Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Use this forum to post links to news stories from other websites - ones that other hikers might find interesting. This is not intended for original material or anecdotal information. You can reply to any news stories posted, but do not start a new thread without a link to a specific news story.
User avatar
Splintercat
Posts: 8328
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Portland
Contact:

Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Splintercat » December 7th, 2021, 8:51 pm

Some big news from Senator Wyden and Rep. Blumenauer -- a major expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area that would cover most of the north half of Mount Hood National Forest, expand wilderness protection here and there, and (most importantly) shift USFS management from timber production to recreation and forest restoration, with a major emphasis on trails. You can read the high-level concept and view the fairly detailed map here:

Mount Hood NRA Expansion

I've been quite involved in this on behalf of TKO, and I'm really pleased to see it finally moving forward. This is LONG overdue for our beloved Mt. Hood (and the Gorge). That said, all things in D.C. are fraught right now, so while this had a solid chance to move through the House while the Democrats hold the chamber, the divided Senate will be more challenging. Your voice matters -- and there's also a link to submit comments through January 7.

Thanks!

-Tom :)

johnspeth
Posts: 346
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 8:33 am

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by johnspeth » December 7th, 2021, 9:20 pm

Indeed, it's good news. I noticed that a few proposed wilderness additions actually have roads (see the proposed areas just south of the Trillium Lake CG). Has the roadless rule for Wilderness designation gone away?

User avatar
Waffle Stomper
Posts: 3707
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Waffle Stomper » December 8th, 2021, 8:38 am

Best news in awhile. Thank you Splinter for all your efforts on this. I'll be submitting my comments and support.
"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir

Webfoot
Posts: 1759
Joined: November 25th, 2015, 11:06 am
Location: Troutdale

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Webfoot » December 8th, 2021, 11:37 am

4610 is Abbott ROAD. USFS has been trying to keep it closed for no good reason.

User avatar
RobFromRedland
Posts: 1094
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by RobFromRedland » December 8th, 2021, 2:44 pm

Webfoot wrote:
December 8th, 2021, 11:37 am
4610 is Abbott ROAD. USFS has been trying to keep it closed for no good reason.
FYI, the majority of it is now open, although you have to access it from 4613. The first 1.3 miles off 224 is still closed. It is supposed to re-open entirely "soon" - there is heavy equipment working on the private land at the beginning of the road which is why they've kept that closed.

Now if they would just re-open 224!
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: WOW! What a ride! - Hunter S. Thompson

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Charley » December 8th, 2021, 4:42 pm

Splintercat wrote:
December 7th, 2021, 8:51 pm
I've been quite involved in this on behalf of TKO, and I'm really pleased to see it finally moving forward. This is LONG overdue for our beloved Mt. Hood (and the Gorge).
It looks like there are some good ideas in here, and for the hard work, I'm grateful!

But... it does look like the proposed Wilderness designation near the Boulder Lakes area trails, which represent some of the remaining trails with legal mountain bike access. Am I reading this map correctly that the map is drawn to exclude these trails, and that there is a line of non-wilderness following the trail up from Boulder Creek toward Gunsight Ridge?

If so, good work!

If not, then I'm disappointed. The local use of NRA statute has shown we can protect wilderness qualities and ecological values without excluding important recreational groups that can be allies in the larger effort to reduce unsustainable resource extraction.

On the other hand, I'd countenance losing some mileage of trails to Wilderness, if I saw that the MHNF was making any on-the-ground progress on long-stalled plans for mountain bike access elsewhere. (And I'm talking about publicly accessible trails, not bike parks like Timberline's). I'm sure there are some people who'd mourn the trail access they've enjoyed for years or decades, but if it's over-balanced by a large increase in total legal mileage, perhaps that's a win.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
Splintercat
Posts: 8328
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Portland
Contact:

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Splintercat » December 8th, 2021, 6:38 pm

Thanks for the posts -- I can respond on some of the questions, since I've been immersed in this stuff for awhile!

