EISPIRATEN

The Ski Hut trail is in general a super scenic way to do Baldy, and it takes us through an area that mostly seems to me like it's in good shape environmentally and hasn't seen the kind of human impact that you see near the Notch. However, there are some sections of the trail, along the climber's-left rim of the Baldy Bowl, that seem to be suffering from a lot of negative human impact in ways that are totally unnecessary. The purpose of this post is to solicit people's thoughts on how to improve the situation. On the map below, I've drawn a red line, a blue line, and a purple line. The red is an area where there are lots of trails braiding back and forth, and there's quite a bit of bad erosion where some of these tracks cut through the chaparral. The blue is what I perceive to be the traditional continuation of this route as you get behind the big rock towers and can no longer see out across the bowl. It hasn't generally suffered much from the braiding problem, because there was a clearly defined route. The purple is something that I think is fairly new. I think it may have been created by people who didn't notice the switchback where the blue trail gains a little elevation, so they went blasting through the landscape.

Around 2016, several changes appeared all around the same time. A new set of official-looking signs appeared all along the whole trail, and there were also a bunch of posts made out of steel box tubing and painted brown, which marked spots along the red and blue routes. Around the same year, a bunch of extremely unsightly yellow spray-painted arrows appeared on rocks, marking a route from the bottom-left of the bowl up to the summit. The signs and posts look like obvious official Forest Service work. The arrows seemed more like some misguided soul who really used bad judgment and marred the landscape. At the time, I asked around both on this board and by calling the ANF office, and nobody seemed to know anything about who had made the yellow arrows. I asked the ANF office if it was OK if I went ahead and made efforts to remove or cover the arrows, and they weren't especially responsive, which I took as permission. Fred gave me some stuff named Kover Kote, which is a concrete product that you apply with a brush, and I made an effort to cover the arrows. Actually, in many cases all that was needed was to flip over the rock that had the arrow on it.

When I discovered the purple trail last week, I was kind of surprised because I thought I knew the area well, and had never noticed it before. When I checked it out, I also found a yellow arrow on a rock along it. I thought this was interesting, because it was the first direct confirmation I'd seen that this really had been done by someone working on their own, as opposed to the people (presumably ANF) who did the posts and signs. They're actually marking totally different routes: the arrows on the purple route and the posts on the blue route.

So on a couple of visits this week, I just went ahead and made my best effort to obliterate the new and totally unnecessary purple trail, and to make it so that the blue route would be the one what would be visually obvious to people. I built a pretty big rock wall at the bottom intersection to block off the purple trail, so it's now much more visually obvious that you do need to switchback and follow the blue route uphill to one of the steel posts. At the top intersection, I dragged some dead wood across the purple trail so people wouldn't head down it. I also tried to fill in the trail as much as possible with rocks and deadwood, so that when you look at it, it no longer looks like a trail.

So I guess this falls under the heading of asking forgiveness rather than permission, but if anyone wants to voice an opinion about the purple trail, feel free. Hopefully others will agree with my evaluation, and maybe when you pass by the area you can help to keep the purple trail obliterated.

There is also the whole issue of the braiding and erosion on the red section, which is more what I'm really hoping to solicit opinions on. It's really an unsightly scar on the mountain. The brown posts are somewhat helpful in that they mark a route that stays kind of in the middle of the braids, so that if you consciously look for the posts and try to go from post to post, you'll be unlikely to keep wearing in some of the braids off on the extreme left and right. However, I don't think most people consciously make that attempt. It's good that the brown posts are not too obtrusive or ugly, but in fact they're pretty difficult to pick out from a distance, so I doubt that most people even see them until they happen to pass by one.

Any suggestions on possible ways to cut down on the braiding? I guess the first thing to do would be to figure out some kind of consensus or semi-arbitrary decision on which braid to call the "right" one. This would probably be whichever path visits all the the brown posts and also provides the best footing and doesn't seem to be creating eroded gullies.

