American Canyoneers - Hole in the Rock Road [Archive]

Iceaxe

06-24-2013, 09:02 AM

Scott P

06-24-2013, 09:08 AM

This is where my opinion will diverge from some other wilderness advocates (of which I am one) and the like.

I spent much of my life as a highway engineer. Paved roads are actually more environmentally friendly in most ways than are gravel roads. Dust, mag, runoff, etc. are all environmental concerns with gravel roads, much more so than with paved roads. This is even more true with high traffic gravel roads (and at least the northern half of the HITRR qualifies).

It will bring probably more visitation though.

My own opinion:

Let them pave the road; protect the roadless areas. My opinion is also applicable for the Notom-Bullfrog Road and the Burr Trail as well. It's the wilderness that needs protecting (including ones from phoney road claims, of which are common from the counties, but the HITRR is not one of them). The high traffic gravel roads don't need protecting and paving them actually might be more environmentally friendly in many ways. The focus should be protecting the wild areas.

qedcook

06-24-2013, 09:25 AM

Agreed.

Slot Machine

06-24-2013, 09:30 AM

I'd say paving HITRR an unfeasible idea for the following reasons:

1. HITRR is LONG, about 55 miles. It would be extremely expensive to pave a road that long. Zion NP contains fewer miles of pavement, for perspective.
2. Maintaining the road would also be very expensive, especially towards Lake Powell, where washes would/do routinely destroy the road.
3. The sand in that area is loose, and would blow across the road, covering it in many places. What is the point of building a $20M road if it is covered with sand?

So, 9 out of 10 'can we' problems are answered with one word - 'Money'. Practicality issues and environmental impacts aside, there is no way that paving the road is more cost-effective than grating it. I doubt the comparison is even close (but would love to see the numbers if anyone has them).

Scott P

06-24-2013, 09:37 AM

Practicality issues and environmental impacts aside, there is no way that grating the road will be less cost-effective than paving it.

I respectfully disagree and I have worked in roadway engineering for 1/3 of my life.

Maintaining the road would also be very expensive, especially towards Lake Powell, where washes would/do routinely destroy the road.

Paved roads need much less maintenance than gravel roads. The maintenance they need is more expensive, but they need it a lot less times.

I do not know the cost factor on this particular road, but given the traffic it receives, I don't think it is accurate to say that there is no way that it would be more cost effective to keep it gravel. That part would have to be calculated out.

Iceaxe

06-24-2013, 09:46 AM

I spent much of my life as a highway engineer. Paved roads are actually more environmentally friendly in most ways than are gravel roads.

Scott, thanks for the input. :2thumbs: It's great to have a highway engineer on Bogley that can answer some of our questions.

Iceaxe

06-24-2013, 09:55 AM

So, 9 out of 10 'can we' problems are answered with one word - 'Money'.

As a structural engineer who has design numerous bridges I can tell you this.... counties usually don't sink money into projects that don't make economical sense. I assume the reason paving the road is under discussion is because maintaining a gravel road is becoming expensive and paving it makes more sense to the county coffers.

My question would be why does paving the road make sense to the county? Because maintaining the gravel road is becoming to expensive? Or perhaps they hope to increase tourism? Or some other reason or combination of reasons?

:popcorn:

summitseeker

06-24-2013, 09:57 AM

Pave it. I shook my spoiler off the last time i did this road and we swore we would never come back due to the terrible washer board.

Scott P

06-24-2013, 11:45 AM

counties usually don't sink money into projects that don't make economical sense. I assume the reason paving the road is under discussion is because maintaining a gravel road is becoming expensive and paving it makes more sense to the county coffers.

Yes, but I'm sure that you know that a large percentage of most county roads are paid for by federal funds.

For those that don't know (I'm sure Shane already does), US, state, and county highways roads don't mean that they are paid for by the county, state, etc. They simply mean that a US highway goes through several states, a State highway stays within a State, usually between different counties (there are a few exceptions), and a county road is within a single county. All have a large percentage paid for by Federal funds and the states/counties are given discretion on which roads to spend the money on.

Sometimes counties (Uintah County in Utah is one of them) have been caught claiming false roads or false paved roads (claiming that a road was paved, when it was really gravel) in order to get more Federal funds. One article (State governments warned counties to use caution after this came out):

http://highway-robbery.org/documents/County_mislabels_road_SLTrib_3-8-05.pdf

Claiming false roads isn't only to keep out wilderness, but is also because counties get money for them. Of course when caught (which doesn't happen often, partially because it is more or less on the honor system), they usually claim an "honest mistake" or "clerical error".

My question would be why does paving the road make sense to the county? Because maintaining the gravel road is becoming to expensive? Or perhaps they hope to increase tourism? Or some other reason or combination of reasons?

It makes sense when the county either doesn't have to pay for much of it (the state and Feds paying for much of it) or when it brings them money. In the county's defense, I would bet that most of the traffic on that road is from non-residents of the county.

Personally, I don't have any problem at all with counties making money of tourism as long as it is done responsibly and the wildlands are protected. In fact, at least in some cases making money of tourism (I'd bet a large percentage of traffic on the HITRR is from hikers and backpackers) gives a viable alternative for rural areas to make money without tearing up the land.

Slot Machine

06-24-2013, 12:45 PM

I respectfully disagree and I have worked in roadway engineering for 1/3 of my life.

Paved roads need much less maintenance than gravel roads. The maintenance they need is more expensive, but they need it a lot less times.

I do not know the cost factor on this particular road, but given the traffic it receives, I don't think it is accurate to say that there is no way that it would be more cost effective to keep it gravel. That part would have to be calculated out.

Really? (honestly surprised, not mocking) Very interesting! Huh... my opinion was based mostly on assumptions. If the above is true, then of course it should be paved. :nod:

Using my best estimate from a 2 minute Google search, I figure 55 miles of 2 lane road would cost $16.5M ($300,000 per mile). Does this sound reasonable Scott? How much would it cost to grade the road once? How often is this done on HITTR? 4 times a year? More?

Thanks for the educated responses Ice and Scott! (still have not submitted my vote) :2thumbs:

Scott P

06-24-2013, 01:13 PM

Using my best estimate from a 2 minute Google search, I figure 55 miles of 2 lane road would cost $16.5M ($300,000 per mile).

It depends on many factors; i.e. thickness of pavement, type of pavement, thickness of road base, width of road, distance from batch plant, expected weather conditions, traffic control, etc. Pavement is nothing but oil and rock with a few minor additives. What's the price of oil going to do (this makes a huge difference)? Rock? It is actually fairly complicated to figure out.

As a very, very rough estimate use $75 per ton of asphalt pavement (in place). The paving width would probably be ~24 feet. Times this by the length for area.

One ton of asphalt = ~110 lbs per inch thickness per yard of area.

Road base would probably be 16" thick. 165 PCF is the average density and the cost per ton is ~$21. Shouldering would cost about the same per ton (and be the same density) and would be a right triangle of opposite = 24" and adjacent is the thickness of the pavement. I have no idea what they would do for traffic control out there. Same with road signage, cattleguards, pullouts, etc. You would have to know the number of those. What type of asphalt? Are any detours needed? How many and how long?

Anyway, as a very rough (and I do mean rough), plug in the above calculations and multiply the total result of asphalt and roadbase by 1.75.

Take that with a giant chuck of salt though. If I could come up with an accurate number just by very rough estimating as above (or from Google), I'd be a lot richer than I am now. And a lot of engineers and cost estimators would be out of jobs.

Also, there are two different cost to consider. Are we talking cost to the Road Department or cost to the public? Even if the cost to the Road Department is higher in the long run, it could still be less for the general public. Gravel roads cost more to drive on for vehicle owners to drive on than do paved roads. Rough roads are much harder on your vehicle, tires, fuel consumption, etc. I don't know the traffic volumes of the road, but if for a hypothetical example if paving saved, say $10 of wear and tear to a vehicle and fuel consumption, and if 500 vehicles used the road a day, over the coarse of the year, that would save $1,825,000 (all figures hypothetical rather than pertaining to this road).

There is also a matter of funding. Even if it were decided that it would be cheaper in the long run for the road department(s) to pave the road, they have to have the money to pay for it. Do they have it now? If they don't have it, they couldn't pave the road now anyway, even if it would be cheaper in the long run.

Deathcricket

06-24-2013, 02:11 PM

Sounds like American Canyoneers just went Westborough baptist on us. :haha:

Iceaxe

06-24-2013, 03:47 PM

Sounds like American Canyoneers just went Westborough baptist on us. :haha:

I believe American Canyoneers would be wise to at least present their reasoning for supporting the position they have taken....

I believe American Canyoneers would be even wiser to present the facts, hold some discussions and attempt to reach some type of consensus with their membership. And if a consensus can't be reached then only information should be presented to the membership so they can support as they see fit and American Canyoneers should not take an official position.