@Charley -- yes, the Boulder Lakes wilderness additions were designed to keep some key mountain bike trails intact. That was largely the work of Matt Weintraub -- who recently relocated to Nevada for a new job opportunity, a big loss for the Oregon mountain biking community. There are some proposed other wilderness adds tailored to respect mountain biking areas, notably on the north end of McIntyre Ridge.

@ Webfoot -- the USFS had never closed 4610, though it had become impassable to most vehicles. Following the Riverside Fire they took the opportunity repair the slide area near the east end of the road, and I expect it to remain open in primitive condition (e.g., it won't be surfaced with gravel or have any other changes beyond basic grading, from what I can tell). The issue here has been dirt bikes and ATVs entering the trails of the Salmon-Huck that connect to the road -- especially Salmon Butte, so that's why some have argued to close the road. It also has wilderness on both sides, right up to the road, so dirt bikes and ATVs have a noise impact that can't be avoided. For now, it's going to remain open, though.

@johnspeth -- Congress has gone there before (in terms of establishing wilderness that includes old roads), and the assumption is that the roads will be closed and possibly decommissioned. The Roaring River additions in 2009 included areas like this, as well as the Elk Cove additions to the Mount Hood Wilderness (that's what they were called, but more accurately, this area was the Clear Fork valley on the north side of the mountain, including Owl Point). The USFS decommissioned the many roads in this area -- some before the wilderness additions, some in response to it, I believe.

Thanks for the interest, and get those comments in! I'm working on a blog post that hits some of the highlights. One that jumped out to me is the exclusion of the Badger Creek Wilderness from the NRA. While it would remain well-protected, the NRA status could bring recreation funds to this badly neglected wilderness -- and it's one that is hard for groups like TKO to tend trails in because of its remoteness for day trips. So, there's my two cents on that detail in the map.

I'm also really pleased to see both BLM and USFS lands along the Lolo Pass Corridor included in the NRA. There are so many great trail possibilities in that area in close proximity to Portland and US 26, so my hope is that the NRA designation might help get some new trails going... some very pretty areas there, despite the intrusion of the BPA lines.

-Tom :-)

Webfoot
Posts: 1759
Joined: November 25th, 2015, 11:06 am
Location: Troutdale

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Webfoot » December 9th, 2021, 7:42 am

I have been to the long existing washout on 4610. I knew it had been repaired and was looking forward driving it this year but they kept it closed long after it was needed.

What about 5800.240 to Linney Creek Trailhead, and Kinzel Lake Road to Fir Tree Trailhead and Devils Peak Trailhead? Are these to remain as Wilderness exceptions like 4610?

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by Charley » December 9th, 2021, 4:17 pm

Splintercat wrote:
December 8th, 2021, 6:38 pm
@Charley -- yes, the Boulder Lakes wilderness additions were designed to keep some key mountain bike trails intact. That was largely the work of Matt Weintraub -- who recently relocated to Nevada for a new job opportunity, a big loss for the Oregon mountain biking community. There are some proposed other wilderness adds tailored to respect mountain biking areas, notably on the north end of McIntyre Ridge.
Awesome! I wasn't sure from the map, but I did recall you've written about the issue and had good solutions.

I'm in favor, then. Anything that increases recreational opportunities here will be an investment in growing the environmental movement.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
BigBear
Posts: 1836
Joined: October 1st, 2009, 11:54 am

Re: Major Expansion of the Mount Hood National Recreation Area Proposed

Post by BigBear » December 12th, 2021, 3:25 pm

I read over the proposal but I didn't see anything specific about anything. I'm wondering how broad strokes of protection and enhancement of recreational opportunities will play out. The colorful map might have been interesting if it had a legend. I don't know if I had a poor internet connection that kept me from identifying how the colored sections of the map related to the proposal's goals. More trail miles and more hiking opportunities would be high on my list of objectives. I suspect that whatever happens won't be immediate, it will be measured in generational terms. The proposal seems like it would be a benefit but I'll have to wait to see the substance before I can be sure.

Post Reply