No skiing below Pebble Creek

I'm a firm believer in cussing out the park service on a daily basis.They deserve it. I spend at least 5 minutes every day cussing them out.

I told myself I would keep my mouth shut 'cause my wording ends up coming out wrong and I offend people unintentionally - so, not trying to do that...First of all, based on Scotsman's character and what a great person he seems to be, I have decided to add this into my morning routine with my tea and teethbrushing.  ;D

Skipole, a couple of frequent TAYers and myself have done quite a few trips together, increasingly so this past year, and on a few actually did dig out MRNP bathrooms and ranger stations.  Believe me, there was far more than 5 feet of snow on the ground and for the most part we followed the roads and trails all the way in depending on where it was.  Sunrise still had a delayed opening.  Where is the follow-through with the deal?  We know it's not your responsibility, and I don't think anyone on here would put the so-called "park regulations" or NPS enforcement on the shoulders of a volunteer uniform.  However, instead of bashing us with talk of "who gives a fig about who", I would suggest using the role that you do have to try to repair the bridge rather than burn it.

When an issue like this is thrown in front of this community, it is obviously touchy.  I did a bit of research (NPS website and calling up to Rainier) so it is right from the Ranger's mouths - I spoke with Melissa, and Brienn who offered me this information:

The park brings in a bit more than 2 MILLION visitors a year.  Their main problems, especially during this busy time of year, is parking, followed by trail maintenence/wilderness preservation.  When asked who is often most damaging to preservation, I was told specifically, "...mostly the day hikers or your average tourist.  They do the most damage because they don't really know much better.  They don't know what they're stepping on."  I then asked about climbers and skiers specifically being damaging and was told, "No, they are actually some of the best visitors.  They typically know what they're doing and make little to no impact."  4500-5000 people annually climb Rainier - which off the NPS website means go above 10,000 ft.  It seems to me that given the numbers, you're barking up the wrong tree.  Thought this was interesting too...maybe you should start posting up on PGA.com as well...

An interesting "Did you know" fact from the NPS webpage:
_{Did You Know?
Paradise Meadows was once home to a golf course, a rope tow for skiers, and to Camp of the Clouds. All of these activities damaged the meadows, as does walking off-trail. Management practices have changed over the years and we now protect and restore our precious subalpine meadows.}

I was not able to get info on the costs of the VC, but to all interested, I also heard from two different Rangers, one of them having worked Paradise during the winter that there are NO RESTRICTIONS TO SKIERS ON THE MOUNTAIN.  When asked about the questioned area, the same was repeated to me.

_{Modified to add picture.}

In the last 7 years, the Bush admn has adopted the biodiversity preservation for parks because, IMHO, it is a way of not funding parks (you don't need to fund what you want to keep people out of--let nature do it).

Isn't that the truth!

Is there any chance "skipole" is just a creature from under the bridge in Fremont?

Also, my only really bad interactions at MRNP have been with volunteer rangers. I got holy hell camping at Glacier Basin when I only had a permit confirmation number and not an actual permit. I couldn't get a physical permit as they close too early, and the ranger on the phone said the number was plenty.... Mr Volunteer went nuts on his radio, threating us with death and dismemberment, unyil the ranger we had talked to got on the horn and shut him up. sigh. "You pay your money and take your chances..."

Skipole, I want to be upfront and tell you that I took Rusty's advice and complained about you to Kevin-Bacher. Below is what I sent.

Dear Kevin,
I was told to contact you with any complaints regarding park volunteers. Please see the attached thread on TAY started by a volunteer named skipole. Although the original message regarding not stompimg flora was good and well-intentioned , the officious tone and arrogant attiutude does nothing to promote what is a growing rift between the backcountry skiing community and the NPS.
I thought you should be informed as to what is going on. See this thread www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10692.0

Skipole sees to be one of these people who crave badges and volunteer shirts and then likes to tell everybody what to do. He/She is doing a terrible job in communicating with the skiing public and seems to be taking on an official tone regarding NPS policy.

Can you rein in your feral volunteer please!
I don't expect you'll do anything in fact you'll probably give him/her another badge but at least I tried.

Chris Willis

Boyo, this thread was destined to go not-smoothly.  It's a fine example of the kind of communication and interaction that will only serve to widen the rift that so many folks have mentioned.

Scotsman, this seems like a fine place for your "skier advocacy" group, eh?  I know Gator and a few other NPS staff post here from time to time and I imagine this thread will get some attention via your email -- maybe we can use it as a jumping off point to make some progress on this issue.  The us/them trend isn't going to help anyone.