But then the question would be whether and how one could ever encourage people to pick that "right" path. I don't think it's appropriate for random people (like the yellow arrow person) to mark up the landscape in an attempt to tell people where to go. When you have rocks and deadwood available, it's not actually that hard to cover up a trail and make it no longer look like a trail that it would occur to someone to follow. In the particular area where the red trail is, there just doesn't happen to be a lot of rock or deadwood. So I guess the best idea I can think of is to pick a day when you're visiting the area and make a project out of bringing rocks and deadwood up or down the hill and trying to kill off one particular short section of braid. It would be a lot of work because of the need to carry the materials, but it might be doable.

There are also a few fairly big boulders along the red route, which could in some cases possibly be moved with a crowbar in order to block off a braid.

Anyone have any thoughts about the best way to handle this? I'm sort of starting from the assumption that ANF doesn't care and won't help, because that was the reaction I pretty much got from them in 2016. I guess my current thought is to go to the bottom of the red section, where the braiding starts, carefully look around at the options, pick a 30-foot section that I think should not be the "right" one, and try to erase it using rocks and deadwood carried up from the nearby sandy flats, or maybe the forested area on the ridge just to the south-east of that, off trail and beyond the sign.

That section of trail is hopeless. Going back 15 years the trail was much more defined and would contour to the west side and then go up. I now can no longer tell the accurate route especially on the lower section coming down. People have moved further and further over to the east and created more direct routes down the steeper slopes. Any spot where there is no vegetation has become a possible route. The only option would be to place wood through the entire section to define it and I'm sure within a week or two it would all be gone. The posts are mainly for snow hiking orientation and places where people traditionally got lost like near the plane crash and that ridge below Ski Hut where people used to go down and not up at that point of the trail

David R wrote: ↑That section of trail is hopeless. Going back 15 years the trail was much more defined and would contour to the west side and then go up. I now can no longer tell the accurate route especially on the lower section coming down. People have moved further and further over to the east and created more direct routes down the steeper slopes.

Interesting. My experience of the area doesn't go back that far. I had imagined that the braids were just people arbitrarily going random ways, as opposed to some sort of trend where they were seeking out a more efficient route. When people think X is better than Y for some reason, then clearly there's not much hope of convincing them to stop doing X. It only works if they perceive the two possibilities as equivalent, or if Y is actually better and people unfamiliar with the area just need a clue to do Y.

How does the current location of the steel posts compare with the older location of the trail that you're describing?

Maybe rather than a goal of "one trail to rule them all," a more realistic goal would be to pick certain specific braids that clearly need to die, and kill them off. There are areas where if you stretched a piece of yarn perpendicularly across the trails, it would cross over four different ones. Some of them are clearly just not optimal or necessary from any point of view.

I'm with David on this, I remember thinking "always bear left" on that part of the trail. Now it seems to go toward the edge of the Bowl. The increased traffic in the last 10 years has really softened up the ground and the little trails seem to wash away every winter, and that means more little trails are created the next spring. If we could build up some rock walls to define switchbacks - as you've started - that would be a major benefit.
Weekend project? Camp at the saddle on the left side of the bowl and spend a day working in the sand. Have to pack up lots of water from the ski hut.

I think it is also important to remember the history of this trail. This was not an official trail when it originally started from the ski hut to the summit. I still remember reading the John Robinson edition I purchased in 2001 and it saying that people with good trail sense can make it from the bowl to the summit. This resulted in it being made by hikers not by a trail crew and that section in particular was the least defined even then as far as trail. In those times the only large hiking groups were on the Backbone. Baldy from the Village you saw three to four parties and Baldy via Ski Hut was 15-20 parties on a busy summer weekend. The increased usage really makes the case to create a proper switchback trail for that section which was never in place.

@JeffH, I'm down if you want to get together and work on this as a weekend project. Some weekends I could do are Aug 15-16 (this coming weekend), Aug 29-30, or Sep. 12-13. I think if there are two guys carrying a log up a steep slope, huffing and puffing, then it's not really going to work to wear masks or do social distancing. If you're OK with exposing yourself to my cooties, that's OK with me. Or we could just avoid doing specific tasks like that.

We would need to agree on how to pick a route. If I'm understanding what you and David R are saying, then you seem to be talking about a route that switchbacks rather than going straight up, and that stays to the left. I think this is potentially going to be a sticking point. People will not take a switchbacking route if they see another route that they perceive to be "the shortcut."

