In a kind-of-big-deal-news-for-hikers story, the Pasadena Star-Newsis reporting that Caltrans is starting a process that would rebuild and reopen a portion of CA-39 that’s been closed for 30 years.
CA-39 is a road you probably haven’t driven very far on. It doesn’t even show up on Google Maps until you’re almost at street view — but it used to be an important north-south route into the Angeles National Forest, traveling from Azusa up the North Fork of the San Gabriel River, skirting big peaks like Mount Islip and South Mount Hawkins before meandering to Crystal Lake Campground and meeting up with the Angeles Crest Highway at Islip Saddle.
The four mile stretch of road south of the Saddle has been closed since ‘78, due to fires, mudslides, and erosion, and the area from Crystal Lake down to the East Fork since the 2002 Curve Fire, so I’ve never even set tire on the road yet — and have only seen it from a distance on Kratka Ridge.
The whole area’s kind of a no-cars-land, actually, with the Angeles Crest closed from Islip Saddle to Vincent Gap for 4 years due to landslides, washouts, and an endangered frog (although it’s rumored to reopen this spring).
Now, all of a sudden, Caltrans is investigating the environmental impact of opening the entire road up again, mainly to make it easier for fire departments and rescue crews to access the deeper reaches of the San Gabriels. Opponents are saying an active road in the area would be dangerous to the region’s population of Bighorn Sheep.
… and so begins the Nature Lovers’ Dilemma. Making access easier into the mountains is great — and I sure would like to be able to get into Crystal Lake to tackle Mount Islip instead of having to park on the Angeles Crest and walk along the pavement for a few miles … but that area of the Forest has been so quiet for so long, I’d hate to see it overrun like Runyon, Switzer’s, or Santa Anita Canyon just because it’s become easy to get to. Or, as Edward Abbey warned:
“The fat pink slobs who go roaring over the landscape in these over-sized over-priced over-advertised mechanical mastodons are people too lazy to walk, too ignorant to saddle a horse, too cheap and clumsy to paddle a canoe. Like cattle or sheep, they travel in herds, scared to death of going anywhere alone, and they leave their sign and spoor all over the back country: Coors beer cans, Styrofoam cups, plastic spoons, balls of Kleenex, wads of toilet paper, spent cartridge shells, crushed gopher snakes, smashed sagebrush, broken trees, dead chipmunks, wounded deer, eroded trails, bullet-riddled petroglyphs, spray-painted signatures, vandalized Indian ruins, fouled-up waterholes, polluted springs and smoldering campfires piled with incombustible tinfoil, filter tips, broken bottles. Etc.”
So we know where the Desert Anarchist would probably stand. What about you? Should the 39 be open only to emergency vehicles past Crystal Lake? Or does the prospect of a shorter drive to the trailhead entice your more?
Web Hosting by ReadySetConnect
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Boy, I can’t wait for those guys who drive their trucks around the river beds, those dudes who shoot their guns and the people who fill the river with trash and needles to spread to other parts of the park!
I don’t suggest driving up the 39 if you can help it. It’s kind of hell over there.
One could argue that some of the arguments against opening the road are weak; however, I have not heard of one argument for opening the road that doesn’t sound like b.s.
The idea of it being an ‘evacuation route’ is laughable. The ACH is sufficient.
The idea that it will open up people to new areas is false. The ACH goes to Islip Saddle, and the time from La Canada to Islip (~50 min or less) is less than it would be from Asuza to Islip via the 39.
Sure, if people had the money to just throw around, it would be nice. But these days, when people / companies should be learning about spending smartly, the idea is ridiculous.
I will be going to the meeting on the 24′th in Azusa at the Senior Center.
What meeting on the 24th? where did you learn about it (I didn’t see it mentioned in the article)?
Thanks.
> What meeting on the 24th? where did
> you learn about it (I didn’t see it
> mentioned in the article)?
There have been a number of newspaper articles which cover the meeting, details of which can be found at:
http://sangabrielmnts.myfreeforum.org/Highway_39_To_2_past_Crystal_Lake_to_Rebuild_Reopen_about1181.html
The answer to the disgusting abuse of the Angeles National Forest is to add more forest rangers and police. Currently there is not enough funding. More attention needs to be drawn to this issue immediately with great urgency. We need to protect our forests from vandals, poachers, recreationally irresponsible/uneducated and the polluters.
This is not a cultural hurdle but a human hurdle. Until the budget is available to police these offenders, we need to band together and volunteer.
I don’t think it should open all the way up regardless. That particular area is even more erosion heavy than the many wacky sections of the ACH that keep having issues (and thank everything that’s finally open again!) Even in the photo you posted from Kratka ridge, you can see all the rock fall area digging clear patches in the slopes both above and below the road. Everything I’ve ever read about it implies it was pretty much always a terrible idea of a road. That said, I’m psyched for them to reopen it *to* Crystal Lake, so I can finally go see some of that stuff!
I went up 39 many times in the 60’s and 70’s. Beyond Crystal Lake there are several very narrow, sharply curved sections (with breathtaking drop- offs and views) that required drivers to go slow and carefully pass folks coming down. One winter I was rewarded for the effort with a hike around Islip Saddle after an ice storm. Every tree, pine needle, rock and shrub was encased in 1/4 inch of crystal clear ice, and the ground was covered in 6 to 12 inch billows of long feathery ice crystals. The most reasonable solution to reopening 39 to Angeles Crest is a toll road. Ten or twenty dollars toll per car might be enough to justify the effort and expense for repairs, and discourage overuse that often leads to misuse. Passing through the toll booth could require signing liability waivers that make sure that visitors could be held responsible for their own safety and any damage they did. Pull a pine cone off a tree, get arrested. Litter, get arrested. Once the rules are plainly explained, most folks are smart enough to play safely. But if they can not, hey, they signed a waiver!!
I think John’s idea is the best I’ve heard yet. Kudos John
I would like it if I could camp up at Crystal Lake once again. If paying a toll will allow me to take my family camping this close to home i would be willing to pay the 10 or 20 bucks to to show my son how wonderful our local mountains really are. Also if paying a toll will keep out the people who don’t know how to clean up after them selves it would make it that much easier to pay.