*** Edit

To push the discussion in that direction, I agree with whitethunder that most of the skiers I know are pretty big advocates for conservation and stewardship of the land we use. If more education was available, via NPS website updates, signs posted near the parking lot during the sensitive "between times" as the snowpack thins, I think that most folks would do what they could to minimize the impact. It will always be a touchy subject when brought up by a perceived "authority" figure, whether volunteer or not, especially given the amount of misinformation and inconsistency that we've seen even in this thread.

I told myself I would keep my mouth shut 'cause my wording ends up coming out wrong and I offend people unintentionally - so, not trying to do that...First of all, based on Scotsman's character and what a great person he seems to be, I have decided to add this into my morning routine with my tea and teethbrushing.  ;D

Skipole, a couple of frequent TAYers and myself have done quite a few trips together, increasingly so this past year, and on a few actually did dig out MRNP bathrooms and ranger stations.  Believe me, there was far more than 5 feet of snow on the ground and for the most part we followed the roads and trails all the way in depending on where it was.  Sunrise still had a delayed opening.  Where is the follow-through with the deal?  We know it's not your responsibility, and I don't think anyone on here would put the so-called "park regulations" or NPS enforcement on the shoulders of a volunteer uniform.  However, instead of bashing us with talk of "who gives a fig about who", I would suggest using the role that you do have to try to repair the bridge rather than burn it.

When an issue like this is thrown in front of this community, it is obviously touchy.  I did a bit of research (NPS website and calling up to Rainier) so it is right from the Ranger's mouths - I spoke with Melissa, and Brienn who offered me this information:

The park brings in a bit more than 2 MILLION visitors a year.  Their main problems, especially during this busy time of year, is parking, followed by trail maintenence/wilderness preservation.  When asked who is often most damaging to preservation, I was told specifically, "...mostly the day hikers or your average tourist.  They do the most damage because they don't really know much better.  They don't know what they're stepping on."  I then asked about climbers and skiers specifically being damaging and was told, "No, they are actually some of the best visitors.  They typically know what they're doing and make little to no impact."  4500-5000 people annually climb Rainier - which off the NPS website means go above 10,000 ft.  It seems to me that given the numbers, you're barking up the wrong tree.  Thought this was interesting too...maybe you should start posting up on PGA.com as well...

An interesting "Did you know" fact from the NPS webpage:
_{Did You Know?
Paradise Meadows was once home to a golf course, a rope tow for skiers, and to Camp of the Clouds. All of these activities damaged the meadows, as does walking off-trail. Management practices have changed over the years and we now protect and restore our precious subalpine meadows.}

I was not able to get info on the costs of the VC, but to all interested, I also heard from two different Rangers, one of them having worked Paradise during the winter that there are NO RESTRICTIONS TO SKIERS ON THE MOUNTAIN.  When asked about the questioned area, the same was repeated to me.

_{Modified to add picture.}

Well Done, Stugie,
Nice bacground work.

Boyo, this thread was destined to go not-smoothly.  It's a fine example of the kind of communication and interaction that will only serve to widen the rift that so many folks have mentioned.

Scotsman, this seems like a fine place for your "skier advocacy" group, eh?  I know Gator and a few other NPS staff post here from time to time and I imagine this thread will get some attention via your email -- maybe we can use it as a jumping off point to make some progress on this issue.  The us/them trend isn't going to help anyone.

*** Edit

To push the discussion in that direction, I agree with whitethunder that most of the skiers I know are pretty big advocates for conservation and stewardship of the land we use.  If more education was available, via NPS website updates, signs posted near the parking lot during the sensitive "between times" as the snowpack thins, I think that most folks would do what they could to minimize the impact.  It will always be a touchy subject when brought up by a perceived "authority" figure, whether volunteer or not, especially given the amount of misinformation and inconsistency that we've seen even in this thread.

Totally agree with you Marcus but somebody needs to step up to the plate and start a dialog with the NPS. Somebody , credible, articulate and diplomatic and that isn't me! What we have at MRNP regarding access to skiing in the summer and winter is very special and unless a dialog is started it may well disappear. There used to be a website called " Paradise Golf Club" and look what happened to that group. Only kidding!

Totally agree with you Marcus but somebody needs to step up to the plate and start a dialog with the NPS. Somebody , credible, articulate and diplomatic and that isn't me!