I don't know that much about trail construction, but I'm thinking that one of the purposes of switchbacks is to reduce erosion. When a trail runs straight up or down a steep slope, water drains straight down it, and it turns into an eroded gully. You want water to drain across the trail. That would be fine in principle, but at this location, we'd have some issues trying to impose something like that. (1) People would want to cut across the switchbacks, because direct paths already exist through the brush. (2) Because the existing paths are fairly direct, creating more gradually switchbacked trails would probably require going in there with saws, clippers, and a pick-axe and creating something totally new. That could be OK in principle, but it would be a bigger project. It would be a lot more work, and it would require people to carry tools up. Doing that kind of significant change to the landscape is probably also something where we would need to build some kind of wider consensus among people who visit and care about the area. It would probably require some kind of explicit permission from the forest service, which so far has not been willing to communicate much when I've tried to talk to them.

So: --

Proposal A: Attempt to erase some of the braids that are more clearly useless.

Proposal B: Create a well constructed switchbacked trail that stays more to the left.

I'd be on board to start work on A any time. If it's B, then I think the first step would be to write up a more formal proposal and start doing outreach to try to get a consensus in favor of that proposal. Outreach could mean talking to people in clubs like the Sierra Club, SCMA, PCTA, and meetup groups. We could also post a notice on a tree at the site telling people how to get in touch and give comments. Schedule a zoom meeting for, say, Sep. 13. I think it would help if we had someone on board who had experience dealing with ANF. Maybe the PCTA, which does a lot of trail maintenance projects?

I’m game to do some work. I think I would rather bring cutting tools instead of a giant log.
Seems like a little recon would be in order to see where we can make a little improvement.
I’d like Sean to weigh in, he has some experience with local trail builders.

P.S. - Way too hot this weekend.

The good news is that I hiked up today and looked at the situation:





The bad news is that a little later, I tripped and broke my wrist, so I won't be doing any trail maintenance for about 6-8 weeks.


The two skinny rectangles in the drawing are two of the brown posts, about 1/2 and 3/4 of the way up the steep section.

The 2 switchbacks on the left side are lovely, wide, good footing, not showing signs of erosion.

The second good news is that these 2 switchbacks are perfectly positioned already in a way that's consistent with the posts.

The second bad news is that visually, people are going to see the awful, ratty, eroded corn maze on the right as a "shortcut," the seemingly obvious and direct route, while the left looks like some kind of inefficient detour to somewhere you don't want to go.

I think what's needed is an official-looking and persuasive sign at the massive junction:

HABITAT RESTORATION
KEEP OUT

<---- SUMMIT

SKI HUT
|
|
v

Man, that's bad about your wrist! Wishing you a good rehab - on the other hand, by then it should be cooler and maybe less traffic.
I've been running this around in my head and you are right, the problem starts pretty low on the trail. If we can re-route people from the flat area toward the left it will help, once they start gaining some altitude again it's hard to get out of the path chosen. Blocking those gulleys is key since they look like trails.

Sorry to hear about your wrist. That stretch of the route is "choose your own adventure." Trail building is an art. In the absence of a great trail, people (and animals) will naturally pick the best route and beat it in.

You are also dealing with the fact that the best route changes depending on weather/snow conditions, and whether you're ascending or descending. People might use your trail if it's generally along the best route. I would focus on identifying the most popular use paths and improving them.

Maybe the first thing to do is to eliminate the western braids. The SAR team has had a number of rescues of people ending up in Goode Canyon and missing the ridge altogether on descent. Perhaps that would be the biggest bang for the buck at this point. The route gets such heavy use that I suspect that without a real trail being cut, and rock or tree (with sign) blockage of other routes, the efforts might prove futile.

JerryN wrote: ↑Maybe the first thing to do is to eliminate the western braids. The SAR team has had a number of rescues of people ending up in Goode Canyon and missing the ridge altogether on descent. Perhaps that would be the biggest bang for the buck at this point. The route gets such heavy use that I suspect that without a real trail being cut, and rock or tree (with sign) blockage of other routes, the efforts might prove futile.

On the red section, the western part is the only one that resembles a well-designed trail that is not subject to bad erosion. On the purple/blue section, the purple that I blocked off is the western part.

I think the red section is an intractable problem, but it would be great if others could help keep the purple blocked off.