Snow hike in Right Fork

Well, it looks like winter is FINALLY here. And about darned time, I say.

Bruce, RJ and I decided to go out and celebrate by hiking about four miles up Right Fork Canyon yesterday, right into the teeth of the blizzard. We had an absolute ball - smiles all around, when we didn't have our heads down trying not to get sandblasted by the wind and blowing snow. The blizzard conditions were pretty much limited to above the bench - below that, it was a beautiful, calm snowfall.

Just goes to show how variable things can be up there.

We were able to drive all the way to the Right Fork trailhead. It was obvious that the storm had started out as a slushfall - there were about three inches of slush underneath the skiff of snow that was showing. There had been no snow up there in recent weeks, so we decided to leave the snowshoes in the truck and hike it. Not a bad choice, although snowshoes would certainly have been appropriate a couple of miles in.

We crossed the creek at the higher of the two creek crossings just past the Scout Camp. The little bridge is gone, but the water is low and the rocks are placed appropriately to keep one's feet dry.














HooDoo, a favorite ice climbing destination. Don't know that it's been cold enough recently for this to be safe at the moment.














For the most part, once we got above the Scout Camp, the snow was mid-shin deep to just below the knees. It was over-the-knees in a few places.















Once we got above the bench, we were able to hike almost to the creek crossing before the blizzard really started blowing up. A good place to turn around and head back.


















So beautiful up there in the winter.

We turned around right at 8600', which is a little lower than the Lamoille Canyon Road turnaround. There are still a lot of willows showing and no base to speak of.

Figured I'd stay out of the canyon today since there is bound to be a million snowmobiles, will hopefully head up to the turnaround tomorrow on my sled and see if it's skiable yet. Given the avalanche conditions, if I do ski it'll be a meadow-skipping kind of day.

Hike classifications

It's been a while since I've posted an update. I tore up my left Achilles tendon several weeks ago - how, I couldn't tell you, but likely from not being as conscientious about stretching as I could/should be. Getting old ain't for sissies, and my days of bounding out of the truck and onto the trail are likely over. Warm up first, please.

At any rate, I've gotten a bit of grief from folks for the (extremely subjective) ratings I've given some of the hikes for which I've provided beta on this blog, most particularly my most recent write-up on Griswold Lake. What's "easy" for me may be less so for other folks, and what I might consider something that should earn a "difficult" rating could be a cakewalk for another person.

Fair enough. Let's take the subjectivity out of it.

Back when I lived in Colorado, I was a member of the Colorado Mountain Club. They have tens of thousands of members and needed a workable rating system to make sure that people signed up for the hikes they were interested in and/or qualified for. Their rating system did a pretty good job in letting folks know what they were in for, so (since plagiarism is the highest form of flattery) I'm going to steal it wholesale. Not only that, but as a courtesy I'll go back and update the ratings I've given various hikes on this blog to reflect this rating system.

Fair enough?

OK, here it is, straight from the CMC website:

Hike Classifications

Hikes (including some trips that require rock-climbing skills) are normally classified as A through D:

Class A: Up to 8 miles round trip and 1200 ft. elevation gain. (Prior hiking experience is usually not necessary.)

Class B: Up to 12 miles round trip and 2500 ft. elevation gain. (Moderate to strenuous physical activity. Some prior experience is beneficial.)

Class C: Up to 15 miles round trip and 3500 ft. elevation gain. (Strenuous to very strenuous physical activity. Prior experience and training is beneficial.)

Class D: Over 15 miles round trip or 3500 ft. elevation gain. (Very strenuous physical activity often including exposure or requiring use of technical skills. Knowledge based on prior experience and training is highly beneficial.)

If you also see the letter "E" after the classification (such as C-E or D-E), the trip involves exposure (i.e., risk of falling) and may require advanced climbing skills.

Got it? That should be easy enough. Since a lot of the hikes around here require route-finding skills, I'll add an "R" after the classification to indicate that, too.

