ALDER CREEK TRAIL

Girl Hiker · Post by **Girl Hiker** » Sat Oct 25, 2025 1:19 pm

Last week Bill, Guy and myself checked out the Alder Creek trail that Kristen and some volunteers restored. We checked it out after the rain last Tuesday. I knew it was going to be a spectacular day as the clouds were putting on a show all along the ACF. The weather was perfect! We all really enjoyed this trail. It was so beautiful. The yuccas were nicely trimmed. Rocks were used to guide hikers along the path and the trail itself was so smooth. Overall, the crew did an exceptional job on this trail. To add, the views all around were gorgeous. We discovered some interesting things while exploring further.
STATS: 10 miles

20251015_085806.jpg

20251015_085305.jpg

20251015_091714.jpg

lots of shade along the trail.

20251015_095205.jpg

20251015_103132.jpg

fall colors

20251015_111752.jpg

Alder Creek trail (3).JPG

20251015_123837.jpg

20251015_125645.jpg

20251015_125325.jpg

20251015_125801.jpg

20251015_141626.jpg

Lunch spot where the trail ends and the private road is

20251015_115308.jpg

I found this huge heart rock.

20251015_144748.jpg

20251015_150324.jpg

nicely trimmed yucca

20251015_103807.jpg

20251015_123547.jpg

20251015_150808.jpg

I spotted this with my x-ray vision. A deer skull waaaaayyyy across the canyon. The guys didnt believe me at first but then Guy confirmed it with his binoculars and my excellent phone camera got a good close up.

20251015_105750.jpg

The deer also enjoyed the trail.

20251015_110842.jpg

20251015_151321.jpg

Mt. Wilson, Lawlor and Strawberry peaks under the clouds

20251015_114506.jpg

20251015_141032.jpg

20251015_102802.jpg

Nate U · Post by **Nate U** » Sun Oct 26, 2025 8:07 pm

Looks like the trail is now fantastic! Best way to access Alder Crag!!

Post by **JeffH** » Sun Oct 26, 2025 8:39 pm

That red (Maple?) is pretty amazing.

K_Sabo · Post by **K_Sabo** » Mon Oct 27, 2025 10:22 am

FYI: the red maple, the manzanita sign, those are all in someone's yard on private property in the Loomis area. There are six private parcels there and they're marked with No Trespassing signs. One may want to think about getting the owner's permission before venturing onto private property.

Girl Hiker · Post by **Girl Hiker** » Mon Oct 27, 2025 1:01 pm

Jeff- it was a Chinese Pistachio tree that someone planted as we were told.

Yes we wandered around. We didnt go on the private property just walked by it on the road where you can access the main trail.

K_Sabo · Post by **K_Sabo** » Tue Oct 28, 2025 12:43 pm

Girl Hiker wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 1:01 pm Yes we wandered around. We didnt go on the private property just walked by it on the road where you can access the main trail.

Considering my crew did all of the work on the trail and we had to study the entire area to be allowed to do the work, I'm obviously very aware of pretty much exactly where each of these pics were taken, where the private property lines are, and where the No Trespassing signs were located on the date of this trip report. My original comment stands as written.

Also, for future reference: gaslighting doesn't work on me.

Moving on now.

Matthew · Post by **Matthew** » Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:02 pm

K_Sabo wrote: Tue Oct 28, 2025 12:43 pm
Girl Hiker wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 1:01 pm Yes we wandered around. We didnt go on the private property just walked by it on the road where you can access the main trail.
Considering my crew did all of the work on the trail and we had to study the entire area to be allowed to do the work, I'm obviously very aware of pretty much exactly where each of these pics were taken, where the private property lines are, and where the No Trespassing signs were located on the date of this trip report. My original comment stands as written.

Also, for future reference: gaslighting doesn't work on me.

Moving on now.

Seems like Loomis Ranch needs a fence!

JakubRZ · Post by **JakubRZ** » Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:01 pm

K_Sabo wrote: Tue Oct 28, 2025 12:43 pm
Girl Hiker wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 1:01 pm Yes we wandered around. We didnt go on the private property just walked by it on the road where you can access the main trail.
Considering my crew did all of the work on the trail and we had to study the entire area to be allowed to do the work, I'm obviously very aware of pretty much exactly where each of these pics were taken, where the private property lines are, and where the No Trespassing signs were located on the date of this trip report. My original comment stands as written.

Also, for future reference: gaslighting doesn't work on me.

Moving on now.

Are the USGS topos correct in identifying the private land plots?

Post by **dima** » Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:11 pm

JakubRZ wrote: Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:01 pm Are the USGS topos correct in identifying the private land plots?

I looked into this for the Loomis Ranch specifically at some point, and this actually is a surprisingly-deep rabbithole. The topos are inconsistent with each other and inconsistent with the assessor's maps and with what's actually built on the ground. The assessor's maps put the buildings on that ranch outside of the property boundaries. The property description is based on a very old reference mark that probably wasn't surveyed exactly-enough back-in-the-day. So if you go by the letter of the law, I guess you can go squat in those buildings? Probably not. I am not a lawyer, but I suspect if this was ever legally disputed, the legal lines would be redrawn to reflect what's there. If there's signage, we should respect it.

Post by **dima** » Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:14 pm

Oh hey, look at that. We talked about this in an earlier post

JakubRZ · Post by **JakubRZ** » Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:13 pm

dima wrote: Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:14 pm Oh hey, look at that. We talked about this in an earlier post

Thanks for sharing

Coincidentally I found some cool reading on the Loomis Ranch. Not sure if this was posted before. My fave is the Elsie Corwin mountain lion story.
http://loomisranch.org/index.html

Site also includes the original survey from 1913:
http://loomisranch.org/page13/page51/page51.html

K_Sabo · Post by **K_Sabo** » Thu Oct 30, 2025 11:16 am

JakubRZ wrote: Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:01 pm Are the USGS topos correct in identifying the private land plots?

Topos are not a consistently good source.

From the research I was required to conduct to receive permission to work on the trail:

Currently for this particular situation (Loomis), Openstreetmap is very close to the exact border perimeter for the subdivided Loomis private property boundary. The LA County Tax Assessor's website -- which is almost always shifted from the correct location in remote areas -- does show the interior parcel divisions essentially correctly but the whole subdivision is physically shifted from the exact overall location as expected.

Recommend CalTopo Mapbuilder layers because they use OpenStreetMap boundaries for reference when exploring this particular location.

K_Sabo · Post by **K_Sabo** » Thu Oct 30, 2025 11:21 am

dima wrote: Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:14 pm Oh hey, look at that. We talked about this in an earlier post

This is interesting and does mirror what I found. I would have had to do independent determination to work on the trail even if I'd seen the earlier discussion.

It's pretty well-known that the Tax Assessor's mapping web site is not in any way legal parcel descriptions. My friend owns 15 acres in Gold Creek and the assessor map on-line is off in both directions in that area but pretty much exact not too far away. What is kind of scary is that is was obviously not correct because of the clear misalignment of the road easement, however my friend had to throw some legal surveys at the County to prove it to them when they were giving him shit while he was trying to rebuild after the Creek Fire in 2017. I was helping him with an off the cuff measurement of what we estimated the deviation to be, and we were pretty close to exact, BTW, just using common sense - something you don't always find at the County. End of the story is that the County backed off and my friend has rebuilt.