Hwy 39 - Open to Crystal Lake Area?
Does anyone know if Hwy 39 is open up to or even near the Crystal Lake Area? I know it was closed for quite a while down lower.
SR-39 (San Gabriel Canyon Road)
Valley of the Moon is just before you get to Coldbrook. We were involved in a service project at Coldbrook earlier this year and a ranger that was there said they were concerned about the bridges (due to the fires up that way) and that the highway wouldn't be opened to the public until after they had been certified by Caltrans as being safe. She seemed to know what she was talking about. If that's the case, then we could be in for a long wait...
6 mile walk or bike (walk for me) past mile marker 32.12 at VOTM before Coldbrook, up to Crystal Lake. Fun ride down. I wish it was opened to the first gate just past CL.
I guess the bridges she meant were the ones that hug the mountainside.
I guess the bridges she meant were the ones that hug the mountainside.
Rte. 39 is passable on bicycle and on foot. I know prople who have ridden it. In 2005, my son and I did Mt. Islip from Islip Saddle during the winter. He talked me into bushwacking down to Rte. 39. We then walked about 2 miles on the road back to the saddle. I mention that episode because we saw a guy in a car on the road. He had gotten through the southern closure and thought he was going to make it onto Rte. 2. We told him that there was a locked gate. A while later, he came back down and confirmed that he had, indeed, encountered a gate. We never got the straight scoop on how he got onto the road, but it was obvisouly passable. (This is not to claim that it should be open to traffic.)
I've walked R39 many times, just wish it was open to vehicle traffic, so I could reach the north side of the mountains without going insanely far out of my way. I can't afford that much gas. I live on R39 in the Azusa area. Willaimson Rock would be a short jaunt north!!! (Soon as they open that up again... damn frogs... argh)
Went up last night for a drive, and expected to turn around near the gate at Valley of the moon (Upper Bear Creek/Smith Mountain Trailhead).
Whadayaknow, the gate is now closed at the old location just a couple klicks or so north of the bridge over West Fork. WTF? Is this because of the fire over Sierra Madre?
Whadayaknow, the gate is now closed at the old location just a couple klicks or so north of the bridge over West Fork. WTF? Is this because of the fire over Sierra Madre?
Great question, Taco. Every time we have hiked Smith Mountain over the last couple of years we have had to walk the road from the gate you mention up to the parking lot at the Smith Mountain trailhead. This is perfectly good road and there is another gate right at the tarilhead that they can lock up there if the road beyond that point has problems. Why won't they let us drive on that portion of the road? Does anyone know?
RV
RV
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/angeles/orders/ ... -Order.pdf
Another key word in there is closed until Feb 29 2009
Another key word in there is closed until Feb 29 2009
It says there's a slide; at least there's a slide marked on the map. Probably why they closed the road lower down. Keep people out. Sometimes the USFS gets a little overzealous. Says they'll fine you if you're caught.
The Crystal Lake area is also closed to hikers/backpackers. Kind of lame. I'm all for rehabing an overused area, but backpackers have a pretty small footprint and would be few in number -- you have to come in from Islip Saddle or walk the road from below. Closing it to people who are willing to walk in on foot is overkill. Am I missing something here?
The Crystal Lake area is also closed to hikers/backpackers. Kind of lame. I'm all for rehabing an overused area, but backpackers have a pretty small footprint and would be few in number -- you have to come in from Islip Saddle or walk the road from below. Closing it to people who are willing to walk in on foot is overkill. Am I missing something here?
Your insight is as good as mine..just dont know. Recently, I have felt that there are a lot of consequences(call them unintended if you want) from laws and orders higher up. In this case, I think you have 2 sides, one of limited access, and one of un-limited access. There are no "trails" in the limited access side(the SG wilderness), you cant close the trail where there is no "trail". But as soon as you get into the designed area of high use, the only way to meet the responsibilities maybe was to close the road and avoid posting an enforcement ranger 24/7.
Any knucklehead can sue the forest service nowadays. I remember a judge revoking Angeles FS immunity when some dude dived into a shallow pool at Stoneyvalle Picnic area..said the forest service had a responsibility to stop people from a known danger.
Overzealous...well closing Little Santa Anita canyon, a known canyoneering canyon...Sierra Madre seems very harsh to me going back to when they decided last year to close all hiking on red flag days.
Any knucklehead can sue the forest service nowadays. I remember a judge revoking Angeles FS immunity when some dude dived into a shallow pool at Stoneyvalle Picnic area..said the forest service had a responsibility to stop people from a known danger.
Overzealous...well closing Little Santa Anita canyon, a known canyoneering canyon...Sierra Madre seems very harsh to me going back to when they decided last year to close all hiking on red flag days.
Is all of Little SA Canyon off limits? That is harsh. Probably some grafitti or trash problems. I doubt very much that canyoneers are causing any trouble. The thing I hate is that there's no intelligence to most of these closure decisions. It's an all or nothing closure. There ought to be a way to get an exception for legitimate, non-destructive purposes (e.g. canyoneering). Sigh [Rant off]
I know they closed Little Santa Anita Canyon his week for a while because it was in the middle of the fire. Has it been closed otherwise? The Mount Wilson Trail was certainly open before the fire.AW wrote:Overzealous...well closing Little Santa Anita canyon, a known canyoneering canyon...Sierra Madre seems very harsh to me...