I'll put a link to this post at the bottom of my trail beta from here on out. FWIW, I pretty much considered Class A and B hikes to be "easy" hikes back in my CMC days, C hikes to be "moderate" and D hikes to be the ones most worth doing. ;)

Griswold Lake and the Hennen Canyon Trail

I've always kind of "dissed" Griswold Lake as a hiking destination, largely because I generally have more distant goals in mind: Ruby Dome and Lee Peak, to be exact. The trail up Hennen Canyon to Griswold Lake is the easiest way to access those two peakbagging goals, and so Griswold tends to be a snack stop along the way.

That said, the hike to Griswold is well worth doing. I had a chance to walk up there this weekend, and really enjoyed the snow, the silence, and the herd of big bucks I saw along the way. ATVs won't make it up this canyon, so the bucks are largely safe from Elko County hunters. Given the sometimes slippery footing and the late start I managed, I was happy to have a headlight along. It got pretty dark around 4:30pm. The trail's so good, though, that getting back to the truck was easy-peasy.

Here's a little beta for those interested in making this trip.

























HENNEN CANYON TRAIL TO GRISWOLD LAKE

Length: 6 miles RT from Spring Creek Association campground trailhead

Elevation gain: 2750'

Difficulty: Class C-R (moderate with route-finding)

Time required: Day hike or overnight
The Hennen Canyon trail is a great day hike or overnight for those interested in an easy-to-moderate, accessible, low-commitment trip away from the mass of people that populates Lamoille Canyon. Because this trail is the main access to Ruby Dome, it sees regular use in the summer and a fair bit of use in the fall and winter. Most people don't go far up the trail when the snow comes, though, and you can just about be guaranteed of having the place to yourself as the days start growing short.


Hennen Canyon Trail


If you choose to make this an overnight, there is good camping at Griswold Lake. The lake itself is very shallow, with a mud bottom and a rock in the middle that makes for an excellent swimming goal. There are fish in the deepest part of the lake. An overnight at Griswold and a hike up Ruby Dome makes for a fun weekend trip.

The Hennen Canyon trail is a non-wilderness, non-motorized trail, meaning it's open to hikers, horsemen, mountain bikers, skiers, etc. However, while the trail clearly sees some maintenance from USFS crews, there are some large-diameter deadfall logs that make the going pretty difficult for the horsey set. In addition, once the trail leaves the trees, it spends a lot of time traveling through some very rocky terrain. While I know that horsemen can and do occasionally get their animals up there, it's very difficult going in places and there's a high probability that your horse will be injured. Be advised. As far as MTBs go - it's well beyond the capacity for my legs and lungs. If you're up for a steady 16% grade, have at it. I've never seen a bike up there, or even tracks... that doesn't mean that it can't be done, but it certainly isn't an entry-level MTB trip.

I couldn't begin to tell you the "official" USFS name for this trail. It is located in the bottom of Hennen Canyon, along Butterfield Creek, up to Griswold Lake. I'll call it the Hennen Canyon trail, but if you ask at the ranger office they may well call it something else.



The hike is rated Class C-R (moderate with route-finding). The hike itself isn't difficult - there's not much elevation gain in the scheme of things, it's not that long, there's no scrambling or exposure. The first two miles or so are on good, reasonably well-maintained trail that's easy enough to find, even in winter. That said, you will be spending some of this hike off-trail following rock cairns, some of which are difficult to see. Not only that, but you will need to be comfortable out there on your own - there's no road up this canyon, no way to get an ATV up there, and you'll need to be prepared to self-evacuate if you have an issue.

One other note - if you are not a Spring Creek property owner, you are technically trespassing using this trail. You have to go through a section of land owned by Spring Creek Association to get to it. I've never heard of anyone being hassled about this, but if somebody does get in your face about it, don't say that you haven't been warned. Stay low-profile, be a good guest, and hopefully their non-harassment policy won't change.


GETTING THERE:
Hennen Canyon is accessed through the Spring Creek Association campground. To reach the SCA campground - from Elko travel SE on Lamoille Highway (5th Street) approximately 17 miles to Pleasant Valley Road, a dirt road that takes off straight as an arrow towards the Rubies. The road will make a 90-degree turn - at this corner you'll see a locked green gate to the left. If you have a key to the gate you can save yourself some walking by driving in. Otherwise, park here and climb over the gate.

