No skiing below Pebble Creek

If there is a paved trail and hundreds of hikers, it doesn't make sense to me to de-ski when you are skinning up a paved track with snow on it, but I can understand hiking down in places if the snow is thin, especially in a highly used area like Paradise. But a blanket rule with less than 5-ft of snow as a standard...that seems excessive as 5-ft of snow is a lot. Most places in the country don't even see that much snow FWIW and how a skier affects undergrowth from so far up, I'm at a loss to understand, but educate me since I could be in the wrong.

I remember when rules like this were first communicated to me. It began when many skiers/boarders began yo, yoing slopes near the car. Building jumps mostly. I saw a lot of damage occurring by most, but not all. It was unfortunate. Nowadays it is becoming more prevalent since there are so many more skiers at paradise than there ever used to be, especially in the summer and early fall/winter months. When you become a large user group there comes with that distinction more oversight of your impact. Thus blanket rules like this.

=There are a lot of places to ski that aren't at Paradise.

I don't think the 5-ft rule applies solely to Paradise.  I think the concern about damage to subalpine and alpine vegetation is throughout the park, including the Tatoosh.  Paradise just gets more hiker/climber/skier/boarder use, and thus damage, and thus requiring more rehabilitation work ... but there is lots of rehab going on at Mazama Ridge.  In essence, skiing is pretty much over except above 7,000-7,500 ft asl or much higher and to get there and back the park wants you to hike, not skin or ski.  In the past, this time of year, I pretty much carried up to above Pebble and down, but my spouse would take the skis on and ove to ski the patches of snow.  I could not quarrel with her skiing the patches when they were thick enough (say 2 ft with no veg visible thru the translucent snow; IMHO as a certified senior ecologist with over 40 yrs experience) but I don't think it is especially helpful to lightly skin/ski-step across the thinner patches or gaps between patches (one traverse may not hurt, but multiple would) or to ski over protruding shrub or tree tips.  I really don't see a connection between ski tracks and social trails, however.  Social trails are a problem, but most skin tracks tend to follow the established trails (although as mentioned above there have been lots of exceptions, increasing in recent years).  But as soon as school's out and the summer tourism begins, social trails are all over the place with kids looking for snow patches to play and slide in (skiers looking for Muir).

As far as Sunrise goes, I haven't been there in the last few years and I haven't seen the park management-park ownership conflict.  When I did ski there, we generally carried our skis and followed trails til we got to snow.

 

I would agree to work on it if the skier community agreed to act responsibly.  However I can tell you that the park's past experience with the skier community has not been good.  Burroughs Mountain is a rare, isolated arctic tundra plant community that has remained since the last ice age.  Skiers regularly go off trail ruining the vegetation there in order to get to snow patches.  The park service would need to know that this would not be occurring.  It only takes a few noncompliant skiers to mess it up for everyone.

You seem well informed and pretty much confirmed what we all thought in that there was a conscious decision to open Sunrise late when all the snow was gone. As you can tell from many of the responses, the NPS has lost the respect of many of the backcountry skiers with it's arbitrary and stupid policies and attempts to close the Crystal boundary.
A skier was recently warned at Chinook Pass for building a snow kicker and told that it was against the rules which is absolute BS.

  I was up at Chinook one day and there where 6 park rangers driving back and forward in NPS pickups and that superintendent strutting around.  I absolutely love MRNP and as an immigrant to the USA ,think America's national parks are it's crown jewels. Any complaint about the service we get from the staff and volunteers is responded to with" we only have limited resources". WE ALL HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES but we learn to use them wisely and efficiently, something the NPS has not learnt to do.

I'm trying to not make this a personal attack on you but on the NPS, but find it very hard to ignore the sense of superiority and arrogance contained in the statement that you will help open Sunrise earlier if you deem the the behaviour of the skier community improved.
Information and discussion is good, moral edicts from "superior beings" I find laughable!

If there is a paved trail and hundreds of hikers, it doesn't make sense to me to de-ski when you are skinning up a paved track with snow on it, but I can understand hiking down in places if the snow is thin, especially in a highly used area like Paradise. But a blanket rule with less than 5-ft of snow as a standard...that seems excessive as 5-ft of snow is a lot.

Despite wanding the trail so that folks would be going on top of paved trail in many places the wands didn't follow the pavement. It's really difficult to stay on pavement with snow over it.

I don't understand it to be a rule of 5 feet of snow. The problem now is that it's 5 feet in one place and almost nothing very close by appearing to be coverage when it's really not.

  Now anyone reading this thread is on notice that you shouldn't ski there.

Don't you think you are doing more harm for your cause with statements like that.????

You seem well informed and pretty much confirmed what we all thought in that there was a conscious decision to open Sunrise late when all the snow was gone.

I certainly am not in a position to represent any "conscious decision" of the park.  However it is elementary that the park's concerns include preservation as well as the desires of user groups.

I'm trying to not make this a personal attack on you but on the NPS, but find it very hard to ignore the sense of superiority and arrogance contained in the statement that you will help open Sunrise earlier if you deem the the behaviour of the skier community improved.
Information and discussion is good, moral edicts from "superior beings" I find laughable!

I retain the prerogative to put my efforts where I want when I want and don't give a fig whether you approve.  And I don't have a desire to further narrow parochial interests at the expense of the bigger picture of preserving what makes a place so special.