I'm not so sure I agree with you, Scotty.
While it is true that you  are rather passionate and at times have a somewhat low flashpoint, you can be quite articulate and diplomatic when properly motivated.
That may very well be the ideal combination we need to get the movement under way!
What say you, gang? Shall we elect Scotty as the Founding Director of the new Backcountry Snow Travelers Consortium?

P.S. As somone pointed out earlier, it also takes money to make these things work. I'll donate $100 to the Treasury today, if you accept the post (more after we attain our 501c3 "nonprofit" status).

No way. I ain't getting drafted!
You seem the ideal candidate as far as I am concerned!
I think we should draft you!
Marcus, please second RonJ as the tip of our spear!

I'll donate $150 if you accept the post and more when we get a non-profit established.

No way. I ain't getting drafted!
You seem the ideal candidate as far as I am concerned!
I think we should draft you!
Marcus, please second RonJ as the tip of our spear!

I second

I got stuck on the phone or I would have beat Marcus' second 

Which is the very reason I would have to decline.  My work requires too much of my time to allow me to do any kind of a decent job with such an endeavor.
That's another reason I thought of you, Scotty, you seem to be out of work even when you're working  :

If you're really serious not doing it Who could we get to lead the charge?

And before you answer that, answer me this, Scotty or Marcus: what would it take to get either of you to take the job?

I saw this when he first posted it, and thought "hmmm this sounds fishy".  Not surprised that it exploded.

Scotsman, don't think we've met but I just wanted to say BRAVO to you for your posts in this thread.  You write well and always seem to know the exact right level of "un-PCness" to appeal to plebes like me while still seeming intelligent and on-point.

Poor Skipole.  He seemed to really throw the baby out with the bathwater on this one.  The trouble is if you come off like a jerk noone will want to do trips with you, and eventually people will just stop listening to you altogether.  But, the community is pretty forgiving and I think a solid and honest mea culpa would go a long way for him.

When I first read his post I daydreamed it as a funny scene from a movie - Annoying, superior sounding volly starts hassling freewheeling backcountry skier.  Skier pulls out the "backcountry blowgun".  "Fwap!" as traquilizer dart hits volly and he passes out.  Tour continues.

Well thanks  but many would rightfully argue with your comments.

I'm not sure skipole needs to offer any apology. I kinda admire his or her passion and at least he/she is putting it out there and not backing off. I respect that.

I'm more worried about the apathy of skiers who think the status quo will remain. Look at this thread, it's all the usual suspects( with a few exceptions) . A few loonies venting on the internet is a far cry from an effective group to protect what we love.

I would be far more heartened if posters with more moderate views and diversity felt it necessary to join the conversation.

Why did the guide companies  and their climbers get to use Paradise when it was closed to everybody else, because they have an organised voice with which to approach the NPS.

I'm afraid apathy will be  our biggest downfall and when the Crystal boundary is closed and dropping to 410 a misdemeanor, the Paradise road closed in the winter,skiing banned at certain elevations at certain times of the year, Rangers ticketing people at Chinook for building kickers, the Slush Cup banned unless a commercial permit and environmental insurance is obtained, the Chutefest at Sunrise and grilling homewreckers in the parking lot after dropping Fear Factor a thing of the past, we'll regret it.

Wow, this has been a lively discussion! Thank you to Jonathan Shefftz and Chris Willis for bringing it to my attention. I am the volunteer program manager at Mount Rainier National Park and am commenting in that capacity. I have forwarded the link to this discussion thread to Steve Klump and John Piastuck, wilderness rangers here at Rainier, as well as Mike Gauthier, lead climbing ranger, and Chuck Young, Chief Ranger, suggesting that one of them respond with clarification on what our ski regulations are, the reasons behind them, and the ways that they are intended to be communicated to park visitors. I've worked many years here as an interpretive ranger in the visitor centers, so I can tell you from personal experience how challenging it is, even as a full-time employee, to keep abreast of current conditions and to communicate that information to visitors.

The regulations about backcountry use are based on a desire to protect the natural resources while allowing for recreational use. Areas like Paradise have more regulations than places like Indian Henry's Hunting Ground, for example, which has much less intensive usage. Summer regulations tend to be stricter than winter ones both because of increased use and because this is when the fragile subalpine meadows are most exposed and vulnerable.