Anyhoo.... that's what I'd do.... :popcorn:

Byron

06-24-2013, 08:03 PM

I also agree that it would be much nicer if it were paved...I'd say down to Dance Hall Rock...unless they wanted to put up a big "scenic overlook" parking lot at the lake?

Tons of people would be flying down the road to get to the overlook if it were paved, that's why I would endorse just to DHR.

I've been up and down and off to the sides of that road for 25 years...I've seen cars that should never have tried to get down to Coyote broken down, with an oil trail behind them. Lots of flat tires. I drive a big pickup, but covering that distance, nice and smooth, sure would be nice.

Consider the Burr trail. It's paved from Boulder all the way to the park boundary, and it's NICE! I don't see it being a problem at all.

Sure, a lot more lookie loos with drive down it, but who cares? Most of them will just park, take a few pictures and leave. The bottom line is that most of those that are going down there to have fun will have a much easier go of it, and that's a good thing.

DesertDuke

06-24-2013, 09:20 PM

I know there are AC members on Bogley and I hope they chime in. I would like to know the basis of their decision.

Thank you Scott for a perspective from a subject matter expert.

spinesnaper

06-24-2013, 10:34 PM

To pave or not pave the Hole in the Rock Road... that is the question....

So this concerns me greatly.... American Canyoneers has taken a stance on an access issue with almost ZERO input for their membership and with almost ZERO research on what the impacts will be. I believe this is a knee jerk reaction.

You can read the details here:
http://www.americancanyoneers.org/gsenm-baseline-study-hitrr/

But bottom line American Canyoneers is advocating that the Hole in the Rock Road not be paved.

I don't know if paving the road is a good or bad idea, I'd really need more information to establish a sound conclusion.

Here are a couple of quick thoughts... a county normally paves a road when it makes sense economically. In other words, because of higher traffic there is a point in time where it is cheaper to pave the road than it is to maintain a gravel/dirt road. Is easier access a bad thing? If so, bad for who? Certainly not the county who would be responsible for the road.... If limiting access is your goal shouldn't you be advocating for the road to no longer be maintained at all? After a few large storms the road would soon turn into a 4x4 road and greatly limit access....

I'd really be interested in seeing more research and facts from both sides before jumping to a conclusion.... Why does the county want to pave the road? What is the long term projection for the area? Will paving the road actually impact visitation? If so, how much? Is the long term effect going to help or hurt canyoneering? I really hate to see a national access organization jump to a conclusion without some facts, figures and muscle to back up their stance, not to mention a consensus from their membership.... anyhoo... food for thought....

Shane

Why stop with just paving the Hole in the Rock Road? And Bob, don't worry about the money. There are vast Federal dollars available for building roads. The politicians love projects like this. But why stop at just paving the road because obviously someone will need to regulate the vast hordes that will be loving this area to death ( not really sure that isn't happening right now). I think we need a brand spanking new Escalante Giant Staircase National Park. This has local advantages because the federal government will have to take over road maintenance saving the local government boat loads of money. Something like this will bring in a huge financial windfall for the local Escalante economy. I am looking forward to buying my time share from the new Westin that will become feasible right next to this new park. Instead of having to drive 11 hours from Los Angeles, I will be able to fly into Escalante in 2 hours. I have always said that this area would be a National park if the Hole in the Rock Road was paved. Perhaps the Park Authorities will consider making the Golden Cathedral wheelchair accessible. Please read Desert Solitude by Edward Abbey. Please be careful what you wish for. I am prepared to donate money to make this area a national park if the road gets paved because there will really be no other way to protect this area at that point. Currently the unpaved road is slowing down the hordes. Personally I think it will be inevitable that this road will get paved.

Ken

oldno7

06-25-2013, 05:20 AM

Seems odd that this group(AC) was formed after the dictatorship of the aca would not allow any opinions other than it's rulers, to be voiced.

I thought this was supposed to be an organization that included all it's members in important decisions.

Now it would appear a "select" group is in charge and pushing their agenda, lacking a vote of the populace.

Seem's somewhat similar to the last canyoneering assoc.

The last association claimed it was the voice of 4000(it was not!)

AC's claim to be the voice of 300--is it???

Slot Machine

06-25-2013, 01:06 PM

I also agree that it would be much nicer if it were paved...I'd say down to Dance Hall Rock...unless they wanted to put up a big "scenic overlook" parking lot at the lake?

Sure, a lot more lookie loos with drive down it, but who cares? Most of them will just park, take a few pictures and leave. The bottom line is that most of those that are going down there to have fun will have a much easier go of it, and that's a good thing.

^ Nice take Byron. ^ Just a couple of cents to add:

None, partially paved, fully paved... From the type of traffic I've seen, I don't think it will really matter. The people that want to go to the end, will go. Heck, I've seen a Toyota Corolla make it to the end. Really, who is going to drive 42 miles to Dance Hall and not brave the final 13? The world's worst parents?? :haha:

From what I've seen there are 4 groups of folks that use the road:

1. Cattle ranchers - paving it will doubtfully change their use of the road. You wouldn't make extra laps to/from work if the road was nicer, would you?

2. Mormon history buffs - Yes, pavement will increase their use of the road. But they are the aformentioned 'lookie loos', having little impact on the area. Already, I see lots of SUV's packed with kids and elderly folks driving down to the end for a look-see. Harmless family fun.

3. Casual hikers - Think Spooky & Peekaboo and Devil's Graden. I think this traffic will also stay the same (maybe slightly increase). Already the dirt road out to these places is fantastic! I set the cruise control to 60 mph and just zoom out there. Any car could get there, so nobody is currently deterred.

4. Hardcore hikers - Since the roads around Coyote suck, and the road to Egypt REALLY sucks, this traffic will probably remain the same too. Those roads are REAL barriers, HITRR is small potatoes in comparison. The quality canyoneering experiences in the area would not be affected.

So, it's difficult for anyone to prove me wrong, and equally difficult for me to prove anyone else wrong. Honestly, how would one measure the number of people are deterred by the lack of pavement each year... without paving it? I just don't see the 'negative impact' argument here.

Lastly, an important point regarding the unlikley increase in traffic: HITTR is not a through-road. Being a road to nowhere is the biggest deterrent to traffic. If it was like Cottonwood Road, cutting across the pristine Grand Staircase area, then there would be a major increase in traffic and measurable harm done.

I wonder how the American Canyoneers arrived at the conclusion that a paved road is a bad thing? (honest question) And why is there no comment from them on the world's biggest canyoneering forum? :ne_nau:

Iceaxe

06-25-2013, 01:48 PM

I wonder how the American Canyoneers arrived at the conclusion that a paved road is a bad thing? (honest question) And why is there no comment from them on the world's biggest canyoneering forum? :ne_nau:

^^^THIS^^^

I have also sent PM's to AC board members and have yet to receive a response. While the Bogley poll is only a small percentage of canyoneers I believe it offers a fair representation of canyoneers as a whole and only 30% of canyoneers currently support American Canyoneers position.

Yo! American Canyoneer, we want some answers to our questions.... if you want our support you also need to support us, your local B-team canyoneers.

:cool2:

Byron

06-25-2013, 06:48 PM

I have always said that this area would be a National park if the Hole in the Rock Road was paved. Perhaps the Park Authorities will consider making the Golden Cathedral wheelchair accessible. Please read Desert Solitude by Edward Abbey.Great post, dude...It made me laugh out loud! I seriously doubt that they'll make anything down that road a National Park anytime soon, as the gov can barley afford the ones they're running now.

In regards to Mr. Abbey, he was, in my opinion, a piece of sh*t. If you read his book "Good News", you just might see him differently. Yeah, it sure would have been nice to have Arches all to yourself, enjoying the view and reveling in misanthropic thoughts...but those days are over.

A Westin in Escalante? Uh...I've gotta ask, does it bother you that they fixed up the Circle D? :haha:

Sombeech

06-25-2013, 07:31 PM

Maybe a good starting point is showing some similar dirt roads that were paved, increase of traffic and environmental damage that occurred afterwards.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Scott P

06-25-2013, 08:05 PM

1. Cattle ranchers - paving it will doubtfully change their use of the road. You wouldn't make extra laps to/from work if the road was nicer, would you?

Cattle grazing has actually been phased out in most areas accessed by the HITRR road. They are still in some areas, but mostly on the east side of the Escalante (places like Deer Creek, The Gulch, and Horse Canyon are very heavily grazed).

Maybe a good starting point is showing some similar dirt roads that were paved, increase of traffic and environmental damage that occurred afterwards.

The Burr Trail on the East Side of the Escalante Canyon would be a good place to compare. It's in the same region.

Undoubtedly use has increased and several campsites have become worn. I don't know if it's any worse than the west side of the Escalante.

