Stupid Scree Wall on Mt. Bond

[dr_wu002]

Signs don't seem to work! I think the rock wall is a good idea but loose the sticks! I saw people lounging all over the alpine vegetation on Eisenhower this weekend and there is a sign just before the alpine zone asking people not to do this!

Nothing -- sign, scree wall, path, closing the summit, taser-armed steward -- is going to prevent 100% of people from walking around in the alpine areas. Some of those methods (taser, scree wall, closing the summit) would be extremely counter-productive in my opinion. "Education" by signs or whatever obviously has limits and so will a path. But keeping a happy balance between hiker access and conservation is probably the best bet because it'll allow hikers (including nearly psychotic skeptics like me) to work with the forest service instead of against. It's not perfect but it's the best solution. It's' worked on Franconia Ridge and, despite what you saw this weekend, it's worked well on Eisenhower. Either way, it's been fairly effective over the last 20 years or so in revitalizing various alpine areas in the North East and my guess is if they continue good methodology "herd mentality" will get the remaining people from stepping around on the plants. There's always going to be douchebags -- that's a given so you just hope you can get as much of the rest on board.

-Dr. Wu

 

[TEO]

I would think that simply outlining the trail with rocks, i.e. a scree wall, but only a rock or two high, such as what you see on Mt. Mansfield, would keep most hikers off of sensitive alpine areas. Educational pictures & signs, showing the rock borders, at the trailhead kiosks would help, too.

Frankly, what the photo shows is both disturbing and sad. I hope that either the Guyot caretaker or the Forest Service will dismantle it. Perhaps letters to the AMC and the Forest Service are in order.

P.s. I've just left messages for both the Forest Service (Pemi District) & the AMC, I would encourage others who are similarly upset by this to do the same.

 

[bobandgeri]

As Tim mentioned we saw and talked to the caretaker from the Guyot tent site that was doing the work. We were there yesterday and were very suprised to see how big the wall is now.

Last week we saw the same thing over on Pierce, except over there, the trail now bypasses the actual summit. If you want a photo standing on the summit you have to step over the wall.

Somebody told us this weekend that they talked to the person doing the work on Pierce and they were told that they work for the Forest Service and not the AMC.

Doesn anybody know for sure who the tentsite caretakers work for? Since the same effort appears to being done on multiple sites, perhaps this is a directive from the Forest Service.

At least the walls/walkway on Pierce looked nice, versus the one on Bond.

 

[dr_wu002]

Somebody told us this weekend that they talked to the person doing the work on Pierce and they were told that they work for the Forest Service and not the AMC.

Doesn anybody know for sure who the tentsite caretakers work for? Since the same effort appears to being done on multiple sites, perhaps this is a directive from the Forest Service.

At least the walls/walkway on Pierce looked nice, versus the one on Bond.

Anyone have a picture of the one on Pierce? Again, why not put a little path to the actual summit. You know peakbaggers are going to be going there -- path, scree wall, or nothing. Could this be a new, more militant stance from the Forest Service? I heard there are similar scree walls now on Zeacliff and Guyot. I don't think an aggressive and confrontational stance from the Forest Service on these issues is going to be successful. They can't and won't monitor these sites all the time and scree walls are going to be dismantled by angry hikers -- probably the same ones annoyed that the Forest Service dismantles summit cairns in said areas.

-Dr. Wu

 

[bobandgeri]

Yes - there is a wall on Guyot making sure you stay on the path and not spread out for lunch (like most people did) around the carin there.

Saw a photo of Pierce yesterday, but can't remember if it was on Facebook, ROT, or VFTT.

 

[roadtripper]

Not to sound too mean, but after meeting the caretaker a few weeks ago, I'm not surprised by this.

 

[BF]

Looks like a great place to get out from the wind for a bivy.

 

[TDawg]

If the forest service is going to tear down the large cairn on West Bond and the sign (!) on Owl's Head for being "non-conforming structures" why don't they remove this?