The majority of people who trample our meadows in the summer time by walking off-trail simply do not realize how much damage they are causing. They think of Paradise and Sunrise as "parks" in the same sense as urban parks, where you can walk anywhere and have picnics and throw frisbees. The reality is that subalpine meadows are more analagous to gardens. No one would walk out into the middle of their neighbor's flower garden and lay out a picnic blanket, and yet many people do so at Paradise. And whereas at home, you plant your garden after the snow melts away, at Paradise, it's already growing even as the snow disappears--if it didn't, it wouldn't have enough time during the short growing season to bloom and seed.

That's why we have trails at Paradise--to keep our millions of visitors safely off the meadows while still providing them with a means to enjoy them. It's a challenge in years like this one when the snow lingers well into the busy summer season, because people tend to follow the tracks established by others, even if those tracks melt out in locations other than the true trails. And then you have a new trail, eroded into a steep hillside in an inappropriate location.

The Park Service conducted research a number of years ago to determine the most effective ways of keeping people on the established trails. We tried various kinds of signs, ropes, and means of enforcement. The research demonstrated conclusively that far and away the most effective method was a human presence: both to enforce the regulations and to educate people about the reasons behind them.

We don't have enough rangers to patrol all of the trails all of the time--nor would that necessarily be considered by many to be the most effective use of our limited resources, even if many of us would love to be paid to hike and ski the trails all day!--and so the "Meadow Rover" program was born. Meadow Rovers are volunteers who have been trained to contact, assist, and educate visitors on the trails, and when necessary, to gently enforce the regulations. We provide them with a uniform shirt and cap, and with guide books and park radios that they can borrow from the visitor center. Some of them have busy lives with jobs and kids at swimming practice, and only come up once or twice a summer. Others are retired or just love coming up on the weekends and are here repeatedly throughout the summer. Like any enterprise, some are better at what they do than others. All of them, however, are driven by an honest desire to do what's right for the magnificent resources of Mount Rainier National Park. They want the meadows to survive to be as resplendent for their grandkids as they are today. They see Mount Rainier as a public resource that they are helping to care for. Most of the people they encounter on the trail recognize and appreciate the work they're doing in that role, but inevitably there are also conflicts. We try to train our Rovers to be open to other points of view, but also to be firm about the regulations and to make every effort to educate people about the reasons behind them.

I believe that this has been Skipole's intention, both on the trail and in this forum. Some of his (or her) comments could have been more tactful, and he could be more open about his identity, but he has also tried to do, here, exactly what he would do on the trail: to not just quote regulations but to explain the reasons behind them.

With a few exceptions, most of Skipole's comments have at least been accurate, even if other posters have have disagreed with the policies quoted or the agency behind them. The most significant correction I would make is to note that Sunrise was "closed" for a long time this year not to exclude skiers but because the heavy snowpack all over the park delayed us in getting the road and facilities shoveled out and dewinterized. (As so often happens, Sunrise was widely reported to be "closed" because the ROAD was closed as our plows and service vehicles were working on it; in fact, only the road was closed, and those who chose to ski or snowshoe in by other routes were welcome to do so.)

In the end, I do believe that the skiers, the Meadow Rover volunteers, and the park rangers all share the same goal: to protect the natural resources of Mount Rainier for the enjoyment of present and future generations. I think there's a lot we can do to work toward that goal together, and I welcome anyone who wants to contribute as a volunteer to check out our website at rainiervolunteers.blogspot.com.

Nicely done, RangerKevin,
I for one would like to thank you for taking the time to reach out and communicate with us.
Perhaps you might also give us the best place to go at the NPS when we feel we would like our voices heard? Maybe and email address?
Thanks again.

I would be far more heartened if posters with more moderate views and diversity felt it necessary to join the conversation.

I don't think I can offer a more moderate view. I hope this group gets what they want.

As far as diversity, when I moved into dog driving and skijoring, I tried for years to be allowed access to the same winter roads open to 'bilers, all to no avail. I've given up on the NPS; short of moving to Alaska and trekking in Denali, I don't think I'll ever be able to run a team in a National Park.

Thanks RangerKevin.
                                 I think most of us now understand the meadow stomping issue but what about the other issues such as
1) Crystal boundary
2) Paradise Road in the winter, will it stay open in the future. etc, etc.
3) Sunrise next year
4) people getting warned about building snow kickers at Chinook Pass.

Whom can we talk to or even better meet with to get updated on the NPS policies and intentions regarding these issues that are dear to our hearts.

Thanks for reaching out to us and even thanks to skipole for being a catalyst.

Chris Willis

...I have forwarded the link to this discussion thread to...Mike Gauthier, lead climbing ranger.

