Thoreau Falls Bridge Removal - 30 Comment Period for Revised Assessment

[peakbagger]

Okay if we really want to discuss inconsistencies in the Pemi, explain to me why a staffed improved campground, Thirteen Falls, exists in one of the most remote parts of the Pemi? I realize that it is there to manage a prior nuisance, but I don't see how its permitted in a wilderness area? There are specific exclusions for structures required for public safety in a wilderness area (which probably justifies the rebuilt bridge in the Great Gulf) and there is also an underlying goal of the wilderness act to encourage public access to these areas to see wilderness. Nowhere is there an exclusion for a recreational campground that I have found and yet it exists. At least when the Pemi wilderness was created it was very carefully crafted so the boundaries exclude Guyot and the suspension bridge on the AT just east of the upper Thoreau Fall Crossing but as far as I can see Thirteen Falls doesn't have this exclusion.

Restore the North Woods and their supporters were advocating for true landscape level wilderness in the northern border region of New England and especially western to central maine. They felt that inherently human presence impacted true wilderness and therefore advocated banning humans. Inconveniently pockets of civilization existed and they conveniently would ignore many of those areas in their grand plans. Roxanne Quimby was influenced by those groups and I believe she was on at least one board and her land purchases and management tended towards that approach. Her views or at least her limited public views tempered by her son have softened considerably in the intervening years.

IMHO, the FS is chronically short of money and of late when they do spend it its on the wrong things like the road to nowhere rebuild of the east side truck road whose only reason for existence is to service a pit toilet at a campground and the rapidly failing Lincoln Woods trail relocation. This bridge and the prior Pemi and Moriah Brook bridge require maintenance and occasional replacement and the FS is not interested in spending or budgeting the money in the long term. Give them a congressional earmark and they will merrily rebuild the bridge while sucking the associated project management funding to prop up the local budget.

 

[JoshandBaron]

Okay if we really want to discuss inconsistencies in the Pemi, explain to me why a staffed improved campground, Thirteen Falls, exists in one of the most remote parts of the Pemi? I realize that it is there to manage a prior nuisance, but I don't see how its permitted in a wilderness area? There are specific exclusions for structures required for public safety in a wilderness area (which probably justifies the rebuilt bridge in the Great Gulf) and there is also an underlying goal of the wilderness act to encourage public access to these areas to see wilderness. Nowhere is there an exclusion for a recreational campground that I have found and yet it exists. At least when the Pemi wilderness was created it was very carefully crafted so the boundaries exclude Guyot and the suspension bridge on the AT just east of the upper Thoreau Fall Crossing but as far as I can see Thirteen Falls doesn't have this exclusion.

A million times yes! I absolutely despise the existence of the 13 Falls campsite. Not only is it a developed camping area in a Wilderness area but the AMC gets to collect fees on it. They leave all their junk there all winter unattended and do absolutely nothing to enforce the 10 person limit.

 

[TJsName]

Agree with Becca. The specifics of specific bridges are a sidetrack to the larger issue. And sorry TJsN, but the larger governments are mostly made up of unelected bureaucracies. It's always worth *trying* to communicate, but these are no longer "governments of the people." It's tough enough over here in the Adirondacks dealing with NY State. I am continually grateful the feds are not over here, pulling out bridges and painting over trail markers.

I appreciate the point. I will add that even at smaller levels (think an HOA) there are still people who treat the Board as some mindless blob. There were people who would complain privately but never speak up, and would never volunteer. It's an unfortunate dynamic that develops. I never noticed a distinct political breaking to the phenomenon - I think it's really a personality thing for most, although undoubtedly learned by many through negative experiences. Not all who lead are leaders.

 

[skiguy]

A million times yes! I absolutely despise the existence of the 13 Falls campsite. Not only is it a developed camping area in a Wilderness area but the AMC gets to collect fees on it. They leave all their junk there all winter unattended and do absolutely nothing to enforce the 10 person limit.

Meanwhile up at Madison last year left behind poop cans were over flowing. Oh that's right they own that land.

 

[TJsName]

In a different thread, the Moderator said, "A lot of issues of interest to the VFTT community are political" but that alone would not necessarily be cause to censor a topic or shut down a discussion. I certainly agree with that and also think both Moderators have a deft and nuanced approach to their thankless task. It is always interesting however, when following threads like this one, to see how our political views inevitably find expression, sometimes obliquely and other times thinly veiled or read between the lines.

As far as the Thoreau Falls Bridge goes, I would like to see it replaced even though I will probably never use it. On the other hand, justifying it's removal as one interpretation of the existing Wilderness regulations is not an entirely unreasonable position. If you want to save the bridge, lobby your Senators with calls and emails. It ain't over till it's over and it ain't done till it's done.

I think the intention of the statement was to avoid the partisan aspects of politics - that is, to allow for open discussion but without wanton prejudice. We have many different view points and preferences that can often time align with political stances, but it doesn't make them inherently political. A dissenting point of view (or one interpreted as such) isn't automatically political or prejudicial. We sometimes phrase things ineloquently that can lead to misinterpretations; written statements to mostly anonymous strangers increases the difficulty and importance of setting tone. Some people use a stream-of-consciousness style, while others put more time into their prose. I tend to do that latter, but only because I'm pretty sure I'd come across as a huge jerk if I didn't.