THE HIKE:
From the gate, walk or drive up the dirt road and take the right fork up to the campground. The road switchbacks up past some pull-out campsites and eventually dead-ends at a flat turn-around with a nice view of the valley. There'll be a large sign that says "Ruby Dome 4 mi, Griswold Lake 3 mi". Follow the arrows, cross Butterfield Creek on a nice new-ish bridge, pass through the man-gate and you'll be on the trail proper.

The trail maintains a pretty steady 16% grade overall. This can be a little... eye-opening... right out of the gate. It can also be fairly annoying in August, when the trail tread is dusty and somewhat slippery, particularly on the downhill. It does get better when you get past the initial sagebrush rise. The grade doesn't really relent but the trail surface improves. Other times of the year, when the trail isn't dusty, it makes for fine walking.

You'll pass through a second man-gate somewhat more than half a mile up the trail. At this point, you're on the Forest proper and are no longer trespassing. Be sure and close the gate behind you.


Butterfield Creek

The trail climbs up to the left of Butterfield Creek, weaving in and out of the aspens and mahoganies on the way up. It's easy to find, even with the snow - follow the tree carvings and cut logs if you can't see the tread itself. There are carvings by Basque sheepherders dating back to the 1930's that are easy to find without much looking. You might find even older ones if you look hard enough.


Old carvings























At about two miles in you'll reach the end of the aspen grove and will be faced with a large, flat rock outcropping. This is a good turn-around spot if you're on a horse or are interested in a shorter, easier hike. If you're interested in pressing on, head up the rock, walk uphill and start looking for rock cairns.


The rock bench begins

There are some really nice views of Spring Creek, Elko Mountain and the Adobe Range from here. Don't forget to take time to gawk.


Valley view

There are about four lines of rock cairns that will eventually lead you up the rock bench to the lake. They all follow roughly the same path, so it doesn't really matter which line you follow. The cairns pretty much hug the left bank of the draw in the middle of the rock bench - if you lose the line it is no big deal, it just might take you a couple minutes more getting up there.

You'll go through a bit of a squeeze right next to the creek, and then the canyon will widen out again. At this point, there are two draws below the lake. The cairns, again, hug the left bank of the left draw, the obvious snow-filled gully in this picture.


Final approach to Griswold Lake

Once the grade begins to relent, you'll know you've all but reached the lake itself.


Griswold Lake


Griswold campsite

If Griswold Lake is your goal for the hike, hang out for a bit, have a snack and enjoy the day before heading down. If Ruby Dome is your ultimate goal, I'll do a real write-up for you one of these days. Generally speaking, though, the easiest way to do it is to circle around the left of Griswold Lake, making your way uphill to the wide saddle between Hennen Canyon and the right fork of Seitz Canyon. Stay on the rocks, stay off of the plants! Once you've gained that saddle, skirt to the right of the large knob, then start picking your way across the boulders up to the obvious low point to the west of the Dome. Once you've achieved that low point, Ruby Dome is to your left, Lee Peak is along the ridge to the right.

Transition into winter

I lost my camera this summer and so haven't been all that great about taking and posting photos. Sorry about that! Anyway, here are a few recent ones celebrating the gorgeous transition from fall to winter.

They're crappy phone photos, but hey, beggars can't be choosers. I finally broke down and got another camera, though... luckily the Rubies are gorgeous enough that those stunning alpenglow sunsets I photographed with my phone - yeah, I didn't think it'd work but I had to try - they'll be back. And I'll be equipped to photograph them.

From a hike up to Liberty Pass a couple of weeks ago:

Thomas Canyon hike, with my friends Bruce and Jeff. It started out pretty dreary but turned into a truly lovely mountain day.

Recent hike up to Lamoille Lake. Not enough snow for skiing the Dollars yet.

Great Basin Institute's most recent bait-and-switch

I got this e-mail a couple of days ago from a young woman who came to my home town from Switzerland to work for the Great Basin Institute on the Secret-Lamoille Trail project. It is a disturbing - very disturbing - indictment of the Great Basin Institute, the man they've hired to "oversee" the project, and of the local USFS office. This utter incompetence is why GBI and the USFS has blown through most of a half-million dollars RAISED BY THIS COMMUNITY on 3.5 miles of trail that is going to have to be substantially rebuilt. It's nothing more than a gross and ugly bait-and-switch, played on the people who put this project together AND on the well-meaning kids who sign up to work for GBI.

