Snowmobiles at Artist Point! WTF

20 years ago there were still some old lift parts in the trees at the top of the Austin run.
To my understanding, there was a "trade" of expansion areas allowed by the FS in the late 80's. An old map/photo that a friend had showed the Blueberry/Artist's Point area expansion plan with the boundary's marked. The "trade" was for the early 90's expansion toward White Salmon and chairs 7+8.
Since there was once an option to expand that way, it may still exist, but (in my opinion) it wouldn't help the overcrowding issues up there.

I was thinking pretty close to what you've drawn, Lowell, but ending a little closer to X at BM4743. Like I said, I'll keep an eye out this summer when I'm up there to see if I can spot any remains.

I didn't start riding up here until 1990 so the Austin Rope tow was already just a legend for me.

One more fleeting thought...maybe the ski area is scouting an expansion with a lift from the bottom of the Swift Creek area up to the Artist Point parking lot ...

More logical -- put the top terminus at Huntoon Point. That would put all of swift creek trees in the lift accessed area.

I'm not sure where the former Austin rope tow ended but it's somewhere outside of the current ski area boundary so there is some historical precedence for lift access in that direction and it would open up Table Mountain as the "other Arm".

The old Austin rope tow ended up just down ridge from the Chicken -- well within the area.  The old Blueberry rope tow ended up just above the Austin Bowl out-of-bounds gate.  Slightly out of area.  But lift access to the Blueberry chutes  would be obtained from the Huntoon lift.

... or from the Table gondola!!  But no worry -- the MBRC is not going to do anything to expand the area.  They just increase traffic on the already in bounds ski area.  I was talking this expansion stuff with them for 10 years.  They especially didn't like the White Salmon Tram.  That would require some land swaps. We could take White Salmon out of the wilderness area and add Church Mountain as wilderness. Ski area skiers could ski the White Salmon, backcountry skiers could go to the the Church area, and sledders could go to hell!!

More logical -- put the top terminus at Huntoon Point. That would put all of swift creek trees in the lift accessed area.

The old Austin rope tow ended up just down ridge from the Chicken -- well within the area.  The old Blueberry rope tow ended up just above the Austin Bowl out-of-bounds gate.  Slightly out of area.  But lift access to the Blueberry chutes  would be obtained from the Huntoon lift.

... or from the Table gondola!!  But no worry -- the MBRC is not going to do anything to expand the area.  They just increase traffic on the already in bounds ski area.  I was talking this expansion stuff with them for 10 years.  They especially didn't like the White Salmon Tram.  That would require some land swaps. We could take White Salmon out of the wilderness area and add Church Mountain as wilderness. Ski area skiers could ski the White Salmon, backcountry skiers could go to the the Church area, and sledders could go to hell!!

Well, I mean no ill will towards sledders, but if we could swap, then I would rather have Park Butte, instead of Church Mountain. Church looks really nice, but Park Butte is probably the area most appropriate for new Wilderness protection in the state. It is absolutely gorgeous, and if you asked most hikers, they would assume that it already is in the Wilderness. If you removed the sledders, it would be one of only three places that fit the criteria I mentioned earlier (wild, easy, and reasonably close to Seattle). The other two are Paradise and Artist Point. All three can be done with skinny skis and all three have spectacular views of volcanoes as well as other terrain. Park Butte is probably the closest of the three, which means that it would be extremely popular for folks on skis, snowboards and snowshoes.

Personally, I would be fine with a year to year swap. Allow sledders at Artist Point on odd years, and at Church mountain on even years.

Allow sledders at Artist Point on odd years, and at Church mountain on even years.

I'm sure the ski area would love to pay for the plowing for all the 4X4s with trailers...

Allow sledders at Artist Point on odd years

And this is a prize for them? How big an area there would you offer them in this plan? Could they circumnav Table Mountain and head out Ptarmigan Ridge etc.? Or just fart around between Table Mountain and the ski area? If the latter, I'm thinking most sledders would see that as being pretty limited, given that it would take what, a few minutes at most to go from one end to the other?

I like Tim's thinking, including the White Salmon tram!