Use would almost surely increase if the HITRR were paved. On the other hand, in many ways a paved road is more environmentally friendly. In fact over here in Colorado, it was the Sierra Club that put the pressure onto paving the Pikes Peak Road:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19016252

Paving completed on Pike's Peak road, 13 years after Sierra Club suit

Sometimes a job can seem as formidable as a mountain.

And when the job is a mountain, how tough does it seem to pave a road through a landscape of wind and snow to the 14,110-foot summit?

"It was almost insurmountable," said Jack Glavan, manager of the Pikes Peak Highway.

On Friday — 13 years after the Sierra Club sued the city to force it to happen and a decade after the work began — highway crews finished paving the final stretch, not with celebration but the same way they did for the rest: amid hard work, noise, heat and some lucky weather.

Said Glavan: "Taking it a little at a time, a mile at a time, it's hard to believe it's done."

The first 6 miles was paved in the 1950s. Paving the rest took longer than building the carriage road to the summit in the 1880s or the automobile road in the 1910s.

"It would not have happened in our lifetime if it were not for (the lawsuit)," said Jim Lockhart, conservation chair of the Pikes Peak chapter of the Sierra Club.

The group sued in 1998, claiming that 1.5 million tons of gravel dumped on the highway since 1970 had polluted streams, damaged vegetation and choked wetlands. The city, which runs the highway for the U.S. Forest Service, agreed in a settlement to complete paving by 2012.

Mountain weather was the main foe. Crews could put down asphalt only when the weather was warm and there wasn't snow, which meant a construction season of May through October — and only June through August on the upper stretches. A sudden squall could grind work to a halt.

"(The weather) can change up here so fast," said paver operator Jeff Bisel, who always stashed a bag with summer and winter clothing on his machine.

Construction machines broke down from the strain of working at high altitude, supplies took forever to arrive and workers had to blast through the side of the mountain in places to widen the road.

Through it all, the road had to remain open for the more than 250,000 people who drive it each year.

Also:

http://gazette.com/paving-way-up-pikes-peak/article/16092

If you don't take increased visitation in account, high traffic gravel roads are almost always less environmentally friendly than paved roads. Visitation would increase though. I'm willing to bet that camping will become more limited to designated sites as well.

(PS, for anyone that doesn't know I am actually a strong wilderness advocate).

qedcook

06-25-2013, 08:44 PM

Shane
Please read Desert Solitude by Edward Abbey.

The guys was an elitist eco-terrorist that viewed himself superior all mankind because he discovered the beauty of the desert earlier than others. But he was just as dependent on the advancement of roads and other established access points.

Iceaxe

06-25-2013, 09:50 PM

The guys was an elitist eco-terrorist that viewed himself superior all mankind because he discovered the beauty of the desert earlier than others. But he was just as dependent on the advancement of roads and other established access points.

^^^Excellent post^^^

And for those playing along at home. I have read all Abbey's books.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

spinesnaper

06-25-2013, 10:09 PM

Great post, dude...It made me laugh out loud! I seriously doubt that they'll make anything down that road a National Park anytime soon, as the gov can barley afford the ones they're running now.

In regards to Mr. Abbey, he was, in my opinion, a piece of sh*t. If you read his book "Good News", you just might see him differently. Yeah, it sure would have been nice to have Arches all to yourself, enjoying the view and reveling in misanthropic thoughts...but those days are over.

A Westin in Escalante? Uh...I've gotta ask, does it bother you that they fixed up the Circle D? :haha:

Gosh, I should put the circle D back on my list if they gussied it up. Last time a stayed there, I elected to use my sleeping bag over their bedding. Just something about it gave me the willies. Last few times I have been in Escalante, I have bypassed the town and head straight to the Egypt trail head.

I regard ATVer's blazing their own way in the same category of terrorist as environmental monkey wrenchers.

I think one makes a big mistake to think that the Federal Government does not have money to make new Parks. Need I remind you that they print dollars?

Perhaps you sneer at the paved Riverside Walk out to the Narrows. However for many Zion park visitors, that is the highlight of their trip.

Pave Hole in the Rock Road and it will just be a matter of time before good folks (people who don't spend time posting on Bogley) decide that the area has to be preserved for future generations (from thoughtless scumbags) and making the area more accessible for taxpayers. It is beautiful, it is remote, and it is of profound historical interest. Those are precisely the kind of things that come into play to preserve an area as a National Monument or National Park. The area is already a National Monument. That only occurred in 1996 (Thank Bill Clinton for that). Upgrading it to a National Park and all the admission fees to be collected--Can you say "paved road." The two are going to go hand in hand. It's a prediction. I could be wrong.

Ken

Iceaxe

06-26-2013, 12:05 AM

Anyhoo.... my issue is not about paving or not paving the HitRR. My issue is that American Canyoneer has taken a stand with little or no regard to their membership.

Does American Canyoneer intend to become SUWA Lite?

FWIW: this has always been my biggest fear with American Canyoneer and this is exactly what happened with the ACA. A lot of good people helped build the ACA, but when it was time for their voice to be heard and counted they were told their voice didn't matter.

reverse_dyno

06-26-2013, 09:31 AM

Arches National Park already has massive traffic jams. I am sure Hole in the rock Road will have them as well. If people are willing to pay $10 a car to sit in traffic for an hour, they will surely head to GSENM to drive around on the nice new roads. They are free, and they can drive them with their rental car. The environmental issue is not the impact of the road, it is the hordes of tourists that will be driving and walking in every easy to get canyon along the new roads. Counties in southern Utah are among the most conservative places in the US. Do you really think they care about the environmental impacts of a road? They seem not to care about the environmental impacts of ATV's and oil and gas drilling. They want the road paved so that more tourists will come to the area and buy stuff.

Scott P

06-26-2013, 09:48 AM

Arches National Park already has massive traffic jams.

I don't think it will be that way. In Arches National Park, you can see a lot of things by car. Other than a few attractions, you can't do the same on the Hole in the Rock Road. In fact, I hear from people who only drive the Hole in the Rock Road without getting out of the car say how disappointing it is. With perhaps some minor exceptions (Dance Hall Rock maybe?), to see the good stuff from the Hole in the Rock Road, you have to leave the road.

The Burr Trail has been paved in the Escalante region. Although traffic has increased, there are no huge traffic jams along it.

They seem not to care about the environmental impacts of ATV's and oil and gas drilling. They want the road paved so that more tourists will come to the area and buy stuff.

Agreed. Paving the road could actually help in this department. Tourism would give an alternate form of income for the locals, other than just oil drilling (which is important, but shouldn't be done everywhere) and overgrazing.

It's the roadless areas in the Escalante system that need protecting.

Brian in SLC

06-26-2013, 10:15 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWwUJH70ubM

spinesnaper

06-26-2013, 05:03 PM

Shane

I apologize for hijacking your thread. With a poll about whether to pave HitRR or not, I mistakenly thought that is what this thread was about.

Most member organizations are merely representative dictatorships. Most members may be interested but they will never put in the energy that the few who are actively involved in leading the organization put in on a day to day basis. Polling members on every issue is an interesting concept.

I do want to point out this is not the only park with a very long dead end road into the heart of it. In Alaska, in Denali National Park and Preserve, private vehicles are permitted only in the first 15 miles of the Park Road. However the road extends another 74 miles beyond that to Kantishna.

I am suggesting that if congestion did become an issue, National Parks tend to respond by restricting private vehicles ( examples include Yosemite, Zion, and Denali). I am not saying that the road would or wouldn't be paved. I also have no idea if the area is being considered for further preservation as a National Park. What I am suggesting is that paving the road will put additional pressures on the area and potentially create unforseen consequences that may impact our ability to access the area as we currently do with minimal restrictions. Those pressures are inevitable but paving the road will hasten these consequences in my opinion.

Ken

yetigonecrazy

06-26-2013, 05:59 PM

^^^Excellent post^^^

And for those playing along at home. I have read all Abbey's books.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

x2

I think the issue here is inevitability- there are numerous pros and cons for both sides, but one thing we can all agree on is the traffic will do nothing except increase. The Burr Trail could be used as a good example here.

I like the idea of paving to Dance Hall Rock, but worry that the Rock itself would become a target for graffitti ala LWH. Pave it to the Dry Fork slots and call it good.....

Typ'n on my clunky big ole Pavilion a1600n

Iceaxe

06-26-2013, 06:40 PM

I guess my biggest concern is I thought American Canyoneer was supposed to be about access.... The paving of HitRR is not something they should be concerned with as it has nothing to do with obtaining better access.

If American Canyoner intends to tackle such political issues and become SUWA Lite I plan to pull my support. Dang, next thing you know they will take a stand on gay marriage, firearms and abortion. And I all I ever wanted was someone that would represent me on the issue of access.