Good God, this pisses me off. It should piss you off, too.

I've changed the author's name, as well as the name of her partner, to protect their privacy.

Hello,

I found your mail adress in blogger.com because I read your articles about the Ruby Mountain Trails. I write you because me and my boyfriend= were part of the GBI workers working this summer to built the Secret Pass Trail and we had a very bad experience!! We really hope that GBI will stop its activities because it´s a very bad organisation.They lied to us about what we were suppose to do during our stay in USA and we paid a lot of money to come to USA from Switzerland!

GBI hires American (american corps workers) but also foreigners. Some foreigners are volunteers (they are not at all paid) others (like [my partner] and me) are interns (paid two times less than the american corps workers).

[My partner] and me came to do an internship in environmental conservation. Our goal was to gain some experience because we just finished our Master in geosciences. What we were suppose to do is described in the attached document. This document, the DS-7002, is part of the J-1 Visa process that explains what the foreigners participating to an internship in the USA are suppose to do in the USA. As you can see, this document contains a plan of what we were suppose to do while we were in Lamoille. This document contains a "contract agreement" part signed by us, the supervisor and the program sponsor. A lawyer explained me that this DS 7002 has the value of a contract.

GBI never admitted that this document has the value of a contract. The organization persisted to say that it is a list of readings and topics to be covered during the internship but if you read it you will see that it's clearly not!

We wrote to Nancy Taylor from the US Forest Department [ed. note - Ruby Mountain Ranger District recreation planner and overall project manager] to explain the situation but she never answered! We really don´t understand why the US Forest Department work with an organisation that doesn´t respect a contract from the US Department of State!!

About the work we did in Lamoille, I totally agree with what you say on your blog! The work done is unprofesional. A lot of the GBI workers hadn´t any motivation (like the interns because we didn´t know that we will do this job!). Some switchbacks were done 3 times instead of doing it well the first time! The result was that we had to cut a lot of trees because of the mistakes mad! The supervisors, team managers, etc. had no idea about environment. When we started the work, we didn´t received any informations about the trail. GBI just explained us how to use tools like a shovel!! I had to ask and ask again to have at least a map of the site and have some informations about the trail (like the historic of the trail, where the trail is going, informations about the environmental assesment, etc.)

We lost a lot of money, time and energy with this experience. We choosed to leave the internship because we were tired of this situation. Now we are still waiting for a full refund of the money that we spend to participate to this internship.

Maybe this story can help you to persuade people to stop the collaboration with GBI, an incompetent organisation that lies to hire its workers.

(signed)

[Name]

Here's what these kids were supposed to be learning, taken from the State Department paperwork granting them a visa to enter this country. Their internship was supposed to be broken into three phases:

Overview:

Interns will see, first hand, how the theories of ecological and habitat restoration are being applied in the field. Participant will be able to apply their knowledge and skills gained while working in the environment in which they are studying.

Phase 1
Week 1: Introduction to Concepts of Ecological Restoration, discussion pertaining to the required research project.
Weeks 2-4: Concepts of Ecological Restoration, Principles of Habitat Restoration, check topic of research project for relevancy.

Phase 2
Week 1: Introduction to Restoration Project Planning.
Weeks 2-6: Restoration Project Design.
Weeks 7-11: Site Analysis and Preparation.
Weeks 12: Introduction to Native Plant Revegetation/Control of Invasive Plant Species.

Phase 3
Weeks 1-11: Monitoring, assessing, and evaluating restoration projects.

As far as I can tell, the only restoration work that needed to happen up there was fixing the butcher job that GBI itself is doing!

Where do I start with how terribly GBI wronged this young woman and her partner?

1. You do NOT abuse volunteers! People sign on to projects like this for an absolute pittance because they want to do great things for the environment, for the forest, for future trail users. Interns sign on for projects like this to further their education! GBI promised these kids a well-rounded season of work learning about environmental restoration, and instead handed them a shovel with NO oversight or guidance and set them to a job they had no desire to do.