I like Tim's thinking, including the White Salmon tram!

Actually, the White Salmon Tram proposal was one I threw in so I would be able to agree with the adversaries that is wouldn't work. You take the tram to the top of the White Salmon Glacier, and ski down one of the best runs in the continental USA.  And then what?  You hike uphill for hours through brush to get back to the ski area.  The tram would need to be accompanied by a return lift from White Salmon Creek to the bottom of chair 8. And who is going to advocate for a chair that supplies no skiing acreage?!  Besides, any plan that includes taking acreage out of wilderness is just not going to fly.

But my three other proposals to the ski area are perfectly feasible in that they do not violate wilderness boundaries.

1.  Huntoon Point chair -- the flat where folks usually skin up after skiing the Swift Creek trees is not wilderness.  The flat just below Huntoon Point is not wilderness.  In both cases, the wilderness is within a ping pong ball throw, but boundaries are boundaries.

2. Table Tram.  The Bagley basin is out of wilderness, and half of the top of Table mountain is out of wilderness.  The tram would make the Coleman Pinnacle area part of the ski area in the sense that many folks would by a ticket to save two hours of hike/skinning. Plus, Little Alaska would be a highlight reel run. Bonus: If they could stop plowing the road to Artist's Point for a couple of weeks of access yearly, they could sell ticket for summer rides to the top of Table for first class gawking.

3. Herman Gondola.  There is a flat  just at the top of the Rock Garden which could unload a gondola short of the wilderness line.  Now The Cornice Gully is in area and Stoneman is a minor hike.

One of the main arguments I heard against these proposals (which cost me a spot on the MBRC board of directors, by the way), is that there is no way to get fuel to these lifts.  Baker would do well to requisition a worn out nuclear submarine!
 

Great to see you on TAY again Tim. How is the healing by the way? Post an updated photo to your body surfing thread please. Thanks for sharing your local knowledge of 542.

... or not! 

It may not be an issue to you, but to others it is a problem...

Sounds like a personal problem 

Seriously, don't you people have better things to do with your time than moan and groan about this stuff?  : We could have shut down Monsanto by now if everyone wasn't clamoring over each other for this kind of petty crap.

I don't post and whine on the internet about people postholing my skin track in popular areas... I expect it. I go OTHER places when I want peace and quiet.  : : : : : : : :

I swear some of you go to these zoos just so you have a reason to complain!

Cool insight Mr Place, thanks.

Sounds like a personal problem 

Seriously, don't you people have better things to do with your time than moan and groan about this stuff?  : We could have shut down Monsanto by now if everyone wasn't clamoring over each other for this kind of petty crap.

I don't post and whine on the internet about people postholing my skin track in popular areas... I expect it. I go OTHER places when I want peace and quiet.  : : : : : : : :

I swear some of you go to these zoos just so you have a reason to complain!

I'm guessing you've never taken someone backcountry skiing for the first time and wanted to find an easy, quiet, pretty place that would make them fall in love with the sport.

Sorry to hear it.

Sounds like a personal problem 

Seriously, don't you people have better things to do with your time than moan and groan about this stuff?  : We could have shut down Monsanto by now if everyone wasn't clamoring over each other for this kind of petty crap.

I don't post and whine on the internet about people postholing my skin track in popular areas... I expect it. I go OTHER places when I want peace and quiet.  : : : : : : : :

I swear some of you go to these zoos just so you have a reason to complain!

Thank you for coming back and posting on this thread about how we are wasting our time...

... posting on this thread!

Do you work with Dilbert?

I swear some of you go to these zoos just so you have a reason to complain!

If it was a spot where snowmobiling is legal, I'd have a lot more empathy for this comment.

I think we need to call in the wambulance...

Seriously, get over it guys.

Passive aggressive?

The "ITS POACHING SEASON!!!" on the SnoWest Washington riding areas forum is an interesting read.

I'm guessing you've never taken someone backcountry skiing for the first time and wanted to find an easy, quiet, pretty place that would make them fall in love with the sport.