:popcorn:

Udink

06-26-2013, 07:36 PM

yetigonecrazy

06-26-2013, 08:10 PM

I'm waaaay too not-sober to read through this thread, but--isn't "keeping the gumbies out" a good enough reason not to pave? Yes, it's selfish reasoning. But isn't there a certain element that just shouldn't be (way) out there? While hiking the Dry Fork slot earlier this year I ran into a couple who wanted to hike cross-country with their daughter and dog from the top of the slot to the TH. I looked at the map in my GPS and informed them that it probably wasn't a good idea--it certainly wouldn't have saved them from any ups-and-downs, and probably would have put them in danger. I only see more restrictions come from paving the HITR road as more ruhtards find themselves where they wouldn't have dared go before.

It's a good point, but the bottom line is those people we laugh at we out there already. With the dirt road. And they and their brother and their 27 buddies are going to go there too. That's what I'm saying about inevitability. Like Scott said, the cost of maintaining a paved road (yes Shane, even with blowing sand, look at Temple Mtn/LWH road) is much less once it's in- if the people are going to come, which they will, then may as well build it. I don't like the idea of going all the way to the HITR takeout because I think leaving a piece of it unpaved, whether it be from Harris Wash, Dry Fork, or DHR, will create a bit of a barrier from the gumbies in grandma's Buick. Leave a good chunk of it down there to be wild. Unfortunately it will also increase traffic into Coyote Gulch, but let's be honest...strict rations arent far off there anyway. But I think it is a preferable option. I think there should be more effort to develop certain sites on the west side of the HITRR, between it and the Kaiparowits. Some decent campgrounds could be created pretty easy, and places like Collet Canyon could certainly be used for something like a loop hike. But these are just thoughts from someone on the outside looking in.

Someone should consult with the people in Escalante and see how they feel.

Iceaxe

06-26-2013, 08:43 PM

I'm waaaay too not-sober to read through this thread, but--isn't "keeping the gumbies out" a good enough reason not to pave?

It might be a legitimate reason for some.... but not if you are an ACCESS organization committed to serving the general canyoneering public.

Oh wait... now I get it... AC is really only committed to serving the agendas of the Great Ones (TM).

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Brian in SLC

06-26-2013, 09:12 PM

That long dirt HITR road makes access into the heart of the Escalante unique. Just like going into the Maze. Pave it, and, it'll change the "feel" of the place.

Dirt roads are a part of the Western landscape. Washboards, ruts, those drainage ditches off the road that the county signed as ATV trails (ha ha...unbelievable...).

I guess, the more I think about it, the more I think leaving it dirt is ok. Maybe its a toss up on whether or not its an environmental deal or not. Appreciate Scott's put for sure.

hank moon

06-26-2013, 11:54 PM

oldno7

06-27-2013, 04:16 AM

pavement leads to more traffic,

which leads to more impacts,

and finally, more regulation.

Keep it dirty!

See "A.C.E.S" (http://www.americancanyoneers.org/what-we-do/) for how the AC treats conservation as a necessary component of Access.

Can you also post a link showing where the organization(as a whole) voted on this issue.

Would be interesting to see the total number of votes and what percentages agree/dis agree with AC's newly adopted position in HITR road.

Of course if these figures aren't available to it's membership(transparency) then it would be safe to say that the agenda of a few is making decisions for the many.

yetigonecrazy

06-27-2013, 05:41 AM

AC is really only committed to serving the agendas of the Great Ones (TM).

Is this why the only AC service projects I've seen happen since they were created have been in the Grand Canyon, and no where else? Is the GC the only place worthy of a service project?

deagol

06-27-2013, 07:19 AM

I can

hank moon

06-27-2013, 07:32 AM

Can you also post a link showing where the organization(as a whole) voted on this issue.

Would be interesting to see the total number of votes and what percentages agree/dis agree with AC's newly adopted position in HITR road.

Of course if these figures aren't available to it's membership(transparency) then it would be safe to say that the agenda of a few is making decisions for the many.

Ehhh...I'm kind of embarrassed to say that I haven't even read the AC's inner-workings paperwork stuff, so I don't know how they arrive at decisions. For my part, I joined up (semi-reluctantly) out of the belief that an access org was needed, and faith that the community stood a good chance of getting it right this time. Time will tell whether that faith was well-placed (I still believe it is). Any new org is gonna make some mistakes and perhaps this is one, I don't know...I honestly don't have all the facts about this paving thing in front of me. I think it's right to challenge what the AC are doing and help direct toward constructive action.

Carry on with the HOTR poll and discussion, please! Some interesting insight - esp. from the actual engineers here - about this issue that I had not heard (my involvement with pavement engineering being more or less limited to groaning whenever I have to slow down in a work zone). :)

Brian in SLC

06-27-2013, 07:49 AM

Yeah, the AC statements on conservation are easily seen on their website:

"Conservation is at the heart of the American Canyoneers

Brian in SLC

06-27-2013, 08:22 AM

Can you also post a link showing where the organization(as a whole) voted on this issue.
Would be interesting to see the total number of votes and what percentages agree/dis agree with AC's newly adopted position in HITR road.
Of course if these figures aren't available to it's membership(transparency) then it would be safe to say that the agenda of a few is making decisions for the many.

I dunno how important that info would be, really. You can scroll through the list of BOD folks, look at their bios, and, kinda figure who leans which way. I think the call to action was appropriate. Regardless of one or a few persons individual agendas, the paving deal could be a big impact to canyoneering in GSENM.

Their initial announcement was:

"Let Your Voice Be Heard!
Participate in the GSENM Recreation Experience Baseline Study
Tell the BLM that paving the HITRR is WRONG!"

But, I think if you scroll through the language, you'll see that its a call for participation, and, to slow the paving process down so voices can be heard, regardless of the individual opinions.

http://www.americancanyoneers.org/gsenm-baseline-study-hitrr/

Maybe someone's paying attention to this thread?

http://www.americancanyoneers.org/hitrr/

Canyoneering is a big tent. Maybe the fringes fit into the American Canyoneers and their mission, but, I suspect some won't.

Bolt Neon canyon's final drop! Actually, just use the bolts already there.

Ha ha. There, I said it. Whew, I feel better. Will the BOD of the AC ever get behind that? Nah. I'm ok with that. Its a minor deal. I'll put up with the 50 feet of webbing, the rope grooves, the rock stacks, the buried dead men.

I don't think we'd even be having this dialog (and the paving the HITR road wouldn't be on my radar) if it weren't for the American Canyoneers. So...hooray.

deagol

06-27-2013, 09:21 AM

from AC website:

American Canyoneers’ Board of Directors has heard from some members regarding our recent post encouraging members to participate in the BLM sponsored Hole in the Rock Road (HITRR) focus groups. While most comments were highly positive and supportive of the post, some questioned our call to action regarding paving HITRR. The American Canyoneers Board of Directors recognizes and respects its membership’s need for effective communication and accordingly, we would like to clarify the intent of our post. In March of this year, off-the-record comments made by Garfield County officials about paving HITRR were first brought to our attention. Earlier this month however, county officials publicly declared their right – and intention – to pave HITRR. Recognizing that the county might take action to pave the road prior to any dialogue or input from the canyoneering community and other outdoor recreational groups, AC made a strong and immediate call to action. Our request to the community to weigh in with their opinion and to participate in the BLM’s baseline study was intended to provide that missing dialogue and most importantly, to put the brakes on any momentum the county had already built to start paving. This was the intent of our post – to tell the county to stop any plans currently underway to pave the road.
We want to be part of the discussion. We refuse to sit back and let Garfield County blithely pave HITRR without regard to other voices. We refuse to allow the county to pave yet another road without dialogue or research, or allow them to ignore yet another agreement not to pave and then just go ahead and do it – as they did with the Burr Trail. We have learned from Garfield County history – and we are determined to not let the county repeat it.
Our call to action was aggressive and, we admit, not especially elegant in wording or tone. We did not mean to offend the sensibility of any readers and, if we did, we hope you will understand and appreciate the urgency and importance of our mission.
Respectfully,
The American Canyoneers Board of Directors
http://www.americancanyoneers.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/red-line.jpg

ratagonia

06-27-2013, 09:54 AM

Really? (honestly surprised, not mocking) Very interesting! Huh... my opinion was based mostly on assumptions. If the above is true, then of course it should be paved. :nod:

Using my best estimate from a 2 minute Google search, I figure 55 miles of 2 lane road would cost $16.5M ($300,000 per mile). Does this sound reasonable Scott? How much would it cost to grade the road once? How often is this done on HITTR? 4 times a year? More?

Thanks for the educated responses Ice and Scott! (still have not submitted my vote) :2thumbs:

Garfield County section only, to the Egypt Road - 16.5 miles. The rest is in Kane County, who could then get interested in paving it further, though if the interest is in promoting tourism, Kane County has no interest there since the traffic goes through Escalante, Garfield County. Kane County already does the absolute minimum to maintain their portion of the road, despite being paid by the feds for doing so.