I assume that you are referring to the closure of the entire ANF. Actually, all of the National Forests and several of the State Parks in Southern California have had extended closures in recent years (beginning in 2003, if not before). It was not just on red flag days, it was for several weeks at a time. which, of course, is exactly what quite a few people call "overzealous." I am ambivalent about such closures. I think that the USFS is in a bit of a bind when huge tracts of land are ablaze. They just don't have the resources to tackle more fires. People argue about whether or not closures have anything to do with preventing fires, but one can certainly understand the lack of resources to supervise evacuations, etc. Anyway, it has been controversial in the past and will be when the forests are closed again.AW wrote:...going back to when they decided last year to close all hiking on red flag days.
>I know they closed Little Santa Anita Canyon his week for a while >because it was in the middle of the fire. Has it been closed otherwise? >The Mount Wilson Trail was certainly open before the fire.
I agree with closing it on known fires. I am not angry if they close it to a perceived fire danger, its just I cant disagree either if its called overzealous just because they close it when its windy outside. Main reason being theres a disconnect by screaming fire danger when houses are built right up against it.....theres always fire danger....and as people know, the communication is extremely pitiful sometimes.
The portion of canyon(not the trail to Firstwater) aka river below First water is a lot more dangerous than before with unknown anchor conditions for rappells and possibly careful terrain. While thats certainly easy to agree with, canyoneers dont like to be babysat as it enforces bad decision making....as it should be proceed at your own risk...not it is open because it is now safe to proceed..which equals safe to proceed assuming you can deal with whatever obstacle you encounter..which is the same thing as before...anyways...
I agree with closing it on known fires. I am not angry if they close it to a perceived fire danger, its just I cant disagree either if its called overzealous just because they close it when its windy outside. Main reason being theres a disconnect by screaming fire danger when houses are built right up against it.....theres always fire danger....and as people know, the communication is extremely pitiful sometimes.
The portion of canyon(not the trail to Firstwater) aka river below First water is a lot more dangerous than before with unknown anchor conditions for rappells and possibly careful terrain. While thats certainly easy to agree with, canyoneers dont like to be babysat as it enforces bad decision making....as it should be proceed at your own risk...not it is open because it is now safe to proceed..which equals safe to proceed assuming you can deal with whatever obstacle you encounter..which is the same thing as before...anyways...
Heres a list of road closures....
The Angeles Crest Highway (SR2) is closed between Islip Saddle and Vincent Gap (indefinitely because of several washouts). (State)
Glendora Mountain Road - Closed from Big Dalton Rd. to East Fork, due to fire danger. (County)
Chantry Road is closed due to fire danger (City of Sierra Madre)
Ridge Route from Lake Hughes Road to Templin Highway - All modes of transportation (Forest Service)
Highway 39 - Closed from just above the west fork of San Gabriel Canyon (State)
So it looks like Hwy39 has nothing to do with the Forest service.
The Angeles Crest Highway (SR2) is closed between Islip Saddle and Vincent Gap (indefinitely because of several washouts). (State)
Glendora Mountain Road - Closed from Big Dalton Rd. to East Fork, due to fire danger. (County)
Chantry Road is closed due to fire danger (City of Sierra Madre)
Ridge Route from Lake Hughes Road to Templin Highway - All modes of transportation (Forest Service)
Highway 39 - Closed from just above the west fork of San Gabriel Canyon (State)
So it looks like Hwy39 has nothing to do with the Forest service.
-
FIGHT ON
The Crystal Lake area is also closed to hikers/backpackers.
HUH? How's a guy possa know it's closed? Are there signs all over the place up there? What if you go there from the north?[/quote]
HUH? How's a guy possa know it's closed? Are there signs all over the place up there? What if you go there from the north?[/quote]
Yep. There was a big sign at Windy Gap last time I was there. Next time I went by, someone had pulled it out of the ground and thrown it down. I feel the same way!!FIGHT ON wrote:The Crystal Lake area is also closed to hikers/backpackers.
HUH? How's a guy possa know it's closed? Are there signs all over the place up there? What if you go there from the north?
Oh, damn, I guess I keep on missing that sign. Oops. Damn. Maybe I should look if I decide to give a damn...
So... I drove on Glendora Ridge Road the other day, completely open... GMR is closed too? I typically only do the scetion from Heaton Flat to GRR. Bollocks.
So... I drove on Glendora Ridge Road the other day, completely open... GMR is closed too? I typically only do the scetion from Heaton Flat to GRR. Bollocks.
-
FIGHT ON
So there is a sign? What does the sign say? Does it actually say "All hikers/ backpackers KEEP OUT"? You can't just go there to check the area out w/o camping? What the heck is that? Are you sure? I just don't get it. I can maybe understand that if the area was over used and they want to let it be for a while but to stop passersby doesn't make sense.Hikin_Jim wrote:Yep. There was a big sign at Windy Gap last time I was there. Next time I went by, someone had pulled it out of the ground and thrown it down. I feel the same way!!FIGHT ON wrote:The Crystal Lake area is also closed to hikers/backpackers.
