Throne Traverse Construction Project

For those of us who endured the unpleasantness of the rock strewn p-tex necessitating traverse to the South Back recently and in the past, relief  may be coming soon.

The Forest Service approved the Throne Traverse Construction Project on September 14, 2009 to build an 8 foot wide groomable traverse off the top of the high campbell.

GRUBSTAKE AND THRONE TRAVERSES CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT

That is honestly terrible,terrible news.
Never did trust the Forest Service.
I am depressed by this news. :'( :'(
I like the present traverse, rocks and all. It keeps the punters at bay.
Anyone want to form a comittee to fight this to the bitter end.

this sucks. so what if a little p-tex is gone. its cheap fixes and really easy to fix yourself. This will ruin that bowl and southback like the northway chair did to northback. I would be down to fight this, not sure I would be much help though.

Now the next question.... How are they going to get a groomer up there?

Now the next question.... How are they going to get a groomer up there?

"This traverse will be machine groomed by a small snow cat housed at the top of the lift." Page 2 of Decision Memo

It should be the ski tuning shops that should get together to fight this.
There will be a huge reduction in core shots and bust edges......it will put ski technicians out on the streets.
There's gonna be ski technicians hanging around bus stops  whispering " hey buddy, want your edges ground."

Hamburger is going to get tracked out in 25 minuted instead of an hour!
I've been warning you about these government agencies but Noooo, he's just a conspiracy nut!

On the other hand...... perhaps we can tell the NPS that the  new groomed track will promote travel into the SB which passes through MRNP land..... We can get the NPS fighting with the Forest Service. Win/win.!

...On the other hand...... perhaps we can tell the NPS that the  new groomed track will promote travel into the SB which passes through MRNP land..... We can get the NPS fighting with the Forest Service. Win/win.!

Rationale for Decision..."While accessing these areas, skiers and boarders sometimes are doing so at risk to themselves and to their equipment as well as causing intrusions into Mt Rainier National Park in an effort to find easier access." Decision Memo, page 4

Just awful.

Some places are supposed to be a little difficult to get to.

It makes getting there all the more worthwhile.

"Only three comment letters were received"

We are all to blame I guess?

Now the next question.... How are they going to get a groomer up there?

Its already up there......

this is bad , bad , bad news , can we stop this? I suggest many e mails to CM management. When they were considering a lift to the top of the King many skiiers let them know it was a bad idea and they scrapped the plan

this is bad , bad , bad news , can we stop this? I suggest many e mails to CM management.  When they were considering a lift to the top of the King many skiiers let them know it was a bad idea and they scrapped the plan

Can we be anonymous so we don't risk getting our season pass revoked like the NY lady at Durango?

Lets all band together and have a good ole TAY uprising at Kirchers office. We can all sit in front of his office day and night until the plan is abandoned....

Seriously though, something needs to be done. Apparently the public comment period is over , not that I knew it was happening anyways.

Maybe a group petition? To MRNP, FS, and Crystal?

I really didn't realize that this would cause so much consternation. I started the thread because this was a recent development made all the more relevant in light of the traverse a few weeks ago--the worst I have ever seen it coupled with not having seen anything posted on the TAY site about the Memo of Decision

This is just one piece of the overall plan around chair 6. (Below from Crystal MDP Amendment 1 Scoping Letter 07252009  issued July 29, 2009)

Replacing High Campbell Basin Chairlift (C-6)
This popular lift was originally built in the early 1950s at Pilchuk ski area then relocated to Crystal Mountain in 1979. Its age makes repairs and getting replacement parts difficult. The upper terminal is near the summit of Silver Queen, at 6,983 feet elevation. The upper portion of the alignment, including the upper terminal, is exposed directly to the prevailing southwest wind. As a result, the lift must often be shut down due mechanical constraints that limit operation of the relatively light, fixed-grip double chairlift in high winds.
This project is not included in the current MDP. However, it is consistent with the overall purpose and need for the MDP, as noted above.

Replacing High Campbell Basin Chairlift (C-6)
This is a new project not previously proposed or approved in the 2004 ROD. The proposal is to replace the existing High Campbell Basin Chairlift (C-6), a fixed-grip double chairlift, with a new fixed-grip quad chairlift. The same alignment would be used, though some new tower locations would likely be required. The unloading point at the top might be shifted down the alignment slightly (about 20 to 30 feet) to a less confined location. Carrier spacing on the new lift would be increased so that rated capacity did not increase notably (978 pph to 1,200 pph). Ride time would be unchanged at about 5.5 minutes and no notable increase in use other than that due to fewer shut-downs is anticipated...

In case you guys have forgot. You are in a
"Lift" served ski area. Which means that the owners can improve the area to best fit the "Lift " served skiiers.

This isn't a "Backcountry" resort. You can access the backcountry, sure. But , if the owners make it a little easier to get to the goods, I don't think you'll have your green circle skiiers wanting to hit a cat track to black diamond runs.

If you like the feel of bouncy traverse trails , just hit the Green Valley Bowl. You can do that all season long.

That is honestly terrible,terrible news.
Never did trust the Forest Service.
I am depressed by this news. :'( :'(
I like the present traverse, rocks and all. It keeps the punters at bay.
Anyone want to form a comittee to fight this to the bitter end.

Reasons For Implementing Traverse Trail:

1. Create Jobs

2. Make it safer for Ski Patrol to access areas quicker and with less stress on Patrollers trying to pull sleds.

3. Save on equipment

4. Improve summer mountain biking and hiking trips

I am with Bandit.  I think this will be good for all the reasons listed, but also for the skiing experience.  I guess we're all after something a little different. I've probably "buzzed" several of you on the trail over to the southback gate as you pick your way through the rocky traverse. I don't like doin' that, but I am not going to putz around waiting for people.

