Home > Forum > Categories > Random Tracks > Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance

Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance

  • Beardedclam
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230639 by Beardedclam
Replied by Beardedclam on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance

To be clear, I'm trying to help create space for a serious discussion between reasonable people.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • kamtron
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230570 by kamtron
Replied by kamtron on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance
Heli-free, you might find a better audience for these rants on 4chan

Keep up the good work, CBA

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Jim Oker
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230733 by Jim Oker
Replied by Jim Oker on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance
Hey CBAlliance - thanks for reaching out to the community here and giving us a chance to have input. Like a few others here, I find myself questioning the choices for priorities on the "plowing" part of your projects plan.

Frankly while I think it's great and important to have some organized effort on access hereabouts, I'm finding it hard to get excited about pitching in given those stated priorities. It might help me if I could see a little past them - for instance could you share any sort of "grading rubric" you used for stack ranking the great many possible "plowing" projects one could imagine in our region? I think it might be quite helpful to expose that and have a robust community discussion about it, which would also let folks like me think out what additional ideas to contribute along with deciding whether we want to contribute more in terms of time and energy toward your mission. I don't think this would need to be a time-consuming thing for you to put out there, assuming you guys did have some method to how you winnowed to your current list.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • CBAlliance
  • Topic Author
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230734 by CBAlliance
Replied by CBAlliance on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance

Hey CBAlliance - thanks for  reaching out to  the  community here and giving us a chance to have input. Like a few others  here, I find myself questioning the choices for  priorities  on the  "plowing" part  of  your projects  plan.

Frankly while I think it's great and  important to have some organized effort on  access hereabouts, I'm  finding it hard to get excited about pitching in given those  stated priorities. It might help me if I could see a little past them - for instance could you  share any sort of  "grading rubric" you  used for stack ranking the great many possible "plowing" projects one could imagine in  our region? I  think it might be  quite  helpful  to expose that  and have a robust community discussion  about it, which would also let folks like me think  out what  additional ideas to contribute along with deciding whether we want to  contribute more  in terms  of time and energy toward your mission. I don't think this would need  to be a time-consuming thing for you to put out there, assuming you guys did have some method to how you  winnowed to your current  list.


Hi Jim,

Thanks for your response. Let me say right up front that there's no formula here. I wish we had one- I'd share it in a second! We lack the resources to even put together data. I understand that the project selection seems a little haphazard, and that is in large part because we are really shooting for things that are feasible and that we have resources and connections to maybe make happen. I will acknowledge that there isn't one obvious project for us to be throwing all our time and money at, such as the Hurricane Ridge road in Olympic NP. So, what's the point? And why the current plowing priorities, which are Twin Lakes/Skyline on 542 and the Kendall/Commonwealth TH?

Our plowing priorities are based on reducing pressure on the two most heavily accessed backcountry areas (anecdotally), which are Snoqualmie Pass and Mt. Baker. Lot 4 at Alpental and the Table Mountain/Bagley Lakes area are under huge pressure from backcountry users. These areas face the greatest potential user conflicts, present the largest issues to resorts, and also frankly just offer a crowded scene that bums everyone out. You can read flowingalpy's dispatches from the front, if you want. Steven's Pass also obviously has issues,* but to my point above has far fewer plowing-related solutions. But to make it simple: where there are too many people trying to go to the exact same place through resort infrastructure, they need to have options to spread out. Otherwise, we stand to lose access as resorts become fed up. We can either argue amongst ourselves about the theoretical legality of these losses (e.g. Crystal), or we can try and do something productive about it. Plowing is a thing we can do.

So, let's say you're not too thrilled about these plowing projects because you feel they don't represent a great way for the BC community to access anything cool. As you might have read, many people feel that the huddled masses (or just insert some insults for whatever group you don't like) should continue to plague the easy front country, while they ski their secret stash in relative peace. To that point, I would say that making access more straightforward or plowing a part of a road for parking just ups the standard. There's plenty of places to go out there (as in, millions of acres), and no one is stopping you from walking farther. The "don't blow up the spot" debate has been hashed to death. It happens every time a guidebook comes out, or someone posts a TR of a "stash," ad nauseum. If we start to lose access to places, no one will be there at the TH to check whether you are a super-rad local or not. We will simply be banned. With that said, many places that people are dreaming of getting to are low on the feasibility scale. That's not to say we will never try. It's just that it's hard and we'd rather start with some easier wins and establish good relationships so that we can then go push on agencies for bigger goals that we all might share.

We have talked about putting out a poll to folks to see what they are most interested in, which would provide the objective process you're looking for. We might still do that in some form in the future to help determine what these next steps for plowing might be.

Honestly, I think it's more transparent and fairly useful right now to just have a discussion about it. Maybe I will compile a list of ideas and shape that into a poll. I'd still like people to have space to question the premise. Plenty of people have spoken up about their priorities. What do YOU want to have plowed? Nothing? A berm in front of every skiing house in Seattle? A road to the top of Rainier? Let's hear it.

-Conrad

*If any of you have particular concerns about Stevens, feel free to message Rowan Stewart directly.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • flowing alpy
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230738 by flowing alpy
Replied by flowing alpy on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance
there are rules for parking at the source lake dog park trail head
that are not being followed nor enforced. security clean up in LoT4

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • alecapone
  • User
  • User
More
8 years 1 month ago #230739 by alecapone
Replied by alecapone on topic Re: Introducing Cascade Backcountry Alliance
Is there more then one Rowan Stewart? I just hung out with him at Stevens over new years, and he made no mention of being involved.

I have suggestions, but most are providing more day and overnight parking.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.