I agree with you on that point, but we can't go full speed ahead now for many reasons. Unfortunately we need a new mindset, new methods of harvesting, and different funding sources.jdemott wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2022, 4:32 pmThe sad reality is that USFS budgets depend on timber harvests. Forty years ago, logging was going full speed and there was plenty of money for trail maintenance. Not so much now.Waffle Stomper wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2022, 12:56 pmPerhaps it's time we reduce even more commercial timber harvests in our National Forests and build more trails to accommodate the added bootprints.
Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
- Waffle Stomper
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir
- retired jerry
- Posts: 14424
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
and 40 years ago they increased logging to a level that was long term unsustainable
we got used to that level
then we had to cut logging (because it was unsustainable)
now, some people are aggrieved that the logging was cut impacting their economy
but it wasn't because of unreasonable environmentalists, it was because they were cutting too much so we had to reduce
we got used to that level
then we had to cut logging (because it was unsustainable)
now, some people are aggrieved that the logging was cut impacting their economy
but it wasn't because of unreasonable environmentalists, it was because they were cutting too much so we had to reduce
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
To be clear, I wasn't advocating a return to full speed logging like we had forty years ago, just pointing out the realities of budgeting. I agree whole heartedly that a new mindset is needed, taking into account what is hopefully a deeper understanding of ways to balance forest health with society's need for forest products. And obviously, we need to figure out how to pay for more and better trails because the demand is clearly overwhelming.Waffle Stomper wrote: ↑March 16th, 2022, 1:40 pmwe can't go full speed ahead now for many reasons. Unfortunately we need a new mindset, new methods of harvesting, and different funding sources.
- retired jerry
- Posts: 14424
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
Waffle Stomper wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2022, 12:56 pmPerhaps it's time we reduce even more commercial timber harvests in our National Forests and build more trails to accommodate the added bootprints.
I fear we are ending up with the worst possible combination:
1. The FS doesn't have the money to build new trails, because the current logging system doesn't cover the costs of building new trails, and fire-fighting has eaten up a ton of money.
2. Even if the FS had the money, there doesn't seem to be any enthusiasm for building trails in areas where people like to hike. I'm guessing this is due to the same preservationist attitude that brought us the familiar exclusionist reading of the Wilderness Act, responsible for the new permit programs.
3. The FS will still gladly sell off old-growth timber, as in the Grasshopper Timber Sale:
https://bark-out.org/news/action-alert- ... ld-growth/
I know the FS has a tough task: it must follow a bewildering mix of laws and policies that are aimed at resource extraction, but also conservation and strict preservation.
Does it really make sense to clear-cut old-growth forests with one hand, and, with the other, exclude people from popular areas because of resource impacts? All while failing to make recreation investments to mitigate the impacts of the crowding?
It all adds up to a completely irrational portrait of our wildlands management. I'm sure the individual employees feel like they're making the best decisions they can, but it looks insane.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
Paying to visit public lands is greatly offensive because its just another notch on the post toward privitization. But in the case of the old scenic highway, traffic and packed trailheads have created its own restriction. I had to look back over my records to determine when I last was on this section of the highway for a hike. I guess I've imposed my own prison sentence. My last time on the old highway: March 1, 2015 when I hiked from Wahkeena to Angels Rest and back. In terms of the "summer months" I had to go back to May 7, 2011 and June 6, 2010 for a pair of Nesika hikes. I was last at the Angels Rest trailhead on December 29, 2013 and the Horsetail-Oneonta trails on April 12, 1914. It's quite an epiphany to see how much I have avoided this area during any time of the year due to the hordes of people. I'm glad I had my hundreds of visits when arriving at the trailhead at 9am would earn you any spot in the lot.
Probably the most curious thing about the toll-them-till-they-stay-at-home approach to our freedoms is the urban freeways. Although Portland is the cause of the problem, Metro's push is to leave the freeways inside the city toll-free but toll the suburbs so you can't travel from Clackamas to Oregon City or Wilsonville to Tigard without paying a fee. Sounds a bit self-serving to me, but I'm just a guy who lives outside the big city.
Probably the most curious thing about the toll-them-till-they-stay-at-home approach to our freedoms is the urban freeways. Although Portland is the cause of the problem, Metro's push is to leave the freeways inside the city toll-free but toll the suburbs so you can't travel from Clackamas to Oregon City or Wilsonville to Tigard without paying a fee. Sounds a bit self-serving to me, but I'm just a guy who lives outside the big city.
