The Forest Service is soliciting public input on the Cape Horn Trail by July 30th.http://tinyurl.com/Cape-horn-plan
(if that link doesn't work , try: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/columbia/projec ... 08_000.pdf )
The Forest Service is suggesting three alternatives.
Alternative 1: Do nothing – leave the trail as it is with no signs, no safety crossings on SR14, and no official recognition.
Alternative 2: Abandon most of the lower trail. The rest of the trail system would be improved with signage, official parking areas, and one pedestrian underpass under SR14. THE SECTION ALONG THE TOP OF THE BLUFFS DIRECTLY ABOVE THE RIVER AND BY THE WATERFALL WOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PLAN.
Alternative 3: Reroute the trail in several places. Build two pedestrian underpasses. REROUTE THE TRAIL AWAY FROM THE WATERFALL.
If you ask people who have hiked Cape Horn what they remember about the trail they probably will mention the waterfall. Hikers come to Cape Horn because of the many and varied features, including the waterfall. The Columbian had an article a couple months ago http://tinyurl.com/cape-horn-falcons with some background on the Forest Service planning process.
waterfall:
Please email your thoughts to: [email protected] and send a copy of your comments to [email protected]
If you have ever hiked this trail, or have heard about it and want to hike it someday, you should think about commenting on the Forest Service proposals. The document is available for download here: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Alternative 2 seems to be a particularly bad idea if my memory of the trail is correct. Basically they take away the most attractive and fun parts of the trail, leaving the portions of the trail that while nice, aren't particularly different from trails you can find elsewhere. And then add parking and signage for this now less attractive trail - what's the point?
For alternative 3, I'm not sure what the problem with the waterfall is. Maybe safety or the private property comes into play but this alternative doesn't seem much better than #2.
For alternative 3, I'm not sure what the problem with the waterfall is. Maybe safety or the private property comes into play but this alternative doesn't seem much better than #2.
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
This is an important situation for hikers to be aware of and I strongly encourage people to learn as much as they can about the history of how this trail came to be, all sides of the arguments about the current set of affairs -- and send in their comments.
The Cape Horn trail is a very interesting case and it likely going to be precedent-setting in many ways. This is in some ways the brimming to the top of continuing constraints on agencies, building frustrations by conservationists and "trail bandits", and perceived shrinking personal rights by private land owners in the area. Add to this the traffic safety issues of RT14, Native American concerns, environmental issues, and the agendas of three separate non-profit groups, this may have as many hands in the pot as the I5 bridge!
If you haven't been out there yet - you may want to consider doing so!
EDIT: Hey BCostly, I started my post before you added your comment so know this wasn't a reaction to anything you said
This is an important situation for hikers to be aware of and I strongly encourage people to learn as much as they can about the history of how this trail came to be, all sides of the arguments about the current set of affairs -- and send in their comments.
The Cape Horn trail is a very interesting case and it likely going to be precedent-setting in many ways. This is in some ways the brimming to the top of continuing constraints on agencies, building frustrations by conservationists and "trail bandits", and perceived shrinking personal rights by private land owners in the area. Add to this the traffic safety issues of RT14, Native American concerns, environmental issues, and the agendas of three separate non-profit groups, this may have as many hands in the pot as the I5 bridge!
If you haven't been out there yet - you may want to consider doing so!
EDIT: Hey BCostly, I started my post before you added your comment so know this wasn't a reaction to anything you said
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
No problem. My post was certainly simply from a hiker's perspective. I did just read the referred to article with the reference to potential impact to the falcons. Unfortunately the forest service letter is lacking any detail on potential issues and impacts which makes it quite difficult for the public to give informed input.jeffstatt wrote:Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Hey BCostly, I started my post before you added your comment so know this wasn't a reaction to anything you said[/i]
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: June 26th, 2008, 8:37 pm
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
My understanding is that the Forest Service is under pressure from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to close the waterfall to the public because of the presence of a peregrine falcon nest on top of the cliffs nearby. A recent Oregonian artcile http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/o ... thispage=1 describes how a nesting pair on the Marquam Bridge in downtown Portland is being monitored by a platform off the Springwater trail. If falcons thrive above all the activity along downtown Portland's waterfront it seems safe to assume they will continue to thrive at Cape Horn even with the trail there.
I hope enough people submit comments to the Forest Service that they change their plans.
I hope enough people submit comments to the Forest Service that they change their plans.
- Stevefromdodge
- Posts: 2508
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
At a glance this plan exemplifies everything that's wrong with current FS planning. Here's a rare chance where outside parties have already done the work and all they need to do is stamp an approval on it. Instead, they're creating 3 artificial choices: Ignore it, close it or spend lots of money on unneeded improvements.
The way I read it, the primary reason for wanting to close the lower loop is to save the expense of building the pedestrian underpasses that would be necessary. I'm not an engineer, but I would guess that the cost of two underpasses would pay for a 100 miles of new trails.
There's a FS mindset that trails need to be "perfectly" safe. While most hikers want safe trails, we understand that these trails aren't maintained to the same status as the sidewalks downtown. We're willing to walk trails without handrails or asphalt and we're willing to look both ways before we cross the road. Please contribute to the official discussion and let the FS know that the existing trail meets your needs.