-Dr. Wu

I am very much in this camp and think it is complete and utter BS that this is being allowed to stay (at this point in time, at least.)

Talk about ass backwards!! Take down the beautiful West Bond cairn (which I never got to see first hand, BTW ,) but leave that gnarly looking thing?!? What an eyesore, that needs to change.

 

[NeoAkela]

Wow - what happened to wilderness? Has there really been a huge careless hiker problem on such a remote peak as Bond? Franconia Ridge I can understand, but Bond I would think attracts a more wilderness-friendly hiking crowd.

I hope this doesn't mean bushwhacking is no longer allowed in the Pemi. I'd hate to be coming up Bond from the east only to be turned back by the scree wall.

 

[dr_wu002]

I hope this doesn't mean bushwhacking is no longer allowed in the Pemi. I'd hate to be coming up Bond from the east only to be turned back by the scree wall.

Just a soul crushing wall of spruce.

I just realized... unfortunately, the dead tree reinforced scree wall will be perfect for providing rocks for a nice fire ring for some campers on the Bond summit and the dead, dried trees will provide nice, readily available fuel for them! Awesome! It won't be me but it won't be long before someone figures it out...

-Dr. Wu

 

[KRobi]

Was on Zeacliff on Saturday and didn't see any walls but we didn't walk all around. Came in and out on AT trail (spur).

 

[loanshark]

I was also on Zeacliff on Saturday and did not see any scree wall.

 

[forestgnome]

my $.02, fwiw...

1) selfishness...this made the builder feel a sense of ownership of the summit and a sense of saving the planet..both self-serving false illusions.

2) We all know that this will stop noone from going where they want. Those who do not breech the wall would not have crossed a 2" scree wall either. Those who want to go over there will. Some of them will step on bare rock only and some will not bother to avoid vegetation. Consider what people have gone through to get there; why would this wall stop them now?

3) It is not illegal to leave trail in alpine zone in the WMNF, and that's a good thing, IMHO. We are asked to stay on trail or on bare rock. The signage states this where trails enter alpine zones. Most hikers honor this request and a few ignore it and nothing will stop the small percentage of idiots who ignore it. Case in point: Last summer I was enjoying the area north of Mt. Eisenhower when I witnessed a huge party of about 30 teenagers and 2 adults walking all over the place and not one person was on the trail. It looked like an army headed toward me about 20 people abreast and noone was on the trail. I listened to a thousand steps of crunching alpine vegatation. As they approached me I informed them of the policy, AND THE REASON, and they all just grunted "Uh-huh" type of responses. When the "adults" came by I stopped them and politely explained the situation but they were about as reasonable as granite, nodding their heads "uh-huh..ok"... A few hours later they were returning and I witnessed the same thing, all of them just tromping all over the vegatation, as if I never said a word and they hadn't read the sign. BUT I DID EXPLAIN IT AND THEY DID SEE THE SIGN!!!!!!!

Nothing needs to change. Leave the WMNF as it is. That wall on Mt. Bond is a violation of the beauty of the place. Our freind who built it cannot see the forest for the trees. It's an incredibly ugly scar on the beautiful summit which serves absolutely no positive purpose. The summit now looks as natural as a parking lot, and not a single plant is saved by it.

There is a small percentage of people who take environmentalism to an unrealistic and counterproductive realm that is detached from realtiy. The results of their actions are no better than those of the simpletons who disregard the spirit of true conservation.