I see that most people here think that money from the Feds is FREE. It is not.

Don't underestimate the motives of Garfield County Commissioners to Frack with the feds.

Garfield County does not hold TITLE to the Hole in the Rock Road. They hold a right of way. Changing the nature of the road requires permission from the Title Holder, which is the BLM. The BLM in their plan for the Monument plans on keeping the Hole in the Rock Road as it is.

This is just the usual political shenanigans from Utah politicians, intent on mis-interpreting the supremacy clause. Your Utah tax dollars at work, supporting right wing attorneys with whacko interpretations of the law. This was already litigated in the case of the Burr Trail, so at least it will not be a BIG waste of our Utah Tax Dollars.

:moses:

Tom

Iceaxe

06-27-2013, 10:02 AM

My two cents...

How is American Canyoneer taking a stand on such a controversial and emotionally charged issue going to improve access or help the organization?

The American Canyoneer board of directors has taken a firm stand to the far left. Does this represent the view of the membership as a whole? The poll on Bogley says no, or at the very least the poll shows the membership is highly divided or uncertain. And for the record I would be just as outraged if American Canyoneer had of taken a firm stance to the far right. Getting involved in this type of issue will do far more damage to American Canyoneer than it will ever do good.

There are already at least a half-dozen other organizations people can join to support or oppose paving of HitRR. Wouldn't it be better for American Canyoneers to stay out of the politic turmoil and perhaps just report the facts and encourage their membership to make their position known?

I joined American Canyoneer with the hope of improving access to canyons and establishing a better interface with land managers. Joining the HitRR controversy accomplishes none of those goals. In fact, it could put the organization at odds with at least one land manager (Garfield County).

If American Canyoneer intends to become SUWA Lite I plan to burn my membership card... or to be more accurate... I would burn it if I had of been issued an actual membership card.

:soapbox:

Iceaxe

06-27-2013, 10:19 AM

I see that most people here think that money from the Feds is FREE. It is not.

Well... not exactly... maybe... kinda... yes and no..... but I give Tom credit for a very nice spin and review of the problem through his SUWA colored glasses....

The problem as I see it with the current system is if you don't take the money it will be spent elsewhere. So the prevailing wisdom is its better to take the money and have it spent in your state, county, or town than to not take the money and have it spent 3000 miles away on a project you will never use.

And finally.... the money actually is free to the federal government as they are the ones that print the money. If the Feds need more money they simply print more money. Yes, I understand the big picture of just printing more money, but in reality that is exactly what they do....

:popcorn:

deagol

06-27-2013, 10:42 AM

FWIW: I (as a non-member) don't see their (AC's) stance as being "far left" at all since they want to leave the road the way it is. Far left would be something different, like... making a change from the current situation to maybe banning vehicles from the road entirely.

Slot Machine

06-27-2013, 11:22 AM

Garfield County section only, to the Egypt Road - 16.5 miles. The rest is in Kane County, who could then get interested in paving it further, though if the interest is in promoting tourism, Kane County has no interest there since the traffic goes through Escalante, Garfield County. Kane County already does the absolute minimum to maintain their portion of the road, despite being paid by the feds for doing so.

Interesting. Thanks for the input.

I see that most people here think that money from the Feds is FREE. It is not.

WEAK! :fitz: It's clear from the quote you used, that I'm comparing the cost of option A to option B.

The BLM in their plan for the Monument plans on keeping the Hole in the Rock Road as it is.

So why are we even having this conversation, if this is the case? :ne_nau:

Slot Machine

06-27-2013, 12:29 PM

I do want to point out this is not the only park with a very long dead end road into the heart of it. In Alaska, in Denali National Park and Preserve, private vehicles are permitted only in the first 15 miles of the Park Road. However the road extends another 74 miles beyond that to Kantishna.

I am suggesting that if congestion did become an issue, National Parks tend to respond by restricting private vehicles ( examples include Yosemite, Zion, and Denali). I am not saying that the road would or wouldn't be paved. I also have no idea if the area is being considered for further preservation as a National Park. What I am suggesting is that paving the road will put additional pressures on the area and potentially create unforseen consequences that may impact our ability to access the area as we currently do with minimal restrictions. Those pressures are inevitable but paving the road will hasten these consequences in my opinion.

Respectfully, comparing Escalante to the other National Parks is an apples vs oranges comparison. (The Burr Trail comparison is apples vs apples though) I've been to all of the aformentioned parks, even Denali, and the views from the road are magnificent compared to anything you can see from HITRR. The appeal to the average tourist is HUGE in those national parks, because few calories have to be burned in order to see great things. Along HITTR one must work quite hard to see anything good, and that is rate limiting factor that prevents (and will prevent) the overcrowding/congestion issue that happens at the other big parks.

I've driven several different vehilces down HITTR over the past 15 years, and never been deterred by the fact that it wasn't paved. Does anyone have an example of someone that was freaked out by this road, and cut their adventure short?

deagol

06-27-2013, 12:48 PM

.... Does anyone have an example of someone that was freaked out by this road, and cut their adventure short?

Actually, I am one who did cut our adventure short, but not because of the vehicle. It was because we were pulling a trailer and the washboards would have killed it after all those miles. My original (and ignorant) plan was to pull the trailer to Dance Hall Rock and set up a base camp. When I got there, we were able to make it a few miles down the road, but with the washboards, there is no way we would have attempted to go much further.

Since then, I've only been down the road in a SUV (SUV that towed the trailer) and a larger pickup truck, not a regular passenger car, so have never had a problem. I've done canyons with some people who were in Subarus (who drove in seperate vehicle) and who were way sketched out by the Egypt road. I have casually overheard a few people who said they wouldn't take their car down that road. I guess it all comes down with how comfortable you are driving your car on that road and if you have a "regular" car, how much you are afraid of messing it up...

My guess it that people who are not as famiar with this region will more likely stay away from that road. I also think the pictures in brochures and on the web draw some people into that area even though you can't see the scenery from the road. People who have done even a little bit of "home work" know that there is something to see down there.

Brian in SLC

06-27-2013, 01:10 PM

My bet is most tourists (and, I'm a tourist too), who visit the area to see some aspect of the monument will probably either have their passenger car, or, a rental car. In either case, my bet is a large portion of those folks aren't going to be psyched to drive down that dirt road.

And...that's ok. But, I can hear them..."how come we have a national monument that we can't even drive into to see." Yeah, forest for the trees, I know.

Local more roadside stuff would be crazy packed with folks. Not sure that isn't ok, but, popularity of Peekaboo, etc, will be much greater. Folks car camping out of, ahem, their cars, will increase.

Since its kind of out of the way for most folks on the Utah or American Desert tourist thing, I dunno how much more traffic it'll really bring. I don't think there's a risk of Zion losing its 2 million tourists a year. But, even a small percentage of those folks? That's a big increase.

Scott P

06-27-2013, 01:40 PM

Since its kind of out of the way for most folks on the Utah or American Desert tourist thing, I dunno how much more traffic it'll really bring. I don't think there's a risk of Zion losing its 2 million tourists a year. But, even a small percentage of those folks? That's a big increase.

I agree with Brian on the above.

Also, paving the road will probably only increase traffic on the paved portion of the road, which could increase by a fair amount. Places like Zebra slot and Devils Garden will see an increase in usage, but I doubt it will have that much of an impact for areas far to the south (you still would have to drive 3/4 of the road without pavement).

From a vehicle access standpoint, the region accessed by the HITRR is actually less accessible than it was 20 years ago. It used to be that the roads all the way down to Hole in the Rock, to Egypt, Early Weed Bench, etc. were really good gravel roads you could take an average sedan on. Yet, it was much less popular (places like Coyote Gulch have been popular for a long time, and few other select sites were as well).

For better or worse, the biggest culprit behind the increased visitation has been guidebooks and websites. 20 years ago almost no one would visit places like the Golden Cathedral of Neon Canyon even though the road to the trailhead was much better. Now the place is very popular. I've played a part in some places becoming popular as well.

If it does get more popular and if the road is paved, the paved road will hardly be the only reason for increased usage.

Since it has been pointed out that it is only ~1/4 of the road that would be paved, I definitely think it would be more environmentally friendly to pave it because of the heavy traffic that part of the road sees. Dust clouds, mag chloride, gravel, and lack of erosion control on heavy traffic roads = not great for the environment. To me it seems easier to clean up a roadside campsite than a polluted waterway.