I snowboard; what's all the fuss is about.   :

I snowboard; what's all the fuss is about.   :

I was googling and I found a website called Oh, Ranger which I thought very apt.
It's all about the National parks and allows you to log in and post comments.
I logged in as Scotsman, they sent me an e-mail and password and then you log in again and change your password to waht you want.

I then posted about my personal view of some of the Park Service policies regarding ski issues.
It went into a holding account while my post is moderated. I'm sure it won't be posted but you never know.

The NPS is very image consious and I think this website, if they actually will allow posts that offer a different view from what is expected could be a good vehicle to get some diversity of views about NPS policies. Plus the name just tickles me and appeals to devil in me!
Here's the link. Have fun!!!! www.ohranger.com

check on the community button and join and post! They haven't allowed my through yet but I'm hoping.
update they didn't allow my first post whcih was a bit vitriolic so I did a second post more like a news article and they didn't allow that either. This is a government website but they obviously will only alow posts that reflect on them positively.
I'm going to keep trying, I like a challenge.
This website gets seen worldwide and there are posts from people in Holland. Lets try and get OUR voice heard.

I snowboard; what's all the fuss is about.   :

Hey Mike, I know you're well regarded by the skiing community and your blog is highly admired as what the NPS could be but I'd like to ask you a few questions or at least get some direction.

Why ( in my opinion) is the park so good at accommodating the needs of climbers and general visitors but so negative towards the issues effecting skiers? It can't be environmental damage as nobody can argue that general mountaineering has had an incredible effect on the park. Muir toilets, fixed ropes etc etc.
Why has the park superintendent tried to close the Crystal boundary and why was Sunrise opened so late. I read Kevin's reply about Sunrise and it's the party line but I have it on good authority( from two other park rangers) who told me  in person that it's BS and that the road was snow-free for at least a month before they opened it. They said ( the rangers) that East side didn't talk to Westside, that the maintenance department ran the show at Sunrise and that with a couple of portaloos they didn't understand why it couldn't have been opened earlier. This is uniformed rangers talking not vollys.
I hate to put you on the spot but to whom can we talk to. Filling out visitor comment forms just ain't going to cut it. How does an individual or group get a meeting  with the Superintendent?
Thanks  man. Your blog and attitude give some of us hope!

First of all, thanks to RangerKevin and Mike Gauthier whom are willing to take part in said discussion.

I just thought I'd throw a word(s) of encouragement out there as far as this question is concerned:

Why (in my opinion) is the park so good at accommodating the needs of climbers and general visitors but so negative towards the issues effecting skiers?

I like to go to work with stuff from TAY to chew on...today I just happened to have The Challenge of Rainier with me, and in light of the ongoing thread, I read a very interesting part.  Being a climber first, skier second, I've been mesmerized by the Willis Wall since I first saw it.  After reading the history behind it, it made me draw some parallels to the skiing community. 

The first 2 routes (West Rib _{('61,'62 Bell)}; Upper Curtis Ridge _{('62 Cooper/Swayne)}) were done without NPS approval, and then this is what the book describes:

"By 1960, following successful ascents of most major ridges and cirque headwalls on Rainier, climbers finally turned their eyes and ambitions toward the conquest of Willis Wall proper.  In the tradition of discouraging what for many years was considered suicidal, the National Park Service long turned down all requests for permission to attempt the climb, but mounting pressures and a growing public acceptance of the appeals of mountaineering eventually resulted in a more permissive attitude...after the late-spring ascents of Willis Wall, and opening of the mountain to year-round climbing without restrictions on routes, a number of climbers examined the vast slope under winter conditions." (Wickwire, Bertulis, Cooper, Swayne, Mahre, etc.)

I'm not saying look to break the rules - I just think that we're on the right path by getting the attention diverted towards an effort that will hopefully in the long run, allow for a great outcome for both sides.

It looks like at least one of your posts showed up. www.ohranger.com/info/coming-soon.

Reading through the thread, one thing that is not clear to me - is there a definitive answer on whether you can ski below Pebble Creek? If not, when did it officially go into effect?

And, what's the criteria for when its allowed (i.e., for the fall/early winter is it date based, snowpack based or some other criteria)?

It looks like at least one of your posts showed up.  www.ohranger.com/info/coming-soon.

Man, if the rejected post was vitriolic and this post was not, the 1st must have been pretty informative

Man, if the rejected post was vitriolic and this post was not, the 1st must have been pretty informative

No, that was my first post and I'm surprised they let it through eventualy. Kudos to them for allowing some dissent. I purposely made it vitiolic to test their tolerance for free speech!