2. These young people spent thousands of dollars of their own money to fly half-way around the world to further their education. Most young people don't have a money tree growing in their apartments. They were defrauded of the educational experience they thought they were paying for - wasting not only money, but also time that they could have used to get the experience needed to move into the workforce.

3. My guess is that these two kids were not alone in their experience, based on the absolutely abysmal quality of work I see up there. They had NO guidance, NO supervision, even though GBI's executive director is paying his Reno "buddy" out of the project's funds to provide precisely that. The blind were leading the blind, which can give no thinking person any kind of job satisfaction. The best part, though, is that once they were here it was almost impossible for them to leave! They were trucked out from Reno and bivouacked at the Lamoille USFS Guard Station, with no vehicle other than the ones driven by their crew leaders.

And, on a personal note - I love Lamoille, I love the Rubies, and I love this state. Northeastern Nevada is, to me, paradise, and I'm very, very proud of the beauty, history and hospitality of this place. To know that these young people traveled halfway around the world to get here, and then were so ABUSED... angers me beyond belief. I wish there were some way that I could show them that the rest of us here aren't charlatans, but I can't. They're gone, as are the rest of the kids GBI brought here last summer.

Travel management and Pandora's box

I got in a bit of back-and-forth a few days ago with a couple of folks on the Elko Daily Free Press website regarding travel management. I've largely stayed quiet about the process in recent years, mostly because I thought it would negatively impact the work I was doing on the Secret-Lamoille Trail Project. Since I've been booted out of that project, though, I don't see a lot of point in staying quiet any more. What the hell - Pandora's box can hold some interesting stuff.

An off-the-top-of-my-head history of Travel Management

For those unfamiliar with the history of Travel Management, several years ago the Bush Administration directed public lands agencies to begin the process of changing travel rules on USFS and BLM lands from "open unless designated closed" to "closed unless designated open." This has the effect of limiting travel on routes in the Forest and on BLM lands to identified system roads, thus in theory stopping overland travel and the incredible resource damage said overland travel can cause.

Few who care about the condition of public lands can argue with the concept. All you have to do is head out to your nearest Forest or BLM land to see the incredible damage that careless motorized travel does every day. More and more people are out there riding, and the motors and tires get bigger every year. One little track from some guy testing his skills driving up or down a steep hill becomes a deeper and deeper track after other folks try and follow him, and after erosion starts taking place. Pretty soon those tracks become rocky gullies and scars on the hillside... so the next guy tries another hill a few feet over and the cycle of damage begins again. Those scars are visible from miles away and will never heal in this dry desert climate. These kinds of "pioneer trails" are rampant around here and are an amazing degradation from when I was growing up.

When the travel management process begins in a public lands district, the district staff does its best to inventory the existing roads, ATV tracks and trails. They look to the public for a lot of help on this because it's not physically possible for them to find everything... something's certain to be missed, and in so doing a good route would be closed to public use since it wouldn't end up on the finished maps. Once they have an inventory done, they go through it looking for routes that should stay open and routes that should be closed. Closure is usually recommended for one of three reasons:

Resource damage/unsustainable route - travel along the route is causing damage to the soils, fisheries, wildlife habitat, cultural sites, etc.

Duplicate routes - multiple routes accessing the same destinations.

Lack of access - routes are locked off from access due to lack of public easements through private property. In these cases, the roads' designation was changed to "administrative" in order to allow for use by permittees and to allow for future categorization as "open" should an access easement be arranged.

As part of the Environmental Impact Statement necessitated by this significant of a change in public lands use, four different alternatives are proposed for the new travel management rules, from "no change" (not possible under Federal law) through increasingly restrictive scenarios. Environmental and cultural studies are done on each of the proposed alternatives, and the public is invited to comment through a formalized "scoping" process. Based on the results of the studies and the public scoping, one of the alternatives is chosen as the most appropriate for that district and is modified based on findings during the process. A draft of the new rule is published for comment again and, after the public has had a chance to have its say one more time, the new rule is adopted and implemented. It's reviewed again in a year and into the future to see what's working and what isn't, and changes are made at that time.