Extremely drastic measures would be required to stop the few morons who trample alpine plants. These measures would rob us all of the freedom to enjoy this beautiful area, and we would loose our sense of connectedness and belonging to the place if were to do what it would take to effectively keep the few grunts off the plants.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

Nice wall, wrong place

That is indeed quite a wall: high and tight. Not the best thing to build in that place and for channelling hikers off the alpine veggies. A much better approach is on Welch Mtn near Waterville Valley. An explanatory sign greets you as you enter the ledge zone; the alpine flora is edged by a single line of rocks to which has recently been added one layer of dead spruce trunks, like a low zigzag fence. People who stop to read understand, and the barriers are to protect the alpine veggies, not bar us from the view.
I see from the photos that the caretaker is energetic, but misunderstanding of how to balance conservation with recreation. Edging paths with low scree walls is far more respectful of both than this notion that the public is going to allow themselves to be fenced out of a good view.
Mighty kind of the caretaker to supply all that firewood too. I am sure it will get used...
I am sure there be many trail crews who would like to put this caretaker to work building retaining walls.
Creag Nan Drochaid

 

[Woody]

Maybe there should be a gathering on the summit of Bond. MarcHowes and UFC would have to be on the attendence list!

 

[cooperhill]

Case in point: Last summer I was enjoying the area north of Mt. Eisenhower when I witnessed a huge party of about 30 teenagers and 2 adults walking all over the place and not one person was on the trail. It looked like an army headed toward me about 20 people abreast and noone was on the trail. I listened to a thousand steps of crunching alpine vegatation. As they approached me I informed them of the policy, AND THE REASON, and they all just grunted "Uh-huh" type of responses. When the "adults" came by I stopped them and politely explained the situation but they were about as reasonable as granite, nodding their heads "uh-huh..ok"... A few hours later they were returning and I witnessed the same thing, all of them just tromping all over the vegatation, as if I never said a word and they hadn't read the sign. BUT I DID EXPLAIN IT AND THEY DID SEE THE SIGN!!!!!!!

I had the same experience a few years ago on Mt. Eisenhower. I politely tried to educate a group on the "rock walk" and they nodded their heads and went on. A few minutes later I saw them trampling vegetation again. Signage and education is all you can do. These structures are unsightly.

 

[Snowflea]

Hmm... Don't think the Watermans would've approved.

While thru-hiking the Long Trail a couple weeks ago, I noticed that along with summit caretakers, the Green Mountain Club uses string/twine to guide people away from the vulnerable alpine vegetation on Mts. Abraham, Camel's Hump, and Mansfield. My first thought was that it was rather unsightly but then noticed that it actually seems to be working: the alpine vegetation seemed much less trodden and more lush than when I was last up there years ago.

 

[Puck]

We need someEastwood types to patrol these areas...."Get off my lawn!"

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

Watermans and alpine zones: MUST READ.

Stinkyfeet, thank you for reminding us of the experiments of Guy and Laura Waterman when they adopted Franconia Ridge Trail between Mt Lafayette and Little Haystack after the AMC paid seasonal trail crew built the scree walls along the trail in 1977.
In their book Backwoods Ethics they devote a chapter to their work on that trail, including much insight on hiker behavior, that remains directly relevant to this situation on Bond. The caretaker should read it and then think again.
Creag Nan Drochaid

 

[dr_wu002]

Hmm... Don't think the Watermans would've approved.

While thru-hiking the Long Trail a couple weeks ago, I noticed that along with summit caretakers, the Green Mountain Club uses string/twine to guide people away from the vulnerable alpine vegetation on Mts. Abraham, Camel's Hump, and Mansfield. My first thought was that it was rather unsightly but then noticed that it actually seems to be working: the alpine vegetation seemed much less trodden and more lush than when I was last up there years ago.

They have those ropes on Katahdin as well. They look a little dumb but they seem at least somewhat effective.

I think a path with ropes or rocks plus a small sign saying, "Stay off alpine vegetation" is the best you can get because it allows passage (unlike the scree wall) but manages the area plus the sign has a simple, declarative statement (I'm not convinced that you can "educate" the stupid -- most people can understand what a path + sign means). There will always be the douchebags that are going to walk all over despite the obvious but you've got a good start if you can keep the other 99% of the people in the right place.

-Dr. Wu