HUH? How's a guy possa know it's closed? Are there signs all over the place up there? What if you go there from the north?
There is a sign. I'm looking at a photo of it now. I can't read it all, but it says in English and in Spanish:
CRYSTAL LAKE RECREATION AREA CLOSED
Per Forest order (CFR some number, CFR another number)
Order (some number)
For further information call US Forest Service 626-325-1291
Don't quote me on that phone number. I'm looking at a photo one of the other guys on the hike took; it's a little hard to make out. If you're really interested, I'm sure you could call the supervisor's office in Arcadia.
The first time I went by there, the sign was up. Another time, somebody had pulled it out and knocked it over.
I agree it makes no sense, but then does it really surprise you that bureaucrats don't make sense? Your tax dollars at work.
HJ
CRYSTAL LAKE RECREATION AREA CLOSED
Per Forest order (CFR some number, CFR another number)
Order (some number)
For further information call US Forest Service 626-325-1291
Don't quote me on that phone number. I'm looking at a photo one of the other guys on the hike took; it's a little hard to make out. If you're really interested, I'm sure you could call the supervisor's office in Arcadia.
The first time I went by there, the sign was up. Another time, somebody had pulled it out and knocked it over.
I agree it makes no sense, but then does it really surprise you that bureaucrats don't make sense? Your tax dollars at work.
HJ
-
FIGHT ON
Ew. Snippy lady at the San Gabriel River Ranger District
110 N. Wabash Avenue
Glendora, CA 91741
L'Tanga Watson, District Ranger
(626) 335-1251
CRS 1 800 735 2929
FAX (626) 914-3790
M-F 8:00 am - 4:30 pm
Got the feeling I was asking too many questions.
. She said you can't go into the campgrounds. Not even to look. Stay away. won't be open until 2011. so there. 
110 N. Wabash Avenue
Glendora, CA 91741
L'Tanga Watson, District Ranger
(626) 335-1251
CRS 1 800 735 2929
FAX (626) 914-3790
M-F 8:00 am - 4:30 pm
Got the feeling I was asking too many questions.
. She said you can't go into the campgrounds. Not even to look. Stay away. won't be open until 2011. so there. Typical. I should probably place a warning here that "this post will be an emotional venting of frustrations" but, what is going on with the USFS?????
I'm sure that there are some important things that they are doing behind the scenes that I am not aware of but, other than clearing some fallen trees off of trails each year, I just don't see what they are doing to enhance our experience in the forest service lands. Camp sites are falling into an increasing state of ignored disrepair. The same thing can be said for the trails. Rather than maintainng the trails, they wait until they deteriorate to an unsafe condition and then they close them. Nice! What good does that do us? Have you ever even met a forest service employee in the San Gabriels either away from the ranger stations or off of the roads?? Rarely. The sense that I get is that they wait for any natural event that can be used as an excuse to close an area to public use and then leave it like that for years so that they do not need to maintain it. (I warned you that this would be a rant)
Look at what they just did with the trail to Smith Mountain. They get a slide so they close it for a year??? Wow. There are some on this board who have pointed to a lack of intelligence on their part as they make these decisions. I agree. If this is a budget issue, ask the public for some help. I for one would gladly volunteer time to help with repairs when they are needed and my services are FREE. I'm sure that there are many others who feel as I do. Rather than constantly closing areas "because they have the authority to do so" why not manage outreach programs that fix the problems?
Our tax dollars at work. Many fo their decisions make me believe that they have lost sight of their purpose and why they are there. Restricting public acess to public grounds is not their purpose.
RV
I'm sure that there are some important things that they are doing behind the scenes that I am not aware of but, other than clearing some fallen trees off of trails each year, I just don't see what they are doing to enhance our experience in the forest service lands. Camp sites are falling into an increasing state of ignored disrepair. The same thing can be said for the trails. Rather than maintainng the trails, they wait until they deteriorate to an unsafe condition and then they close them. Nice! What good does that do us? Have you ever even met a forest service employee in the San Gabriels either away from the ranger stations or off of the roads?? Rarely. The sense that I get is that they wait for any natural event that can be used as an excuse to close an area to public use and then leave it like that for years so that they do not need to maintain it. (I warned you that this would be a rant)
Look at what they just did with the trail to Smith Mountain. They get a slide so they close it for a year??? Wow. There are some on this board who have pointed to a lack of intelligence on their part as they make these decisions. I agree. If this is a budget issue, ask the public for some help. I for one would gladly volunteer time to help with repairs when they are needed and my services are FREE. I'm sure that there are many others who feel as I do. Rather than constantly closing areas "because they have the authority to do so" why not manage outreach programs that fix the problems?
Our tax dollars at work. Many fo their decisions make me believe that they have lost sight of their purpose and why they are there. Restricting public acess to public grounds is not their purpose.
RV