Sorry to hear it.

like my year old daughter?

or new to ski touring wife?

and yes, we've seen the sled of death at Skyline Ridge

except my daughter wanted to jump on it and go for a ride.

Eastman, I'll quit wasting my time here.. you're right. But keep in mind who is complaining in this thread... it's not me. If they are illegally snowmobiling, I have no problem with complaints to the USFS and I would be angry with the sledders myself, however I have looked at the map - the wilderness boundary is just beyond the point.

however I have looked at the map - the wilderness boundary is just beyond the point.

There are elements in the USFS management of the area regarding where people can and can not use motorized recreation in a NF than a Wilderness boundary...

As a point of clarification, the territory from where the White Salmon Lodge road turns off 542 to the wilderness boundary at the end of 542 (summer end) is managed by the Mount Baker Recreation Company under a lease agreement with the USFS.  It is the policy of the MBRC that no snowmobiles are to be used for recreational use in its management area -- which is larger than just the ski area boundaries. The leasee's dictates have the status of law, as violating them is forbidden by USFS regulations in a leased management area.

In the case that initiated this thread, it sounds like the MBRC employees took a few liberties with their sleds. Naughty, naughty!! If it is a pattern, it is a problem.  Folks will be folks.  I once skinned up to Table Mountain, booted to the top, and was skinning across Table toward our goal, Alaskan Amber (aka "the upper hourglass") when a helicopter landed a party at the top of our proposed line and we were treated to seeing six folks eat the treasure we had been sweating for.  The bird was flown by Ski Area Captain Duncan as a treat for some out of state dignitaries. Stuff happens!

Who is to say the snowmobile tracks were not made by the USFS checking the area? GEEEzzzz this entire thread is a bunch of built up 'what if' and 'might be' nonsense. Don't like tracks (and you don't know who made them), don't like snow shoers, don't like airplanes....how about dogs, I've seen plenty of complaints about that but not on this thread (yet).
If you look for problems I guess you can always have your cup half empty and your never going to be happy. Complain when there are REAL problems, otherwise you just look like a bunch of whiners and real complaints won't be taken serious.

The "ITS POACHING SEASON!!!" on the  SnoWest Washington riding areas forum is an interesting read.

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=31725.0

I once skinned up to Table Mountain, booted to the top, and was skinning across Table toward our goal, Alaskan Amber (aka "the upper hourglass") when a helicopter landed a party at the top of our proposed line and we were treated to seeing six folks eat the treasure we had been sweating for.  The bird was flown by Ski Area Captain Duncan as a treat for some out of state dignitaries.

If we cannot have your entertainment in person, we are very happy to have it virtually. Duncan is a hell pilot as well, who knew (besides you)? A man of many talents.

We hope you are healing well, and enjoying W(ine)AY as well as enlightening us TAYers from time to t!me. Thanks.

Who is to say the snowmobile tracks were not made by the USFS checking the area?  GEEEzzzz this entire thread is a bunch of built up 'what if' and 'might be' nonsense.  Don't like tracks (and you don't know who made them), don't like snow shoers, don't like airplanes....how about dogs, I've seen plenty of complaints about that but not on this thread (yet). 
If you look for problems I guess you can always have your cup half empty and your never going to be happy.  Complain when there are REAL problems, otherwise you just look like a bunch of whiners and real complaints won't be taken serious.

I take these complaints seriously and I don't think they are a bunch of whiners....

I take these complaints seriously and I don't think they are a bunch of whiners....

Me too.  I post from time to time about snowmobiles contributing to my frustration.  "Don't be a baby",  "It's legal, get used to it"..  pretty discouraging comments sometimes.   

I don't think it hurts anything to report what you've seen.  I read the (multi-page) post Silas linked above.  Some of the snowmo crowd calls the TAY community a well-organized and well-funded group;  Greenies with an agenda to take away all snowmobile terrain.  Funny that perception.  A guy says he saw some tracks and the result is three pages of mixed opinions.  Hardly well organized.  Not even pointed in the same direction.

like my year old daughter?
or new to ski touring wife?

Would you have preferred to see snowmobiles on that trip?