I'll keep saying it - open discussions like these are valuable.

 

[Peaks]

In fairness to the USFS, they did put up counters on both sides of the bridge. Counters show low use, 17 passes max on one day of a long weekend. I suspect their conclusion will be removal without replacement unless there are compelling reasons otherwise. I suspect that it's hard to justify replacement with low use like this.

 

[egilbe]

In fairness to the USFS, they did put up counters on both sides of the bridge. Counters show low use, 17 passes max on one day of a long weekend. I suspect their conclusion will be removal without replacement unless there are compelling reasons otherwise. I suspect that it's hard to justify replacement with low use like this.

What happens when someone drowns trying to ford the river during, or immediately after a rain event? Or during early Summer? Do you put a price on one death? Two? Three? The entire point of the bridge is to prevent drowning deaths. Whenthe forest service is going to want to harvest the timber, are they going to change the Widerness designation at the whim of Congress? May as well replace the bridge. Its still a recreation area, in spite of the Wilderness designation.

 

[jfb]

Here's an interesting link: https://www.loc.gov/resource/conghear04.00170581027/?sp=9

 

[JoshandBaron]

What happens when someone drowns trying to ford the river during, or immediately after a rain event? Or during early Summer? Do you put a price on one death? Two? Three? The entire point of the bridge is to prevent drowning deaths. Whenthe forest service is going to want to harvest the timber, are they going to change the Widerness designation at the whim of Congress? May as well replace the bridge. Its still a recreation area, in spite of the Wilderness designation.

At what point are you responsible for your own decision making?

 

[egilbe]

At what point are you responsible for your own decision making?

At the point where it endangers your life. Decision making is a skill thats tough to learn when it endangers your life.

 

[skiguy]

At the point where it endangers your life. Decision making is a skill thats tough to learn when it endangers your life.

Personally I do not usually face a steep learning curve when something is endangering my life. Especially in the out doors. Although I have experienced other folks that their risk assessment is not well honed. As far as this bridge being removed it does further the agenda of the intent and or goals of the "Wilderness Act. Where do you draw the line for when the Government becomes responsible and not when it comes to public safety? On another note. There has been some comments here about a helicopter being used to remove materials. If so and they are flying in. Why not bring new material rather than having an empty load on the way in.

 

[JoshandBaron]

At the point where it endangers your life. Decision making is a skill thats tough to learn when it endangers your life.

I guess I have trouble with where that line is. Hiking is inherently dangerous and should be expected to be more difficult in areas designated as Wilderness. While they never get called into the TFT area for SAR missions with the current crossings required, they get called in to do SAR missions with some regularity for folks doing Owl's Head and having trouble with those crossings, shall we bridge them? Ban swimming at Franconia Falls? Fences on Bondcliff?

 

[skiguy]

Certainly would be an even muddier line to define if The AMC had gotten it's way and landed up putting in the Hut near Ethan Pond. Something tells me they would have thrown their weight around to get the Bridge rebuilt.

 

[sierra]

What happens when someone drowns trying to ford the river during, or immediately after a rain event? Or during early Summer? Do you put a price on one death? Two? Three? The entire point of the bridge is to prevent drowning deaths. Whenthe forest service is going to want to harvest the timber, are they going to change the Widerness designation at the whim of Congress? May as well replace the bridge. Its still a recreation area, in spite of the Wilderness designation.

Decisions made in the backcountry fall solely on the user. If you come to a crossing, and it's unbridged. You must assess and determine the best method, place and even if you should cross at all. If there was a bridge and it comes down, see above. Nobody is forcing anyone to cross a waterway. What about the shelters that have been removed? If someone hikes out to a shelter without knowing it has been removed and based on their thinking that it is still there, have no tent. If they perish during a storm that night, is the Forest service responsible?

 

[jfb]

What happens when someone drowns trying to ford the river during, or immediately after a rain event? Or during early Summer? Do you put a price on one death? Two? Three?

You might ask the same questions about skiing in Tuckerman's Ravine. At what point will skiing be prohibited?

 

[dug]

You might ask the same questions about skiing in Tuckerman's Ravine. At what point will skiing be prohibited?

Parking lots can be a bit slippery, too. The stretch from the door to the trunk, before microspikes can be put on, is downright deadly.

 

[Peaks]

What happens when someone drowns trying to ford the river during, or immediately after a rain event? Or during early Summer? Do you put a price on one death? Two? Three? The entire point of the bridge is to prevent drowning deaths. Whenthe forest service is going to want to harvest the timber, are they going to change the Widerness designation at the whim of Congress? May as well replace the bridge. Its still a recreation area, in spite of the Wilderness designation.

Please, submit a comment to the USFS. (And IMHO, it's a valid concern)

 

[JoshandBaron]

All comments must be filed by tomorrow.

 

[JoshandBaron]

http://indepthnh.org/2017/09/13/most-commenters-want-thoreau-falls-bridge-replaced-not-removed/

 

[Peaks]

http://indepthnh.org/2017/09/13/most-commenters-want-thoreau-falls-bridge-replaced-not-removed/

Thank you Josh and Baron for sharing the link. And thank you to the 34 others who submitted a comment in favor of replacing the bridge.