An EIS is an open invitation to a lawsuit, and the likelihood is that the agency is going to get sued by a variety of parties after the rule is adopted. If the EIS is done well and if the agency can demonstrate that it used good science and good scoping policies to do its work, the lawsuit generally doesn't get very far. If the agency's work is slipshod, the lawsuit will drag on for years if not more. Your tax dollars at work - generally speaking, entities that sue the federal government get their legal fees paid by the taxpayers. Groups like Western Watershed Project pay themselves nice, fat salaries that way.

That's the basic concept of how travel management is supposed to work, and how it is working across the country.


Travel Management and the three local Ranger Districts

By and large, that's how the travel management process worked here, up to a point. The USFS conducted an inventory of routes and published very preliminary and incomplete maps in 2005, asking the public to fill in the gaps. The ONLY people who participated were members of the Gold Country ATV club, even though the USFS ran articles in the paper, got on the radio, held public meetings, sent out letters, begged people to get involved. The overwhelming sentiment was that people didn't want to participate - to spill the beans on their favorite routes - because the USFS would then just close the route. These people missed the entire point of travel management, because unless the routes were identified and categorized as open, then they were GUARANTEED by law to be closed.

Another big problem with trying to get the routes identified was that the maps were, frankly, awful. You literally couldn't tell by looking at them which road was which, where it went, or anything. They should have been topographic maps or satellite images, but instead were simple black lines (routes) on a white background. Utterly useless... even if a person WANTED to help the maps were so bad that they couldn't.

This went on for several years, with the USFS trying to get their maps to be more complete and the public largely ignoring them. Scoping came and went, and while a few people commented most people didn't really say much.

And then, after the public scoping period had come and gone, one of the local USFS "haters" got wind of the deal.

Oh, my, god, you'd have thought the USFS was trying to murder Santa Claus! The commissioners blew up. Members of Elko County Staff, on Elko County time, spent days and weeks attacking the USFS and the travel management plan. People screamed in the media, screamed in meetings, made all kinds of false statements and accusations. Much of it was politically motivated, and a few people now hold elective office here in large part because of the noise they made about travel management. What started out as a fairly orderly and necessary process turned into a national example of a process gone wrong.

Travel management has been extended for multiple years at this point at the request of the commissioners and other local politicians - demanding more and more public meetings, more and more opportunities to attack the USFS, more and more ways to drag things out. As things sit right now, they've chased the local ranger out of town (no tar and feathers, although I'm certain that they'd be applied if they could catch him). The Forest supervisor has had to put her foot down and refuse to extend the process any farther. Meetings at this point are accomplishing nothing - they're just more opportunity for local residents to abuse USFS staff. Said non-tarred-and-feathered ranger will sign the travel management document as likely his last act for the Ruby Mountain Ranger District before leaving this area forever. Don't let the door hit you in the ass.


How things could have - and should have - gone

Frankly, anybody with any kind of familiarity with this area could have seen this coming. There has long been a hugely antagonistic relationship between locals and the USFS, and given the history of belligerence and the emphasis on motorized recreation here, it was a given that this was going to be an explosive issue.

The USFS made it radically worse by publishing terrible maps, by terrible communication, and by not playing the politics well.

One of their very FIRST acts should have been approaching the commissioners looking for help and buy-in. In 2005, before this all went to hell, the commission had some very level-headed people on board who were more about problem-solving than putting on a big show. They didn't do it, though, and now they're reaping the seeds that they didn't sow.

Before publishing the EIS with its four alternatives, the USFS should have identified the reason behind each and every mile of proposed road closure, and identified what needed to happen in order to keep those stretches of road open. That would have given people productive ways of working to address problems. If the road/trail needed to be improved, if erosion control needed to be done, if access easements needed to be purchased and/or negotiated - those things can happen if people are given the opportunity to work on them. Just telling somebody *NO* is guaranteed to get peoples' hackles up.

We needed people at the USFS working on this project who were more familiar with the local area and local politics. Frankly, while Gar Abbas is a very nice man, he was the wrong man for this job. He wasn't local and didn't have the local connections and buy-in that was absolutely crucial to make this process work. In addition, he didn't enroll locals to help the USFS to engage the community more fully in the process. The USFS became more and more insular as things went on, which is an understandable reaction given all the abuse that was directed their way. It was, however, absolutely the worst thing they could have done.