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
This is the crux of the problem in my opinion, regardless of funding USFS does not want to build new trails they want to herd everybody in a limited trail system then because of "overcrowding" limit access. If I was someone who wanted to reduce my workload and make my job easier I might follow a similar approach. The slow but inevitable closing down and locking out of Public lands is about the only thing that make me grateful to be as old as I am. At least I got 70% of my hiking life in before all this Bull Shit started.Charley wrote: ↑March 17th, 2022, 2:06 pm2. Even if the FS had the money, there doesn't seem to be any enthusiasm for building trails in areas where people like to hike. I'm guessing this is due to the same preservationist attitude that brought us the familiar exclusionist reading of the Wilderness Act, responsible for the new permit programs.
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
Short version:BigBear wrote: ↑March 18th, 2022, 4:20 pmBut in the case of the old scenic highway, traffic and packed trailheads have created its own restriction. I had to look back over my records to determine when I last was on this section of the highway for a hike. I guess I've imposed my own prison sentence.
...
It's quite an epiphany to see how much I have avoided this area during any time of the year due to the hordes of people. I'm glad I had my hundreds of visits when arriving at the trailhead at 9am would earn you any spot in the lot.
I don't think that hikers' subjective experience of "crowding" on the trails should be our management priority.
- Crowdedness does not matter to everyone.
- Even in the case of a popular trail like Angel's Rest, one can still park in the lot easily, and hike in relative solitude, if one doesn't try to hike on the most crowded days.
Long version:
I do acknowledge that many of us hikers prefer to not hike in crowds. I love to brag to my friends about hiking 70 miles of wilderness trails and seeing only a few parties (even in the Cascade Lakes during alpine larch season!). I also acknowledge that the Gorge has gotten more busy with hikers.
But, I actually seek out busier trails sometimes, like when I'm feeling lonely, or want to see more people (I especially have done that during the pandemic). I enjoy seeing other people enjoy the forest and the views. I know I'm not alone, or there. . . wouldn't be as many people out there on the most crowded trails at the most crowded times! ("It's so crowded, no one goes there any more" is a logical fallacy).
But I don't think that one necessarily must avoid all of these trails permanently. I've hiked Angel's Rest numerous times in the last year, and never fought for a parking spot. The best way to avoid crowds is to avoid sunny summer weekend mornings.
- I often go on a weekday.
- I usually park in the late afternoon.
- I don't bother trying to go there on a weekend morning, but I'd go on a Saturday afternoon or evening.
- Sometimes I go during cloudy weather, but I'm not even seeking out rainy weather to keep people away.
- I tend to hike there in the fall/winter/spring.
- I hike with a headlamp, so that I can see any sunset that the weather gods allow.
So I don't think it would be accurate to say that one cannot find solitude in the Gorge.
Maybe a person is a dyed-in-the-wool, morning-only-hiker, who only has weekends free, and doesn't want to see a soul out on the trail. That would be difficult combination of limitations and desires!
I don't think that, given this theoretical person's combination of limitations and desires, it would logically follow that the exclusionary policies that land managers have started taking are the correct response.
Finally, from what I can tell, the HCRH permits have more to do with dangerous traffic conditions than crowded trails. They're specifically allowing entry on public transit or bike. In the reporting I've seen, there are no specific mention of limits on trail access.
On the other hand, since the system seems to preclude parking in the late afternoon (permits required until 6pm), it looks like I might not be able to take advantage of my normal tricks to visit the Gorge when it's less busy. If so, that's a bummer!
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.
- retired jerry
- Posts: 14424
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
They close a gate at the freeway when the Multnomah Falls lot is full so people can't exit the freeway
Maybe something like that would work for HCRH. And have a sign at the freeway exit saying it's closed.
Maybe something like that would work for HCRH. And have a sign at the freeway exit saying it's closed.
-
- Posts: 528
- Joined: May 11th, 2015, 8:41 pm
- Location: Troutdale
Re: Ticketed access to HCRH waterfall corridor
There's some additional/updated info up now at https://www.waterfallcorridorpermits.org
It does answer one question for me--the maps they put out earlier showed the parking lot on 84 as requiring a [separate] permit. Huh? Well, in effect that's what they've done. The timed entry permit for visiting Multnomah Falls that they were doing previously has now shifted so that they're checking your permit (or ticket showing you came by transit and don't need one, I guess) at the pedestrian tunnel. So you can't get any further than the parking lot without that.
Also interesting that they've moved the western border from Vista house to bridal veil
It does answer one question for me--the maps they put out earlier showed the parking lot on 84 as requiring a [separate] permit. Huh? Well, in effect that's what they've done. The timed entry permit for visiting Multnomah Falls that they were doing previously has now shifted so that they're checking your permit (or ticket showing you came by transit and don't need one, I guess) at the pedestrian tunnel. So you can't get any further than the parking lot without that.
Also interesting that they've moved the western border from Vista house to bridal veil
Last edited by squidvicious on April 15th, 2022, 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.