Home > Trip Reports > May 6, 2006, Earl Peak (Teanaway)

May 6, 2006, Earl Peak (Teanaway)

5/6/06
WA Cascades East Slopes Central
6673
10
Posted by silaswild on 5/6/06 12:49pm
Deep firm snow blocked even high clearance 4WD travel about a mile beyond Stafford Creek turnoff (two miles short of Beverly Camp), even though the road is mostly clear beyond.  Actually the most difficult snow to drive (I dare not say impossible) is in the early going; then most of the way beyond is snowfree.  Once we had the skis on, we took the trail, crossing Bean Creek and then also crossing a south running tributary shortly after that.  Took the trail route to the summit, arriving at 11AM.  We booted the top 1400' in pretty stiff snow.  After a couple hours on the summit, the snow was butter soft.  On the way out we stayed on the SE side of Bean Creek, avoiding stream crossings.  I suggest this route for upward travel as well; when the trail crosses to the N side of Bean Creek, don't cross, rather climb up E into the trees and traverse NE to the basin.

Longer story:   I had arranged to meet Randonnee the Republican (RR) at 29 Pines camp Friday PM for a 6AM start, snowmobile assisted on the snow covered road.  In the dark I missed the camp (since I failed to take time to find it on a map or even bring a map) so I drove to the snow, then back half a mile to camp in the Tercel Townhouse.  I woke at 5AM, had breakfast, repaired my bindings, and waited for Rando to arrive with the necessary transportation. 

No vehicles came up the road, so at 630 I decided to head for Mt Snoqualmie where I knew other friends would be.  Met RR on my way down, we were off by 7.  I got a 50 yd tow to the dirt, walked a mile while he scouted ahead, then got a 200yd tow, and walked another mile to find him at the down tree across the road at 3600' mentioned by Swooz last month. 

At 8 we headed up, RR self propelled now too.  An hour later the wind picked up and big gray clouds started moving in; I wanted to bail, but RR said "that's the Stevens cloud, there's only a 20% chance of precip today."  Hmm, I thought, this could be the one day in five, but did not want to wimp out, so we continued on in conditions that were not going to be tons of fun skiing down. 

In Bean Basin, RR stoped to put on ski crampons, I flailed upward skinning until he caught up and decided to remove skis and boot up.  It was barely possible to kick steps, the slope was not smooth, great character building ski down, I thought.

Breezy on top at 11, but the clouds were not on us or the Stuart Range, like they were on Hinman and Daniel.   Blue sky could be seen to the west, maybe I should have stayed home?  Bundled up in all the gear I brought (after last week's sunbathing at Crystal) and we waited in the hope of some solar snow cooking.   At noon, two DOT avi controllers from Ellensburg arrived; turns out RR had trained one of them years ago.  After noon, the cloud cover thinned and the sun did its work. 

At 1PM, I was cold enough and bored enough (even with the great views, but without bbq, oysters, music, and TAY mob of last Sunday) to start down.  The south facing snow was softened enough that my dentures stayed in (just kidding.)  And the west slope from the 6200' bench was perfect butter!

At the sled, RR took my skis, poles, and pack and I had a pleasant stroll back to the car.  Afterward I joined RR, his Democratic wife, and apolitical daughter for a nice lunch at their sunny, but breezy campsite before heading west into the clouds.
Heya Silas and RR- Looks like Skip, Justin, and I missed you at the summit of Earl Peak today by less than 1 hour (we ascended via the NW ridge).  We figured there was another party well ahead of us when we passed the sno-mo parked at the downed tree across the Beverly Creek road  :)
Definitely a great day out for sure, and we were pleasantly surprised to have the large blue break in the clouds overhead (especially after the morning drive in light rain between Snoq. Pass and Cle Elum).  Skip and I were very glad to have our ski pons today, as they were used for almost the entire ascent above the Bean/Beverly Creek junction.  We ended up ascending a SW aspect a little north of Earl Pk to gain the NW ridge and were able to skin all the way up to the summit rocks (~50 ft below the top, then ski carry to the summit).  We skied down our ascent route in perfect corn conditions at ~2:30, a fabulous ~2,000 vertical ft descent to Bean Creek! Skip opted for a short variation on the descent route which looked a bit trickier than just walking around on the rocks  ;D

author=silaswild link=topic=4667.msg19872#msg19872 date=1146973785"> On the way out we stayed on the SE side of Bean Creek, avoiding stream crossings.  I suggest this route for upward travel as well; when the trail crosses to the N side of Bean Creek, don't cross, rather climb up E into the trees and traverse NE to the basin.


