NPS avy gear census at Crystal Southback

I think you are "dog piling"  and I can see RonJ in my mind smiling and saying I told you so.

Master Obi Wan Jock - Can one make a pile of one?

I have searched my soul and reached for the force but still 3 things come back to haunt me.

1. The Park previously tried and failed to close the boundary.
2. They failed because Darth Uber didn't have numbers and relied on his dark side of the force "feelings"
3. He claims not to know that his employees are surveilling that boundary and collecting visitor data. Despite it being common and published knowledge for several years that they were doing so.

I'm just stunned by Ronje. he seems to be content with Deputy Ranger Clump's answers which, at least to me and I'm sure to you, seem to confirm our worst fears on this issue.

Either Ron has Yoda like calmness and serenity or he's really the.....

Lots of interesting background & comments on last year's thread...especially #13, by wise Joe:
www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=11895.0

Here's mine: I think we need to form a commitee/ group whatever you want to call it . This group needs to diplomatic type as its spokesman. The group needs to meet with Boyne and the NPS, start engaging them in a conversation about the issue and try and find a solution that keeps access open! Our apathy will allow the inevitable to happen unless we start engaging them.
Somebody like GaryJan would be perfect as the spokesman, team leader ( not trying to draft you BUT) as he has crediblity, a smooth diplomatic manner and experience working with the Park Sytem on ski related matters.
How about you JP?
Wshat about the original members of the group that won the initial decision?
Anybody want to step up to the plate and help me get this formalized and organized??

Scotsman and All,

I agree that there may be an important opportunity evolving here, and while I am happy to serve as a resource to the degree that my previous time spent on the successful appeal allows, I have since moved out of the White River drainage and my current place of residence, time available,  and travel logistics would likely make me much less effective than others here in terms of serving as a reliable spokesperson.

Having been personally amazed (and insulted by)  the attitude displayed by the Park Superintendent and his legal counsel during the Renton Settlement Conference, I would want to see the NPS signal a sincere invitation from the Sup's office before investing significant blood, sweat and tears into any "constructive" process.  If the NPS folks referenced here are serious, they will read this and can certainly send a signal that they are for real.  Anything short of a nod and engagement from the top is worthless in my humble opinion as the NPS has plenty of reasonable staff who have no real power or influence.

I would also want to make sure that someone from Boyne had a seat at the table.  Given that the USFS significantly softened their stance during the appeal process, it may well be that Boyne welcomes closure action by the NPS as a way to build support for the lift directly to the top of the King.  I'm sure that Boyne also is reading these posts and can share whether they see reaching peace with the NPS as a positive step -- or a slip backwards in attaining their ultimate vision for the resort.  Either way, we can rest assured that they are meeting with the NPS on these and other issues and should be included if this effort is going to get any traction.

Lastly, for those who were not engaged in the first round of this in 2004, the NPS case for closure never really was about environmental impact.  They tried to make a case that this was so, but their own technical data buried in the Appendices told a much different story which the Sup denied when confronted during the above referenced settlement conference meeting.  More support for the need for the NPS to step forward with a sincere offer to collaborate if they are really serious.  My 2 cents anyway.

Thanks to all who have expressed an interest in working on this, and to Marcus for providing the forum for this information sharing.  The risk of a negative precedent is real here, and could have impacts in other ski communities.  It (once again) is worth the fight.

J.P.



 

Thanks J.P, and dead on as usual.
As I said, we need to hear it from the "man"... The Superintendent of the Park.
He's the one that's spearheaded this policy and he's the one who said " he feels skiing harms the park" .Ron's Ranger Klump although a good guy I'm sure isn't the "man."

A few years ago I went up to Sunrise when it opened and there was no skiable snow left.
I went to the Ranger's office to talk to somebody about their road opening policy. I found a Ranger and we talked for a long time and he encouraged me to stay as the Superintendent was on his way to Sunrise and he thought it would be a good idea for me to talk to the Superintendent direct.
The Ranger was very sympathetic and was a BC skier and told me that many in the park felt the same way regarding the road opening and that inter-division politics where rife between the East and West side Rangers and Maintenance crews and that their internal attempts  to get the road open early was futile.
We had a great, civil ,sensible conversation. Needless to say I waited for a long time and the Super never showed up.

The " group"( if it ever forms) needs to talk to the Superintendent.

Here's mine: I think we need to form a commitee/ group whatever you want to call it . This group needs to diplomatic type as its spokesman. The group needs to meet with Boyne and the NPS, start engaging them in a conversation about the issue and try and find a solution that keeps access open! Our apathy will allow the inevitable to happen unless we start engaging them.
Somebody like GaryJan would be perfect as the spokesman, team leader ( not trying to draft you BUT) as he has crediblity, a smooth diplomatic manner and experience working with the Park Sytem on ski related matters.

I sincerely appreciate your comments Scotsman, but for all the same reasons listed by J.P., it would also be difficult for me to act as a spokesperson. I would be very happy to contribute to this group in any way I can though. I also agree with J.P.'s comments that Boyne needs to be part of the group and that there needs to be a clear signal from the Superintendent's office that he is willing to engage in meaningful dialog. Without that, nothing of substance can happen.

That's good to hear BUT I have had run ins with the ONP Rangers up at Hurricane.
They have a policy that all backcountry travelers must sign into the log book by the visitor center and will give you a ticket if you don't.
Have they changed that policy at ONP or is it still enforced upon penalty of a fine.?

How long ago did your "encounter" occur? The sign in log is in the outer foyer of the visitor center. If we are heading out the road towards Hurricane Hill, we will usually sign in and out. I have never felt I was required to sign in, and I have not seen or heard of a Ranger confronting a visitor in the manner you were. In contrast, the current group of Rangers at Hurricane are very professional in their dealings with the public and the District Ranger is an advocate of winter recreation at the Ridge.
As you are aware there are several backcountry access points along the last 3 miles of the road (Switchback Trail to Mt Angeles, Maggies, Obstruction Point Road). I doubt anyone entering the backcountry from any of these points takes the time to drive to the VC and sign in (and out). Again, I have not heard of anyone finding a ticket on their windshield when returning to their cars.

Gary

GaryJan ,
About two years ago I think. I was with other people so they can verify. I too like you thought it was voluntary to sign in and out but this ranger was very emphatic that it was not. As I said, I challenged him on this and he went away and got a little sort of rule book and actually showed me the passage that said he had the power to fine me if I didn't.

I wasn't the only one as he was approaching everybody that was gearing up in the lot by the lodge and telling them they HAD to not should!

Very strange, maybe you could check into the rule when you are up there next and see if the policy has either changed or is no longer being enforced but still on the books and let us know or just a ranger on a bad day!
Thanks for your kind offer of assistance.