The commissioners and the local agency haters haven't had a lot of reason to try and find constructive solutions to the problems caused by unregulated motorized travel, because they've been almost completely successful in derailing the process. Ultimately, though, they're playing a losing hand. Whether they like it or not, Travel Management is the law of the land and is going to happen one way or another. It's earning them all kinds of political points now, but it isn't doing a damned thing to resolve the underlying issue, which is public lands access.

They need to decide to work WITH the USFS, rather than against them. There are common goals out there - the USFS wants increased public access, too, believe it or not. Be leaders - find commonalities and build on them, rather than just launching attack after attack. That just wastes tax dollars, both at the local and federal level.

Find out what can be done to minimize the REASONS for road closures. There are tools that the commissioners have been reluctant to use that would guarantee access into the future - for example, changing planning and zoning rules to require that subdividers provide a public access easement whenever they're dividing property adjacent to public lands. Using RS2477 to establish public access easements on established roads that have been used for access for years. Write grants to purchase public access easements from property owners. Develop a local volunteer corps to do road improvements, erosion control, etc. The list goes on.

There's not a lot of possibility that any kind of real leadership on this issue is going to come out of the Elko County political class. They're winning elections based on their public posturing, so why change? The agency haters are in full cry and will be satisfied with nothing less than the complete departure of any and all Federal agency presence in this part of the country. It'll never happen, but it keeps them busy and earns them business from the other haters in town. Nice little closed (and closed minded) loop. No solutions, no progress, nothing but a lot of hate and wasted energy.

I can always dream that we'll see level-headed, creative, problem-solvers on the Commission again, but the haterade runs deep in Elko County and anybody who emphasizes solutions rather than belligerence doesn't have a chance in hell of being elected here. I can always dream that we'll get a new ranger that has a clue how to work with the locals, but there's not a lot of hope that anybody with any talent is going to want to come to Elko County. This is the place where agency careers come to die. It's a downward spiral that I have little reason to believe will stop any time soon.

Sorry to be so gloomy - time to go walk around in the Rubies and forget about "travel management" for a while.

This just can't be allowed to stand...

In my previous post, I suggested that the organizers of the Secret-Lamoille Trail project look to the Nevada Division of Forestry for project labor, since they do a great job for significantly less money than what the project is paying for GBI. One of the commenters on my previous post replied:

NDF is not any better at building trails than USFS or GBI. A community-trained crew would be even worse. I have seen GBI and NDF projects across the state and GBI always has done a much better job and had less environmental impact. NDF is just as expensive as GBI now.

Just about everything in that poster's response was flat-out wrong, but this one I see no point in letting stand.

The Nevada Division of Forestry will hire out ten-man crews, complete with tools, transportation, supervision, their own food and drink, etc. for about $850/day. For projects like this one, they'll do it for half that price, with the other half going towards grant matching. In other words, you get a supervised, equipped, self-contained crew for about $425/day. Since these guys earn the right to do projects like this, they're darned happy to be out there and work their butts off.

Simple cost comparison - $2550 for six work days from adult men, with another $2550 going towards grant matching, vs. $15,000 for six work days from GBI's kids. You do the math.

NDF is local, and they're part of this community. Many of the folks on their crews are locals, too. Opportunities like this benefit the community in myriad ways, as well as getting the trail built for a reasonable cost. The money saved using NDF crews could be and should be used to bring on a professional trail builder who can provide direct, constant, on-the-ground supervision to make sure that NDF is building the trail to standard. And, while he's at it, said professional can train local volunteer crews how to build trail, too. That would give our local community a talent base to maintain this trail down the road, as well as to work on new trails elsewhere in the area.

Win - win - win - win - win.

Here are photos of NDF crews that came out this summer to build trail up at SnoBowl. These guys kick ass in all respects. That project would be going better if we'd had the opportunity to train local trail builders on the Secret-Lamoille Trail Project, as was originally envisioned. Right now we have a lot of enthusiasm but not a lot of on-the-ground experience from our volunteers. Just imagine what a group of experienced local trail-building volunteers could accomplish!