We ascended Bean Creek via this route, which I thought was fine though some in the group may disagree due to the tree well/moss-covered snow factor... We ended up skiing down the opposite (NW) side of Bean Creek which turned out to be pretty good; that is if you don't mind a few stream crossings ;)
1) Skip crossing a tributary of Bean Creek
2) Crossing Bean Creek

Other trip photos are posted here

I might add that our NW ridge assault resulted from a "manual override" of the advice provided by electronic navigation equipment.  This longcut was later summarized by one in our party thusly: "It's a better route.  F#&k you." 

In truth, it was a nice route.  So nice, in fact, that we went back the same way after leaving the summit at 2:30 to ski its brilliantly corned open bowls.  That was fine spring skiing.  Despite weather to the N, S, E, and W, the day stayed beautiful until after we had arrived at the Cottage Cafe in Cle Elem.  It was lovely. 

Just two more shots for posterity:
northern panorama
trouble

Nice pictures you guys! Great job finding the sun today - Greg and I looked outside today and decided to go biking when we saw it was raining up at the pass!

Good to meet you and see RR after all these years!

Excellent Skiing!

Cheers,

Stimbuck

It was a nice tour. Thanks, Silas for coming along and for the excellent TR and photos. It was good to run into some other folks on the summit. It was quite a relief to watch them easily skin and walk to the summit on softened snow after we had kicked and scratched our way up earlier. We were not sure if the snow would soften enough to enjoy, but it did finally.

The earlier excellent posting in April caught my interest. Ludwig and I went in to Earl  on 4/27 with almost continuous snow on the road. I turned around at 6200' on the 27th at noon because it was getting too soft.

Before this year, the last time I skied Earl was in 1989, in powder, on 210 cm Fischer GTS and Asolo Super Comps. Although not randonnee gear, even on that gear I tended to do a lot of alpine turns! That gear was light enough to skate roads sometimes and was nice for traveling- I had the Black Diamond nordic extendable poles that went to 145 cm length. Back when the Ski Doo was new a friend and I skied several of the Teanaway Peaks in powder from my wall tent with wood stove basecamp at 29 Pines campground.

Since the sign at the trailhead states "No Motorized Vehicles" I am concerned about the snowmobile high marks to the summit of Earl. Stimbuck commented that it was not Wilderness. Does anyone have information about snowmobile use of this area? Yea, I use a snomo, but I really believe that Forest users should follow the rules and respect others' uses.

Thanks to Skip and Cass for dragging me aloong, and yes, I will confess to vocalizing my displeasure at the Treewell/Moss variation to the summer trail, particually since I had scoped a Chuck Norris style non-wading stream crossing route in the AM. However, we now know which side of the creek has prettier tree wells and sidehilling, in the event that it ever comes up again  ;D
Great trip on a magical day spent in the "The Sucker hole" since it appeared that we were surrounded by ugly clouds on all sides.
RR- I am not sure on the legality of the highpointers surrounding Earl but I also found the tracks to be disturbing. At times I wish I had a snowmachine, but even more I wish people with sleds would have the same respect that you have in parking them instead of trashing places where they are inappropriate (legal or not).  I think part of the tension between the BC skiers and the sledders is that a sled can mark up an area and impose on the natural beauty in a very short period of time, as witnessed at the Crystalfest. Kind of a drive by assault. Kudos for the sled parking job!!!! I hope you can spread the wisdom.
Great day in the hills.


author=Randonnee link=topic=4667.msg19884#msg19884 date=1147029679]Since the sign at the trailhead states "No Motorized Vehicles" I am concerned about the snowmobile high marks to the summit of Earl.

Randonee, could you describe where the snowmobile tracks were in more detail? Did you see tracks going up along Bean Creek and in Bean Creek basin? Where were the tracks that climbed to the summit of Earl?

I believe that Bean Creek basin is another one of those "voluntary" non-motorized areas, but not 100% sure. On the other hand, I believe that the Stafford Creek basin is open to motors, so they could legally reach the summit of Earl from the east.

A couple quick thoughts on the Snowmobile access issue:

Stimbuck is correct that the machines are allowed in Stafford Creek basin as it is not Wilderness.

Bean/Beverly basins are in a voluntary winter closure.  It is not "legally" closed.