Normally, when it comes to environmental issues I would side with the likes of ratagonia at least 95% (and probably more) of the time, but from a road engineering/environmental standpoint, I don't know if keeping it gravel really would be the right thing to do. Pros and cons for sure.

hank moon

06-27-2013, 03:30 PM

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanCanyoneers

[COLOR=#333333][FONT=lucida grande]HOLE IN THE ROCK ROAD POSITION STATEMENT

deagol

06-27-2013, 03:32 PM

A complex issue for sure. I have spent a little time in the US & British Virgin Islands and they always said that paving the roads would HELP the coral reefs by decreasing sedimentation due to run-off from gravel roads. Could be the same thing here...

Another thing occurred to me: paving the road could lead to more people car-camping along it (assuming more people would not be afraid of driving it) and not using portable toilet systems. I know this sort of gets into other issues, but it's more than just day access. Camping if not done right leaves a lot of other impacts around and people using the back-country as their bathroom is something I have seen a huge increase in since the early 90's with the popularization of camping areas around Moab and elsewhere. I would bet money (if I had any) that paved road=more people= more camping= more "back-country sanitation" issues.

oldno7

06-27-2013, 07:08 PM

If the AC's articles of organization, clearly state that the BOD may act without a majority of members input--then AC's did the right thing.

I believe I read that their membership was 300. If that is the case then the BOD is speaking for the 300 without said members input.

If those are the rules(AO) then play by them or join a new club.

If these are not the clearly defined rules set forth in the AO--the BOD would seem to have overstepped.

Keep in mind, I am not a member. My views are from the outside looking in.

Byron

06-27-2013, 07:32 PM

I started hiking down that road back in the late 80s...and like Scott said, the roads where in far better shape. Probably because they were still running cows down the canyons then and the cowboys may have had some political pull.

I could care less about all this debate regarding the "masses" that will ruin the place. Quite frankly, the river around Fence/Neon and Coyote Gulch are toilets already. It was nice to visit when it was a bit more wild, but that was long ago and now Coyote, in particular, is just a place to pass through. I've got a trip report about it. People are going to keep coming, there's no stopping it. I remember when everything changed...it was around the mid nineties. All of a sudden, BOOM...tons of people started hiking the easy stuff close to the road. I recall thinking it was because REI started to become popular, there was a sea change in gear in the early nineties as well...all that heavy, clunky stuff became obsolete. You used to be able to drive into Calf Creek at anytime during the season and get a campsite, even if you pulled in there after dark.

Sure...Neon, Choprock and the others up there are still good for hit and runs, but my selfish interest are concerned only about the backcountry...and VERY FEW venture more than 2 nights away from the car. I'm not worried about the boonies so much, so having a nice, smooth road to get there, and get out after an epic backpack sounds just fine to me. Besides, I really hate getting my truck all dusty.

tjdowling

06-27-2013, 08:05 PM

Is this why the only AC service projects I've seen happen since they were created have been in the Grand Canyon, and no where else? Is the GC the only place worthy of a service project?

For the record...

http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?68088-American-Canyoneers-Yankee-Doodle-Cleanup-Day

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

hank moon

06-27-2013, 10:38 PM

People are going to keep coming, there's no stopping it.

death's inevitable, but what's the rush? :lol8:

ratagonia

06-29-2013, 05:06 PM

If the AC's articles of organization, clearly state that the BOD may act without a majority of members input--then AC did the right thing.

That is what a Board of Directors does. Good definition.

Tom

Bluff-Canyoneer

06-30-2013, 05:11 AM

That is what a Board of Directors does. Good definition.

Tom

Same as any publicly owned corporation. The shareholders (members in ACs case) elect a board to act on their behalf. If you don't like their actions, vote them out at the next election.

Does anyone think the board of Apple contacts the shareholders every time they make a decision or take a stance on an issue?

oldno7

06-30-2013, 06:01 AM

Does anyone think the board of Apple contacts the shareholders every time they make a decision or take a stance on an issue?

Sorry bluff, but your comparing apples to canyons....

oldno7

06-30-2013, 06:10 AM

That is what a Board of Directors does. Good definition.

Tom

For the record, that's also how the aca was run.( albeit a "fake" board(sonny & charly) in a "fake" organization.)

When the AC was being formed, I recall talk of inclusion and transparency.

But like I said, if that is clearly stated as standard procedure in the articles of organization--then thats the rules to play by.

can you paste that part of the AO here so that it is clear to members who are also bogleyites.

Have you read the AO?

Iceaxe

06-30-2013, 08:55 AM

Same as any publicly owned corporation. The shareholders (members in ACs case) elect a board to act on their behalf. If you don't like their actions, vote them out at the next election.

You almost got it right.... in a publicly held company the board of directors is elected to act it the "best interest" of the company and shareholders. And BOD members can be tossed out when shareholders don't feel that is happening (Jobs was tossed off the BOD at Apple at one time).

From what I can gather only a small minority of "shareholders" in the AC case believe that wading into the minefield of environmental politics between state, county and feds in regards to road construction will better the organization.

In reality AC is not a publicly held company and the BOD can do whatever the hell they want. They do not have to act in the best interest of the organization or canyoneering and are free to pursue personal agendas. In this particular case several BOD members who also support SUWA have decide it's a good idea to support SUWA in regards to HitRR. There is no way anyone can justify how AC fighting this particular battle will benefit the organization with regards to canyon access.

While the HitRR provides access to canyons, fighting this battle is as silly as fighting the I-15 project through Provo or Las Vegas.

To bad time, money and resources will be wasted on this while the Zion permit system is still a clusterf**k, Arches is considering adding a permit system, canyoneering in Grand Canyon still has many issues, Oak Creek is still closed along with a large portion of the Navajo Nation. It seems to me picking your battles wisely would be a much better use of limited resources.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Slot Machine

06-30-2013, 11:43 AM

Too bad time, money and resources will be wasted on this while the Zion permit system is still a clusterf**k, Arches is considering adding a permit system, canyoneering in Grand Canyon still has many issues, Oak Creek is still closed along with a large portion of the Navajo Nation. It seems to me picking your battles wisely would be a much better use of limited resources.

^^ Best thought of the entire thread. ^^ :2thumbs:

I also hope the AC focuses on the short list above. :nod:

hank moon

06-30-2013, 04:51 PM

^^ Best thought of the entire thread. ^^ :2thumbs:

I also hope the AC focuses on the short list above. :nod:

Here's a new one: Shane for BOD! Please run. Diversity rules :)

Wolf

06-30-2013, 08:29 PM

http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?69176-American-Canyoneers-BOD-elections-update&p=538592#post538592

Here is the update on Bogley for elections, it's also on the AC web site. We have extended the application period until 08 July. Shane, you have been asked in the past to be part of the board. It would be great to have you as part of the solution. Anyone else interested, please apply, we could use you.

WOLF

hank moon

06-30-2013, 08:48 PM

^^ Best thought of the entire thread. ^^ :2thumbs:

I also hope the AC focuses on the short list above. :nod:

SLOT MACHINE for the BOD, too! Quit hoping and start hopping :)

Slot Machine

06-30-2013, 10:27 PM

SLOT MACHINE for the BOD, too! Quit hoping and start hopping :)

Ha! One must be aware of one's limitations. In the small world of canyoneering, I'm somewhat good at a very short list of things.

Playing nice with others to solve big problems isn't on that list. I 'hope' other people can use thier superior interpersonal skills (like Rich Rudow) to solve the aformentioned issues.

But I get what you are saying Hank. I admit that I'm throwing peanuts from the gallery. :nod:

Bluff-Canyoneer

07-01-2013, 02:15 AM

You almost got it right.... And BOD members can be tossed out when shareholders don't feel that is happening (Jobs was tossed off the BOD at Apple at one time).

Well, to quote you, you almost got it right. Board members cannot be "tossed out." They can be voted out by shareholders, as I said. Jobs was not tossed from the board, he was fired by the board. It works like this: 1) shareholders elect BOD 2) BOD hires senior managers 3) If BOD wants, they can fire managers, which is what happened to Jobs.

Edit:
Just to clarify, Jobs was CEO, so the board could fire him at will. Often, the CEO is also Chairman of the Board, which complicates things quite a bit. Not sure if Jobs was also Chairman, but if so the remaining board members could chose another chairman.

The rest of your post was spot on, I believe.

hank moon

07-01-2013, 05:38 AM

Ha! One must be aware of one's limitations. In the small world of canyoneering, I'm somewhat good at a very short list of things.

Playing nice with others to solve big problems isn't on that list. I 'hope' other people can use thier superior interpersonal skills (like Rich Rudow) to solve the aformentioned issues.

But I get what you are saying Hank. I admit that I'm throwing peanuts from the gallery. :nod:

Hi Slot Machine

I'm not saying you (or Shane) are throwing peanuts. I'm saying that the AC BOD (or any similar BOD) needs diverse viewpoints to draw on. The view that the AC should avoid taking a "SUWA lite" path is an important one to consider when prioritizing projects, writing statements, etc. The devil's in the details.