The way I read it, the primary reason for wanting to close the lower loop is to save the expense of building the pedestrian underpasses that would be necessary. I'm not an engineer, but I would guess that the cost of two underpasses would pay for a 100 miles of new trails.
There's a FS mindset that trails need to be "perfectly" safe. While most hikers want safe trails, we understand that these trails aren't maintained to the same status as the sidewalks downtown. We're willing to walk trails without handrails or asphalt and we're willing to look both ways before we cross the road. Please contribute to the official discussion and let the FS know that the existing trail meets your needs.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: June 26th, 2008, 8:37 pm
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Good points, Steve. Apparently entirely missing from the Forest Service analysis is the question, "What is best for hikers? Do we go to Cape Horn, or any other trail for that matter, in pursuit of safety or (big brother forbid) in pursuit of something else? Attractions along the trail like views, wildflowers, and waterfalls draw people away from the Discovery Channel and out into the natural world. These experiences are truly endangered and public agencies should do their best to preserve them, not close them off.
- anna in boots
- Posts: 2122
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
- Location: In the moment
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Funny, I found the Cape Horn trail last fall merely by going for a scenic drive and spotting a collection of cars at a gravel turn-off. Turns out, it was an impromptu Mazama gathering and they told me all about the "invisible" trail below. I hiked it at dusk and had a blast, especially the waterfall. I even got a free ride back to my vehicle from a friendly local with an awesome restored '40's Ford truck painted a bright aqua. Memorable day.
What I remember in particular was how adamant these Mazamas were about getting the trail on the map, erecting signs, fixing the trail, etc. but how I felt, deep down inside, that I hoped nothing would happen at all and it would stay gorgeous and "invisible." What's there now is plenty. I have to say that, if it is improved, rerouted, what have you, I will most likely migrate elsewhere to another "invisible" trail. Somethin's gotta stay pure.
anna in boots
What I remember in particular was how adamant these Mazamas were about getting the trail on the map, erecting signs, fixing the trail, etc. but how I felt, deep down inside, that I hoped nothing would happen at all and it would stay gorgeous and "invisible." What's there now is plenty. I have to say that, if it is improved, rerouted, what have you, I will most likely migrate elsewhere to another "invisible" trail. Somethin's gotta stay pure.
anna in boots
Current trip reports at All Thoughts Work™ Outdoors
http://allthoughtsworkoutdoors.wordpress.com/
http://allthoughtsworkoutdoors.wordpress.com/
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
In the defense of those wanting to protect Cape Horn Falls, if the other 108 Gorge falls, the Pacific Ocean, and three volcanos can't get them out from in front of the TV, I'm not sure this one will either. Live in Houston TX for a few years and you may come back thinking it's borderline greedy to expect the FS to just unilaterally adapt any trail that trail bandits build out in the woods despite without any concern for the people who live out there and for conservation groups fighting to protect other interests in the area.UphillHiker wrote:Good points, Steve. Apparently entirely missing from the Forest Service analysis is the question, "What is best for hikers? Do we go to Cape Horn, or any other trail for that matter, in pursuit of safety or (big brother forbid) in pursuit of something else? Attractions along the trail like views, wildflowers, and waterfalls draw people away from the Discovery Channel and out into the natural world. These experiences are truly endangered and public agencies should do their best to preserve them, not close them off.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: June 26th, 2008, 8:37 pm
Re: Cape Horn Plan - public comments needed by July 30th
Interesting thoughts, Jeff!
At the bottom of Cape Horn Road, which would be a sweet place to park, is a sign asking hikers not to even drive down there at all. That seems pretty respectful of locals to me. As for the conservation groups involved, haven't they actually been buying properties and easements for this trail? I don't see that the general public enjoying Cape Horn Falls offends either locals or the conservation groups that have been responsible for protecting Cape Horn from private development. It may not even offend the Forest Service - but for some reason their maps show the trail avoiding the waterfall entirely. As to your other points: the Gorge may have 108 waterfalls but nearly all of them are on the Oregon side. Also, Cape Horn Falls is unique in that it can be reached by public transportation (the trail head parking area is really a bus stop park & ride for Skamania County Transit). Poor people deserve access to these places too.
About Houston: it probably does have fewer outdoor recreation opportunities than Portland, but let's not try to emulate Texas here - we can do better than that!
At the bottom of Cape Horn Road, which would be a sweet place to park, is a sign asking hikers not to even drive down there at all. That seems pretty respectful of locals to me. As for the conservation groups involved, haven't they actually been buying properties and easements for this trail? I don't see that the general public enjoying Cape Horn Falls offends either locals or the conservation groups that have been responsible for protecting Cape Horn from private development. It may not even offend the Forest Service - but for some reason their maps show the trail avoiding the waterfall entirely. As to your other points: the Gorge may have 108 waterfalls but nearly all of them are on the Oregon side. Also, Cape Horn Falls is unique in that it can be reached by public transportation (the trail head parking area is really a bus stop park & ride for Skamania County Transit). Poor people deserve access to these places too.
About Houston: it probably does have fewer outdoor recreation opportunities than Portland, but let's not try to emulate Texas here - we can do better than that!