Currently there is no legal closure (outside of the wilderness) for oversnow motorized snowmobile travel in any of the basins south of the Teanaway Crest.  The crest forms the wilderness boundary.  If it drains into Ingalls Creek it is in the Wilderness.  Hence, Hardscrabble and Fourth Creek basins, which are north of the crest, ARE wilderness.  It is useful to look into these basins for evidence of snowmobile incursions and report them to the Cle Elum Ranger District.  I have repeatedly noticed that the "legal" tracks on Earl's east basin often continue right into the wilderness over the Hardscrabble divide.  I have also noticed that the tracks going up Iron Peak from the N. FK. Teanaway road often continue into Fourth Creek basin, well within the wilderness. These should be reported to the Forest Service.  On maps the Wilderness Boundary coincides with the Chelan/Kittitas county line above these basins.  The main issue is that the machines enter the area legally and then pass through the wilderness basins in order to connect longer trips.  This needs to stop.

In contrast, summer motorized wheeled use is prohibited on the Stafford Creek, Stand Up, Bean, Beverly, Iron Peak, Long's Pass, Ingalls Way, and Esmerelda basin trails.  Winter motorized travel is not prohibited until they reach the Wilderness boundary.  These laws went into effect in the early 1980's to preserve a primitive horse/hiker experience.  At that time few snowmobiles/riders were capable of getting into the basins.  It appears to be an oversight to not have made the area legally closed to motors year-round, simply because the technology did not exist when the governing management plan went into effect.  That plan is known as the Alpine Lakes Area Land Management Plan.  When Congress designated the Alpine Lakes Wilderness this plan was adopted, through public process, to manage the entire area between I-90 and US-2.

A question to ask is when does the summer non-motorized use season begin and the winter season end?   Skiers, snowshoers, hikers and Spring alpine scramblers enter the area as the roads melt expecting a primitive non-motorized experience.

Check maps to notice the location of the boundary on the ridge crest.  If machines stop on the crest that is tolerated.  The FS welcomes observations and input.  It shouldn't fall on deaf ears.

John

author=John_Morrow link=topic=4667.msg19901#msg19901 date=1147116018]
A couple quick thoughts on the Snowmobile access issue:


The main issue is that the machines enter the area legally and then pass through the wilderness basins in order to connect longer trips.  This needs to stop.

John


I agree completely with John and might also suggest that stopping snow machine tresspass will not happen in a vacuum. Input from skiers and boarders ('non-motorized users') is needed, and I believe will be required, as this is a highly contentious issue.

But I wonder if perhaps this view is not that strongly held within the backcounty skiing community.  At the Crystal Fest, the group witnessed two snomos high marking the Throne, directly across from the gathering place. It seemed to me that some were mildly upset, but I did not get the sense that the group as a whole was highly concerned by this illegal and inappropriate activity. Maybe everyone was just having too much fun.


Nonetheless, I'm wondering how many of those present later reported what they saw to either the Crystal management, or the Forest Service. Anybody?

Larry

Snowmobile tracks climbed the Bean Cr. side, and the summit high mark came up from the Stafford Cr. side. Again, back in the day, there were no other skier tracks and certainly no snomo tracks in that high country. Sad, there were some sweet powder days on Iron and Earl before the new snomo technology was developed.

Another issue is that I do not see enough signage that would even reasonably support enforcement. Does the USFS really care? Snomobilers have climbed regularly to over 7000' in Wilderness and bragged in the bars of climbing to near 8000' on Mt. Cashmere for over a decade. Some have bragged of snowmobiling to Lake Augusta from Jay Cr. in the Icicle. The USFS must certainly know about this. I skinned up a cut trail into the Wilderness in March that was packed by regular snomo use

As I told Silas, I have mixed feelings about reporting to the USFS. I am fairly cynical about USFS enforcement and Policy; I will not blather on about it here.

If I am ever present and see a violator I will try to engage the offending snowmobiler in conversation, photograph him, the machine, and his Snomo License number. If possible, I will call 911 to report the violation and try to ski down to where the snomo carrying rig is parked (in certain places I could do this) and get a Lic. #.

The Teanaway Peaks would reasonably warrant more restriction of snowmobile travel. The area has important proximity to the Stuart Range and the ALW.

If any USFS officials are interested in more details, I would provide them here by PM.

Reply to this TR

3103
may-6-2006-earl-peak-teanaway
silaswild
2006-05-06 19:49:45