Since the AC already has several skilled people people on the BOD, that's covered. What's not covered are the POV and other skills that you and Shane could bring. I'd like to see a Shane and Slot ticket this time around :)

Next? :popcorn:

Iceaxe

07-01-2013, 07:53 AM

Jobs was not tossed from the board, he was fired by the board.

FWIW: About six months ago I read the book "Steve Jobs" by Walter Isaacson.... it's a great book and I highly recommend it.

penmartens

07-01-2013, 12:07 PM

It seems that this thread is having trouble deciding what it wants to be. Is it a bitch session regarding an organization that most people don't belong to; or, is it an airing of facts so that people can be informed about an environmental/conservation/recreation issue involving the Escalante area? Perhaps, moderators could split this off.

AMERICAN CANYONEERS

I am not a member of the AC. They are a new organization. I am waiting and watching to see if they become something I want to be involved with. As far as I can tell they are doing exactly what they said they would. They sought out members to pay a nominal fee. They had an election by the members to choose a board of directors who would take a stance on a variety of issues and use the number of members (300 or 400, depending on which report you read) to lend substance to the voice of the BOD.

This is not unusual. It is how many organizations/clubs work, including: Access Fund, Sierra Club, SUWA, Colorado Mtn Club, Wasatch Mtn Club, etc. None of these organizations poll their members before taking a stand on an issue. There is nothing evil nor underhanded about this. It is standard practice.

For those who are members, they do have a choice if they don't like how things are done. They can wait until an election and vote out the offending members, they can write to the BOD and make known their differing opinions, they can launch a recall before an election is due. Members are not powerless to guide the BOD of whatever organization they belong to.

THE HOLE IN THE ROCK ROAD

There seems to be much false information and innuendo surrounding the issue. I appreciate Scott's facts about paving.
I don't see anywhere, other that the AC's bombastic introduction, that the BLM is considering paving the HITRR. A baseline study is being conducted by Dr. Casey. He and his students want to know many things about the Escalante area including who is using it, how, and why. They also want to know what makes the area 'special' to its users. If one showed up to rant about paving, either pro or con, and not prepared to talk about the many issues the study is looking for, you might be regarded as an environmental wacko.

I thought there was a link somewhere in this confusing thread from a UT paper or news report quoting the Garfield County commissioners as wanting to improve the HITRR with water diversion culverts and gravel. That is a far cry from paving.

BOGLEY

We need some facts here. If Bogley is the premiere canyon site they claim, then step up and get YOUR members some facts.

Is a group or organization trying to pave the HITRR?

Would any improvements stop at county lines, or does BLM, as a federal entity have the ability to cross county lines?

Is the BLM looking at a road, or are they looking at a management plan? Dr. Casey's study indicates perhaps more than a road is at stake here.

Bogley could come up with a better poll. Instead of a single focus, black and white question, they could expand, gather beta on the wishes of its members and present those findings in an orderly manner to land managers.

I am not a pollster, but would make some suggestions:
1. Would you like to see the HITRR paved?
2. Would you like to see the HITRR improved with culverts, grading, and gravel?
3. Would you like to see the HITRR with the same level of management it has had for the last 10 year?
4. Would you like to see the HITRR left alone to the effects of nature and people?
5. How many times have you accessed the HITRR in the last year? last 5 years? last 10 years?
6. What do you when on the HITRR?
And so on....

Respectfully,
Penny

ratagonia

07-01-2013, 12:38 PM

Slot Machine

07-01-2013, 01:01 PM

Since the AC already has several skilled people people on the BOD, that's covered. What's not covered are the POV and other skills that you and Shane could bring. I'd like to see a Shane and Slot ticket this time around :)

Hi Hank! Nice of you think that I have skills that would add to the AC. However, I have no interest in adding another level of complexity to a hobby that should be as simple as 'hiking with ropes'.

We need some facts here. If Bogley is the premiere canyon site they claim, then step up and get YOUR members some facts

This is such a strange comment, since Bogley is a forum and not a person (or canyoneering association). It's not the forum's responsibility to do research for a user. :ne_nau:

Although, I DO like the rest of your post Penny. Yes, this thread is a-wanderin', and I do like your suggestions about collecting better data.

Bob

Iceaxe

07-01-2013, 02:03 PM

Is a group or organization trying to pave the HITRR?

Would any improvements stop at county lines, or does BLM, as a federal entity have the ability to cross county lines?

Is the BLM looking at a road, or are they looking at a management plan? Dr. Casey's study indicates perhaps more than a road is at stake here.

Bogley could come up with a better poll. Instead of a single focus, black and white question, they could expand, gather beta on the wishes of its members and present those findings in an orderly manner to land managers.

I believe this is exactly the type of information the members of Bogley were asking American Canyoneer to supply. It was American Canyon that posted in bold type across their website "Tell the BLM that paving the HITRR is WRONG!" Which is what started this entire thread.

Bogley is a forum for sharing ideas, thoughts, beta, opinions and information. Bogley is not an "Access Group" or any type of political organization. Heck, Bogley isn't even organized beyond Acca paying the light bill every month. So bottom-line I think you have some great questions, but you are asking the wrong organization to supply you the information, after all, isn't that what an organization devoted to access is supposed to do? Particularly before taking a side?

:popcorn:

Sombeech

07-01-2013, 02:28 PM

Bogley itself is made up of all of us. The admins like accadacca and myself may have certain viewpoints, but our opinions do not represent Bogley as a whole. The members who post, represent Bogley.

We also won't be the ones providing facts and research, nor should anybody ever, EVER depend on our study results in a matter like the paving of this road. I will probably never drive it my entire life.

Threads, and polls like this are created by members daily, as well as the content that fills those threads. Any member is welcome to chime in, and when the conversation sways one way it does not necessarily reflect the admins' opinions.

If a thread leads astray from a certain person's opinions, knowledge or findings, that person should just simply post more ;)

From what I am observing in this thread, some members just want some feedback in regards to the decision by the AC to urge against paving. In my quick skimming of the thread, i haven't seen much regarding the reason, at least by a proclaimed BOD member. And please note that i am not demanding this, that is just what the thread is asking for.

Thanks, now get your Bogley on.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Iceaxe

07-01-2013, 02:31 PM

I'm not saying you (or Shane) are throwing peanuts. I'm saying that the AC BOD (or any similar BOD) needs diverse viewpoints to draw on.

Hank, thanks for considering my view valuable. And I share your concern that American Canyoneer could use a wider point of view. As you know the organization was formed among a group of friends and acquaintances. I have no problem with that outside the fact that such a group has too much inbreeding of ideas. It's a big problem when everyone is fishing for ideas in the same small pond.

But I am not currently interested in a spot on the American Canyoneer BOD for the following reasons:

Being on the BOD would muzzle me on many issues where I prefer not to be muzzled. For instants, it would be hard for me to openly discuss issues such as civil disobedience (poaching) in an open forum as many would not understand that my personal views are not that of the organizations.

My experience with a similar organization (the ACA) really left a bad taste in my mouth. As you well know, I did some heavy lifting at the start for the ACA and was rewarded by being villainized for the next 10 years after I had a difference of opinions with the leadership.

At times I see American Canyoneer beginning to follow the same trajectory as the ACA, particularly with this HitRR issue, and that troubles me greatly.

As some of you know I have had a couple victories with regards to access over the years. When I look back on what it took to make them happen I believe it was much easier working alone and that attempting to get an organization to jump through the required hoops would have exhausted me.

I respect much of what American Canyoneer has done to date, particularly the service projects. I look forward to the day when American Canyoneer has a big win in the department of access to put in their trophy case. But in my humble opinion, if American Canyoneer keeps tilting at HitRR windmills such victories will never happen.

67602

penmartens

07-01-2013, 04:37 PM

Thank you for clarifying what this thread is about; also, for clarification on what Bogley is and is not.
I will look for useful information elsewhere.
Penny

Iceaxe

07-01-2013, 04:46 PM

I will look for useful information elsewhere.
You will find a tremendous amount of useful information on Bogley.... but it's up to you to sort it out and come to an educated personal conclusion.

If you are looking for someone to hold your hand and guide you down the yellow brick road to a predetermined destination then you are correct, Bogley is probably the wrong place.

67604

Byron

07-01-2013, 05:52 PM

I will look for useful information elsewhere.
PennyNot trying to bust your chops or anything like that, Penny...but if/when you get this "useful" information, could you please post it up here for the benefit of all us uninformed masses?

I think the thread asked a pretty simple question. Quite frankly, at this point I would much rather see pictures of someone standing next to their car on that road, frown on their face, with a blown up tire. Or perhaps a car so covered in dust you can't tell what color it is or stories of rescues (I have a few) of folks that got in over their heads just driving down there. I say pave the thing...I'll have a grin from ear to ear as I'm flying down to 40 mile, latte in my hand.