They should have done something similar in Northback instead of putting in the lift....if they would have slightly lowered I-5 and graded and groomed the trail it would have been a great way to make it easy to ski most of Brand X and still have a good experience getting back to the base area without building the lift.

Reasons For Implementing Traverse Trail:
1. Create Jobs
2. Make it safer for Ski Patrol to access areas quicker and with less stress on Patrollers trying to pull sleds.
3. Save on equipment
4. Improve summer mountain biking and hiking trips

Reasons for not Implementing Traverse Trail.
1. Makes it easier to get to start of Throne bootpack and SB gate.
2. More accidents for Ski patrol as people without the skills will be lured to more difficult terrain.
3. Will promote increased access to SB which mandatory passes through MRNP land.
4. Mountain Biking down Powder Bowl not a good idea.

5. Mountain Biking in MRNP not allowed( where would you go on a mountian bike from top of chair 6, down Kempers?

I don't think you'll have your green circle skiiers wanting to hit a cat track to black diamond runs.

Oh really!!? :
My experience skiing Crustal for quite a few seasons leads me to believe this hypothesis wrong.
But I have to be honest and say it will improve the access and will save on gear and that my reasons for being against it are purely selfish.
I just don't like sharing my SB powder with more skiers and although honesty is usually the best policy I am prepared to make up reasons to advance my agenda in this case. ;D

Reasons for not Implementing Traverse Trail.
1. Makes it easier to get to start of Throne bootpack and SB gate.
2. More accidents for Ski patrol as people without the skills will be lured to more difficult terrain.
3. Will promote increased access to SB which mandatory passes through MRNP land.
4. Mountain Biking down Powder Bowl not a good idea.

5. Mountain Biking in MRNP not allowed( where would you go on a mountian bike from top of chair 6, down Kempers?

Powder Bowl and Kempers are on the exact opposite side of the Throne? Not sure what you are talking about here? Mountain biking on the Throne side? Yes

What is wrong with making a safe and efficient way to get to the SB?

What is wrong with making a safe and efficient way to get to...

If you're going to use that as an argument why not put a gondola up to the summit of Mt Rainier?

...some things need a small barrier to entry.

after this weekend i see both sides of the argument. It was rockier than i have ever seen it up there, and im sure i left my share of ptex up on top. but i still believe that that small amount of ptex was worth the amazing skiing i got on the early chutes of the throne. this weekend i also saw 5 people who are not good skiers have to be downloaded down chair 6 because they could not handle it. this proves the fact that stupid people will constantly go up there and that traverse and early descent to the traverse separate the good from the bad. it may make it easier for ski partol to get to cases out there but they will have significantly more cases on their hands. i am with anyone who has any ideas for fighting this. emails to all three contributors to the plans, Crystal Mt., NPS, and the Forest Service.

Oh yea - skier unite to save the sh**y traverse to the Throne!!  It seems that we are Crystal Mountain ski patrols only hope!!

Quick Bat boy - to the Dynafits  :

The traverse is much worse than the skiing.

When they plan the gondola to the top of Rainier then I'll get my undies in a wad.

If you're going to use that as an argument why not put a gondola up to the summit of Mt Rainier?

...some things need a small barrier to entry.

Once again. This is a "LIFT" serviced ski area.

A gondola up to the summit of Rainier? HHMM,, gives me visions of Switzerland. I'll go for that.

My bet -- the barrier for entry to SB is not the traverse, it's the fact that you have to carry your skis to get there. The campbell bowl terrain will get tracked out quicker, I'm sure, but beyond that...

Think of it a high speed quad up sunrise then a groomer out to Glacier basin.From there put a tram all the way to the summit with a mid way station on steamboat prow we could have groomers down the Emmons and the Winthrop.Who do I have to call to get this idea off the ground.

While I dont like the idea of them shifting mountain ridges around it will be nice to just cruise to the gates (maybe too nice?). What does and will continue to anger me is traverse tracks (Exterminator, Bull Run, The Throne and the North face of the King) and the possible adding of a groomer down the fall line of cambell basin (Kempers ridge would be a good groomer though).

Its not going to be a Gondola its going to be a tram and Im all for that. While I dont like the idea of them shifting mountain ridges around it will be nice to just cruise to the gates (maybe too nice?). What does and will continue to anger me is traverse tracks (Exterminator, Bull Run, The Throne and the North face of the King) and the possible adding of a groomer down the fall line of cambell basin (Kempers ridge would be a good groomer though).

Exactly. too nice!

My bet -- the barrier for entry to SB is not the traverse, it's the fact that you have to carry your skis to get there.  The campbell bowl terrain will get tracked out quicker, I'm sure, but beyond that...

Totally agree with you..

I don't even think that campbell bowl will track out quicker, on a good powder day it gone in 30 minutes anyway. Beside the fact there is a huge line for the lift. At this point I doubt the traverse really does anything else other than damage ski bases, it sure doesn't keep anyone away...

I disagree it keeps myself and quite a few others friends away. I only have one solid board so I can't afford too many core shots.

I admit it may be different for me -- I couldn't care less about base damage, as it's (almost) all easily repaired and I like doing it.

I disagree it keeps myself and quite a few others friends away. I only have one solid board so I can't afford too many core shots.

Totally disagree with Marcus. Snowboarders will love new traverse. Kyle and his buddies will have Hamburger scraped of snow in 29 minutes.