call for closure.

that elitist from silverdale wanted to tell me that all carnes are bad--Studebaker Hoch
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sore Feet
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 6307 | TRs | Pics
Location: Out There, Somewhere
Sore Feet
Member
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 1:20 pm 
But closing the valley off doesn't automatically make it wilderness, especially if the inholders are gonna maintain the road up to Goldmyer (or further). And call me crazy, but if Wild Sky didn't pass, then I don't see Washington approving any sort of measure to add that land onto the ALW any time soon.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 1:24 pm 
Sore Feet wrote:
But closing the valley off doesn't automatically make it wilderness, especially if the inholders are gonna maintain the road up to Goldmyer (or further). And call me crazy, but if Wild Sky didn't pass, then I don't see Washington approving any sort of measure to add that land onto the ALW any time soon.
I thought that "less" than wild sky did pass. Well Im happy if it didnt, but I thought that it did. TB

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
jimmymac
Zip Lock Bagger



Joined: 14 Nov 2003
Posts: 3705 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lake Wittenmyer, WA
jimmymac
Zip Lock Bagger
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 1:54 pm 
Backpacker Joe wrote:
I thought that "less" than wild sky did pass. Well Im happy if it didnt, but I thought that it did.
I believe enough people demanded all or nothing that they succeeded in getting nothing.

"Profound serenity is the product of unfaltering Trust and heightened vulnerability."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian Curtis
Trail Blazer/HiLaker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 1696 | TRs | Pics
Location: Silverdale, WA
Brian Curtis
Trail Blazer/HiLaker
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 2:03 pm 
Sore Feet wrote:
But closing the valley off doesn't automatically make it wilderness, especially if the inholders are gonna maintain the road up to Goldmyer (or further). And call me crazy, but if Wild Sky didn't pass, then I don't see Washington approving any sort of measure to add that land onto the ALW any time soon.
You're right, and I'd rather it wasn't pure wilderness because I'd like to see bicycle access allowed up the old road (I don't see a problem with bicycles in wilderness anyway, but that's another issue all together) but it would act like de-facto wilderness with no road. I don't like having the inholders keeping the road open so I guess I'm hoping they'll give up on maintaining the road.

that elitist from silverdale wanted to tell me that all carnes are bad--Studebaker Hoch
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17852 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostFri Jan 21, 2005 3:10 pm 
I don't think this is about the cost of maintaining the road, but if it were, a more practical solution would be to keep the road open to GoldMyer and gate it there. That might satisfy the wilderness nazis, while still keeping the "wilderness" within reach of us commoners.

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 > MF Snoqualmie River Road Statement from FS
  Happy Birthday Traildad!
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