That would be much more interesting that reading through some engineers report on how to construct a culvert. When serious people start talking seriously about doing something radical down there, then it's time to "get educated"...until then it's all fun and games...for some, that is.

jman

07-01-2013, 06:41 PM

You will find a tremendous amount of useful information on Bogley.... but it's up to you to sort it out and come to an educated personal conclusion.

If you are looking for someone to hold your hand and guide you down the yellow brick road to a predetermined destination then you are correct, Bogley is probably the wrong place.

67604

Before the blanket gets thrown over all of us by your statement Penny...remember that no speaks for all of us. Like Sombeech said, we aren't one voice and have many opinions often which clash...which is great. Everyone should feel very free and unrestrained with their opinions. Often through diversity we learn a lot. If we all thought the same, like Shane's analogy with fishing in the same small pond, then we would be sheep.

I love it when Byron, Shane, Tom, Scott P, and others clash. Tom doesn't have all the answers and nor does Shane.

But you and the folks who don't post here but always view - would be very wise to listen to ALL of the opinions.

/2 pennies

Sombeech

07-01-2013, 08:16 PM

I find that when everybody agrees all the time and pats each other on the back, less is learned.

Strength in Diversity.

Bogley is THE most diverse Canyoneering community anywhere on the internet. For those looking to join a community where all ideals are the same, this would not quite fit their agenda but we would still love to hear from them.

Again, Strength in Diversity.

If the thread isn't going your way, please post more. :mrgreen:

Slot Machine

07-02-2013, 12:24 PM

If you are looking for someone to hold your hand and guide you down the yellow brick road to a predetermined destination then you are correct, Bogley is probably the wrong place.

Yikes! Translated into photo form:

67616

:lol8:

reflection

07-02-2013, 02:02 PM

Each generation (no, each decade of new eyes) gets to take a new look at land use planning on the Colorado Plateau? Interesting that some that are so framiliar with these corridors and have travelled them for years claim neutrality as to an opinion - until more fcts of course are tendered?

The BLM and federal land managers have for decades been in opposition to paving. Upgrading sections, more gravel, widening - this has all occurred. But the fabric of the place changes dramatically if and when paved, and after that will the pressure be on to pave side roads -40 mile ridge to Coyote Gulch?

In the short run, the financial economic benefit goes to engineers, contractors, sub-contractors, asphalt company, trucking companies. Usually political contributions grease the contracts. Often the demand for the service (paving) is inflated and costs understated. Garfied County with it's tax base could not afford such an operation, and the annual upkeep, as compared to what it is now, would likely enhance. Parties would look to the state and federal government for funding; and yet compared to the financial needs of repairing bridges across America and the upkeep of federal highways, the paving of the HRR would likely be a very low priority.

American Canyoneers vote - no thanks to a paved road? That organization like most has directors and officers. Members defer to such for decision making. If a collective voice of the membership though offers an alternative or contrary view, the board would likely listen and potentially modify. At least I hope they would.

Any of you ever see the Burr Trail back in the days when it was a dusty, bumpty rutted dirt road? The National Park Service stood steadfast in saying NO to paving, and yet movers and shakers in Garfield County wanted to pave the road feeling it would offer untold economic benefit. The chip and seal, widening, and partial paving. The fiancial Holy Grail, it turned out, NOT to be.

Pave the road to 40 mile ridge for example, and Devils Garden, Dry Gulch- Peekabo, Spooky - and probably Coyote Gulch would turn into a spring and fall highway and canyon "traffic jam". So much for solitude and quiet in the desert. ( I know some of those sections have been busy for decades) There are a constellatoin of users on that road with a varying degree of interests. Most I think, even the California Cowboys would ask to keep the traffic down, and keep the road mostly as is. Canyoneers though that only care about access, might surmise that other ecological, economic and social concerns should take a subordinate look? That range or spectrum - wild or semi-wild on one side and industrial and developed on the other - at least in the front country. Folk's range and depth of concern for the desert is on display.

Slot Machine

07-02-2013, 03:27 PM

^ Interesting observations, reflection. ^ General, but good. I always enjoy it when you stop by.

Can't quite tell from your post... if it were up to you, what would you do? And why?

outsider

07-02-2013, 09:03 PM

Thanks for the thoughts and history, reflection.

As an AC member, I was surprised when I read the initial HITRR announcement. Surprised to the point that I contacted one of the AC directors to provide feedback, since the statement as titled and written did not seem to be appropriate for the AC (in this member's opinion, at any rate). Later I read the updated AC statement, yet I still felt like some things were unclear, particularly regarding the motivation behind the call for action. Ram and Rich Rudow posted some additional information in a CC thread (http://canyoncollective.com/threads/american-canyoneers-latest-news.18550/)that I found of interest and perhaps others will too - a few quotes cross-posted:

Ram: "Far from it being a pave or not pave issue, it was seen as an access issue. Right now there are backpackers, canyoneers, LDS historical tourists and the Devils Garden and/or Spooky Peek-a-boo family crowd down there. We have our way now. We really do. Self serve permit sign ins at trail heads. It will never get any better than that access wise. Pave it and I believe that will go away fast. REAL fast. If they build it, they will come and then we will have to wait in lines of some kind or be limited in when and where we can go. Isn't it worth a bumpy ride to avoid that? Sometimes less is more."

Rich Rudow: "Garfield County is asking the Fed's for $15 million to improve the 16 miles of road inside Garfield County, but they are on the record with aspirations to pave the whole thing for tourism."

-john

Slot Machine

07-03-2013, 11:26 AM

Ram: "Far from it being a pave or not pave issue, it was seen as an access issue. Right now there are backpackers, canyoneers, LDS historical tourists and the Devils Garden and/or Spooky Peek-a-boo family crowd down there. We have our way now. We really do. Self serve permit sign ins at trail heads. It will never get any better than that access wise. Pave it and I believe that will go away fast. REAL fast. If they build it, they will come and then we will have to wait in lines of some kind or be limited in when and where we can go. Isn't it worth a bumpy ride to avoid that? Sometimes less is more."

I think visions of Zion and Arches are dancing in Ram's head. (friendly teasing :mrgreen:)

HITRR is a MUCH different setup than either of those parks. As mentioned before 'the good stuff' is a long way from the proposed pavement. However, if the Egypt Road (and other branches from HITTR) were to be paved, then maybe there would be lines, and maybe canyoneers would be limited.

That is the shade of grey where I'd begin to protest.

deagol

07-03-2013, 12:02 PM

.... if the Egypt Road (and other branches from HITTR) were to be paved, ...

This is what I was thinking. First HITR, then Egypt.

oldno7

07-03-2013, 01:20 PM

This is what I was thinking. First HITR, then Egypt.

You haven't heard of the proposed bridge across the Escalante, through Steven's Arch?

I was more curious when I heard of the tunnel through waterpocket.

The new "Grandest of all Loops" is going to be great--

Down HITR,across the Escalante,through Stevens,Under Waterpocket,across Halls Narrows(bridge)to Bullfrog.

Then dinner and back across the Burr trail to Boulder, Escalante and Wa-La--"Grandest of all Loops" it's going to be awesome!!!

Slot Machine

07-03-2013, 01:20 PM

This is what I was thinking. First HITR, then Egypt.

Even though they are connected, the use of the two roads is very different, so their maintenance is very different.

Based on Scott P's very rough cost analysis, there is a fairly strong argument to pave HITRR.

However, the Egypt road is probably very cheap to maintain. I only recall one section that is graded (the short switchback-ish turn). Unless the land managers think thousands of people will flock to the Egypts if it's paved, then there isn't much of a cost-to-benefit argument.

My crystal ball says the Egypt road will never be paved. YMMV. :mrgreen:

Iceaxe

07-03-2013, 01:32 PM

Anyone here read "The Monkey Wrench Gang (http://www.amazon.com/The-Monkey-Wrench-Gang-P-S/dp/0061129763)"?

There are those that believe paving Highway 95 between Hanksville and Blanding was the devil's work.

And many think I-70 should never have been paved through the center of the San Rafael Swell.

:popcorn:

Iceaxe

07-11-2013, 09:15 AM

For giggles....

msmnificent

07-12-2013, 08:38 AM

American Canyoneers vote - no thanks to a paved road? That organization like most has directors and officers. Members defer to such for decision making. If a collective voice of the membership though offers an alternative or contrary view, the board would likely listen and potentially modify. At least I hope they would.

A majority of the positions on the board are open this election. Make sure to vote for the candidates who you feel will listen and represent you (and the majority of canyoneers) best:

Voting insturctions here: https://www.facebook.com/AmericanCanyoneers
http://www.americancanyoneers.org/board-of-directors-2013-elections/

It's just $5 to become a member and vote: http://www.americancanyoneers.org/join-now/