But keep in mind who is complaining in this thread... it's not me. If they are illegally snowmobiling, I have no problem with complaints to the USFS and I would be angry with the sledders myself, however I have looked at the map - the wilderness boundary is just beyond the point.

Tim Place writes that snowmobiles are prohibited at Artist Point by the Mount Baker Ski Area through its agreement with the Forest Service. As a former MBRC board member, he should know.

So there's no "if" about it. Despite being outside the wilderness boundary, snowmobiles aren't allowed up there. This thread has been useful at clarifying this, which was Donnelly's original point, I think. The whiners were right.

So is this is just a trivial little thing? I don't think so.

The road to Artist Point was built in the 1920s. It pre-dates both the Mount Baker Ski Area and the Wilderness Act. But ever since the 1920s, Artist Point has been a de facto wilderness in winter. It has been a ski destination. Other than Paradise on Mount Rainier it's the oldest truly alpine ski destination in Washington.

I'm glad the ski area doesn't allow snowmobiles up there. This place is hallowed ground. It should never be motorized in winter. If it ever becomes necessary, skiers should fight to keep it that way.



Skiers tour near Artist Point, circa 1959. UW Special Collections, Bob and Ira Spring Photographs, print #18891.

Let me quote myself...

...you won't see joe sledhead ever go there though, I would put my money on the mt baker ski area workers...

Lowell, you won't ever see sled decks in the parking lot there. I wouldn't want that the same as you.

Let me quote myself again...

...You should send complaints to Mt Baker ski area, ask them if they know what is going on.

...You should send complaints to Mt Baker ski area, ask them if they know what is going on.

And send comments to the MBSNF as they are the land managers and track such occurrences...

Would you have preferred to see snowmobiles on that trip?

Tim Place writes that snowmobiles are prohibited at Artist Point by the Mount Baker Ski Area through its agreement with the Forest Service. As a former MBRC board member, he should know.

So there's no "if" about it. Despite being outside the wilderness boundary, snowmobiles aren't allowed up there. This thread has been useful at clarifying this, which was Donnelly's original point, I think. The whiners were right.

So is this is just a trivial little thing? I don't think so.

The road to Artist Point was built in the 1920s. It pre-dates both the Mount Baker Ski Area and the Wilderness Act. But ever since the 1920s, Artist Point has been a de facto wilderness in winter. It has been a ski destination. Other than Paradise on Mount Rainier it's the oldest truly alpine ski destination in Washington.

I'm glad the ski area doesn't allow snowmobiles up there. This place is hallowed ground. It should never be motorized in winter. If it ever becomes necessary, skiers should fight to keep it that way.

Skiers tour near Artist Point, circa 1959. UW Special Collections, Bob and Ira Spring Photographs, print #18891.

Thanks for that Bob and Ira Spring photo: what a gem of a place!

If it's legal, my bad.  

Even if it was legal ... When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty (T Jefferson). There is nor reason for snowmobiles being allowed to cruise around there. Climbers need permits to set foot on glacier on Mr Rainier and at the same time they are speeding up and down the Easton Glacier on Baker (seen and especially heard them yesterday).

Oh you probably saw me then  ;D



What were you saying?

Honestly, I think snow mobiles should be confined to designated roads and trails and only allowed when there is 2' or more snow on the ground. It's easy to see the disturbance of underlying soil and damage to vegetation in areas where snow mobile use is popular. It's not really their use in areas with deep snowpack but the approach and trail head areas where damage is done. Even when they're in areas with deep snow they must traverse sections with low or no snow and you can see the damage. Why should snow mobiles be any different than their dry land OHV counterparts? I'm not anti snowmobile, I just think their use should be treated like ATVs and dirt bikes.

Couldn't that same 'damage' argument  be applied to 'climbers' trails and areas that are damaged by hikers around passes and lakes?

Yes, to a much greater extent, and not only at "passes and lakes", but every inch of the trail!!
Plus, the nice addition at established camps of "toilet paper behind every tree", piss and shi*t by the bucketload...
FAR greater damage is done by hikers!!!!