[pct-l] Pictures of Pleasantview ridge trail option section D

[dsaufley]

Lecturing? I prefer "advising." This was posted in a community forum. My
goal is to underscore to all anxious hikers who saw your message that
Pleasant View Ridge a possible alternate and followed the links to the
photographs of "Elwood" (please insert your own "expletives") hiking in the
closure: it is NOT acceptable to be hiking in this area, unless and until
the USFS reopens it. 

PCT hikers need to be respectful of the forest rules.  Bad behavior on the
part of a few can shut out everyone. I can plainly see that Pleasant View
Ridge is not in the burn area. That is not the point.  It is in the CLOSURE
area.  I do not know all the reasons why this unburned area is closed, but
it is logical that it may provide refuge to displaced wildlife.  The
majority of wildlife habitat in the San Gabriels was utterly destroyed by
the Station, Sheep, and Morris fires. Wildlife sightings have increased in
the towns that border the forests. What happened to most of the creatures
large and small up there is too horrific to imagine. The desperate survivors
are stressed and have nowhere to go. Maybe the collective "we" really
shouldn't be in their remaining refuge.  Maybe it's not all about "us." 

The fact that some member of "Elwood's" hiking group is a USFS employee is
irrelevant.  That fact does not condone violating the closure.  Promulgating
information about going into the closure does not make it right either. The
Angeles NF has a history of closing the forest to hikers.  They've been
closing it almost every fire season in recent years, as have many southern
California national forests. I stand as a witness as we've had to help
numerous sobos who hiked 2,100 miles but could not finish because of
closures.  When pleading their case, the good folks at the FS offices
(rightfully) had ZERO sympathy.  To roughly quote, "there are people who
cannot access their homes and businesses in the forest during the closure.
We are not going to tell these people they cannot go into the forest,
suffering personal and financial losses, and then turn around and let hikers
in." That was BEFORE the devastating Station, Sheep, and Morris fires, and
before two precious lives and many homes and business were lost. The USFS
lost many stations and resources in the Angeles, and many employees were
left homeless by these fires. The unprecedented devastation cannot be
overstated.

I love hikers as much if not more than anybody. But in the big picture
thru-hikers, who are basically lucky folks that are out on a lark and want
to hike the whole thing, are not guaranteed a route through the now-closed
forest. To have that privilege, hikers should be on their best behavior, not
their worst.  Which brings me back to "Elwood" and why he gets under my skin
like he does:

* Elwood is representational of all of the abusers who go past the closure
signs, no motorcycle signs, no mountain bike signs, etc.
* Elwood behaves as though he is above the rules, which implies that he
thinks he is better or more privileged than the rest of us.
* Elwood behaves as though his enthusiasm and love for hiking the mountains
is superior to the rest of ours, therefore he can go in, while the rest of
us cannot.
* Elwood's brazen flaunting of his rule-breaking on the internet is
encouraging others.
* Elwood is doing all hikers a disservice by violating the rules, but
apparently doesn't care as long as he gets to do what he wants to do.  

If they open up the trail, they will also open the door to OHVs, mountain
bikes, and an even greater number of  people like Elwood who would not stay
within limited boundaries. Putting myself in their shoes, if I were the
USFS, I would be extremely cautious about opening access.  Give people an
inch, and they will take a mile. Look at what "Elwood" does when it's
closed.  

Last but not least, a personal lesson learned. I've found that something
posted in cyberspace will become a reference for an untold number of people.
For example: our zip code changed approximately 10 years ago.  All relevant
resources where our address is available were immediately changed to reflect
the new zip code. I've posted and reposted the new information time and
again. Ten years later, we are still getting packages addressed to the old
zip code. The same is true for other mail locations that once existed in our
little town but have been gone for years:  Century 21, Richard's Canyon
Market, and the now non-existent Agua Dulce Post Office. That old
information is floating around, still getting used. Thankfully our mail
carrier knows all about the hiking scene and sends all of the boxes here
regardless of the bad addresses. Take from it what you will.

L-Rod


-----Original Message-----
From: canoeman at qnet.com [mailto:canoeman at qnet.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:24 PM
To: dsaufley at sprynet.com
Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
Subject: RE: [pct-l] Pictures of Pleasantview ridge trail option section D

I hope your not lecturing me, I have not hiked the closed area. But my
property
is up against the ridge. This guy in the forum is the same one who actually
hiked the burn areas last fall and posted the pics on that forum site.
It's interesting to note that one of the forum  members is a angles national
forest ranger. 
So they know about these goings on.
I am the local volunteer the PCTA is talking about, in the PCTA  report. I
have
been in contact with Nitro.
The ridge trail they hiked is not in the burn area. To be precise its about
3
miles from the burn limit at its closest, about the first mile, then it
swings
away abruptly to be about 10 miles away by the time it hits alimoney ridge.
I
posted these guys links simply to show the view from the
ridge. By posting this link, I am hoping that the PCTA folks will see that
this
could be a viable detour. there is a twenty year old dirt bike, horse trail
trail all the way from  mt williamson to alimony ridge and a jeep trail from
alimony ridge to cheseboro rd. these were very well used until the
wilderness
bill went through.
The forest service often acts without checking the facts as is the case with
the limits of the closures. None of this proposed route is within miles of
the
burn area, but it is closed.
Should they choose this route, I think it would be an excellent option to
road
walks.
But I have a feeling they wont allow this route because frankly I think the
forest service really doesn't care. It's pretty much got it's hands full
with
the real burn area.
My main worry is that if the PCTA waits too long, the communities will be
 more  inclined to just fight the re-route through juniper hills, valyermo,
because of not having sufficient time time to accommodate and plan for
hundreds
of the hikers walking thru their residential streets.
 If they think this route is being forced on them, I realistically foresee
the
town councils, congressman getting involved, and the offers of private
property
access trails being withdrawn.
If that happens, we can definitely count on 45 miles of black top walking,
with
no offers of water access. But this is all a moot point until the PCTA
decides,
but it certainly doesn't hurt to suggest viable future routes, this is a
forum
yes.

Canoeman
 

Quoting dsaufley <dsaufley at sprynet.com>:

> This proposed route is WITHIN THE FOREST CLOSURE. The jackass "Elwood"
(and
> his friend "Turtle") who are going up there, violating the closure, then
> posting pictures on the internet should be caught and fined.  Fines can
> range up to $10,000 for being within a closed area.
> 
> HIKERS SHOULD NOT USE THIS ALTERNATIVE. PLEASE STAY OUT OF THE CLOSURE. 
> 
> Keep your eye on the PCTA website for updates regarding alternatives.
They
> do not expect to announce an alternate until APRIL.  See below for the
> "official" status of the alternate.
> 
> www.pcta.org/planning/during_trip/Trail_con_SC.asp?sect=D
> 
> L-Rod
> . 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> On Behalf Of canoeman at qnet.com
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 5:57 PM
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: [pct-l] Pictures of Pleasantview ridge trail option section D
> 
> Here are some pics of the possible Pleasantview Ridge possible trail
detour
> for
> the station fire.
> These guys hiked it in the snow, so no snow would be easier.
> This would be a lot nicer then the road walk.
> 
>
http://sangabrielmnts.myfreeforum.org/Pleasant_View_Ridge_to_Will_Thrall_Pea
> k_Part_2_about2498.html
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/8080049@N08/sets/72157623251411977/show/
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-l mailing list
> Pct-l at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
> 
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> 
>