In case you didn't check out the website ( rainiervolunteers.blogspot.com ) given by RangerKevin below, this is what the website says:

"And finally, don't miss the vigorous discussion going on at turns-all-year.com, initiated by an unidentified Meadow Rover who attempted to explain why skiing can create problems on the lower elevation trails at Paradise this time of year (due to thin snow, large crowds, and the need to establish routes where the trails will be as they melt out). The discussion is lively and wide-ranging; hopefully, it will lead to a better understanding of why we have regulations in place to protect the meadows, and ideas about how we can better convey that message to people visiting the park.

Clearly, our Meadow Rovers are playing a vital role right now--not always an easy one, or even a universally popular one. But you have only to look at Hank and Judy's pictures above to see why it's so important. Thank you all for your hard work on behalf of our Mountain!"

_*edit*

Looks pretty obvious to me that the damage was DEFINITELY cause by those ski/snowboarder folk... :

Yep, just what you would expect. Self-congratulatory.
We finally get a response from Kevin at NPS. We are so delighted, we effuse over their kindness to have replied and then when you want to expand the conversation they retreat.
I've worked for the government( on construciton projects for them) for nearly 20 years and the only thing that makes them listen and change is to carry a big stick and use it.
The big stick being their funding scource, litigation and negative PR.

I don't mean to stir the pot too vigorously, but the second of those photos (I had to go to the blog to see a larger version) depicts a scene in which the obvious snow patches are easily connected with what appear to be meadow-protecting and solid isthmuses.

Anyone got any photos of the usual line down from the base of Pan Point to the visitor's center, which I assume is the primary concern? Discussions like this one are often improved with the addition of solid and agreed-upon data.

I concur with Scotsman's general assessment that squeaky wheels receive grease. Reasoned dialog's awesome whenever user groups/resource demands come into conflict.

Thanks to the rangers for their replies!

Hello again -- a common theme in these postings is how to effectively communicate with those who have the authority to explain or modify park policy. Let me provide a few suggestions.

First, the caveat: all of us are extremely busy, especially this time of year, and it's hard to keep up with our e-mail and phone messages, so please don't take offense if it takes a while to get a response from someone. It's not disregard, it's just lack of time. Your concerns are very important, but we also are busy keeping the park running day-to-day as well. (I've been interrupted by about five phone calls in the short time I've been writing this.) Plus, we're the government, and so things inherently move slower than they do in the real world.  Please be patient! (The winter season is often a better time to discuss policy, because we have fewer distractions from front-line operations.)

Now, the names and numbers: Our Wilderness Manager is Steve Klump, 360-569-2211 ext. 3304. He coordinates policy and enforcement parkwide and is the best person to talk to with your concerns. My recommendation would be to elect one person to do so rather than having a dozen people call him about the same thing! He should be open to chatting with you or setting up a time to do so, either by phone or even in person. I can't guarantee that he'll promptly change any policies, but he's a good guy and I'm fairly certain he'll give you an honest hearing.

Steve's boss is our Chief Ranger, Chuck Young, 360-569-2211 ext. 3300. But he'll probably just refer you to Steve if you haven't talked to him already. Chuck will get involved if you have issues involving changing park policy. His boss is Superintendent Dave Uberuaga, 360-569-2211 ext. 2301. Dave is incredibly busy, and again will refer you down the chain of command if you haven't talked to them already. But he has the final say about park-level regulations (those that aren't superceded by, say, Federal regulations or legislation).

There are many ways to contribute to a discussion of issues. This is a great forum, and once we're alerted that something relevant to our operation is being discussed, we do follow the discussion. My volunteer program blog at rainiervolunteers.blogspot.com permits comments on the topics posted there, and I welcome feedback; I've also set up a Yahoo discussion group for volunteers, which is linked on the right-hand side, where you can discuss your own issues related to volunteering just as you can here on topics related to skiing. Some of us, like Gator and I, feel that this is where we need to go for a more responsive government. But it does take time and a shift in work priorities to keep up with, and again, we're the federal government, so change comes slowly!

I've avoided answering some of the specific questions that have been posted here because, frankly, I don't know the answers with enough certainty. I recommend contacting Steve and getting the answers to your satisfaction, then posting them here. Good luck and keep the conversation going!

Thanks for the information.
Do you have e-mail addresses for the following gentlemen you mention.
Steve Klump
Chuck Young
Dave Uberuaga
It's difficult to get through at times on the phone and the whole world seems to communicate by e-mail these days.
Thanks