From: eric@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Hirst)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing,rec.backcountry
Subject: Cairns, Flags, and Fixed Wands
Date: 25 Jul 92 00:02:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: milton.eric.712022536
Organization: University of Washington

(Excuse me if this has been covered before in r.b. -- if it has, I wasn't
listening.)

While climbers hem and haw about the merits/evils of bolts, I haven't
heard much fuss over the use of the above three common modifications
to backcountry routes.  While the oft-touted Principle of First Ascent
usually determines who decides where the bolts do or do not go on a
rock face, this principle seems to be ignored wholesale in other climbing
and hiking situations.

Obviously, cairns, flags, wands, and even trails can be removed a lot
easier than bolt holes, and it is hard to argue against a set of cairns
which prevents erosion and protects plant life.  But it seems that once
a line has been marked, more people will start using it, it will appear
on a map or in a book, people will begin to follow it in all conditions
without map or compass, and suddenly it becomes unsafe to remove the markings.
Even if they are removed, some large well meaning organization will probably
soon replace them.  The result is that the change to the scenery is effectively
permanent.

Here's my test case: You judge my actions.

Last weekend, I was headed up an open rocky slope from Upper Enchantment Basin
to the summit of Little Annapurna.  Routefinding in this spot is extremely
simple, and could be done in a whiteout with a compass by about anyone and
without a compass by most.  To reach the summit from the well marked basin
trail, go generally east and up (Class II).  To get back to the the basin
trail, go west and down.  No vegetation, no steep snow, no route substantially
easier or more difficult than the route 15 feet to either side of it.  No
sudden dropoffs except east off the summit ridge.  No trail is marked on any
map I know of.  The basin is approximately 13 miles and 7000 feet from the
road for anyone without an ice ax or an attitude.  Accurate topos available
to all for a modest fee. 

Anyway, up I went, along with Tim and Gordie, immensely enjoying the scenery
as it grew more and more spectacular, and immensely enjoying the freedom of
motion afforded by the open, rocky, trail-less terrain.  Although many have
traipsed up this peak, there was absolutely no evidence of human activity,
until. . . you guessed it.

Without pausing, I obliterated the cairn with a gentle kick, then another.
As I was setting my sights on a third, Tim exploded at me, profoundly pissed.
I'll leave out the expletives, but his basic argument was that it was not for
me to judge whether people with weaker routefinding skills should be excluded
from any given spot in the mountains.  My basic argument is that the local
Mountaineers are out of control and are willing to make every mountain as
accessible to as many people as they can get away with.  By knocking down
those cairns, I was trying to save yet another mountain from domestication
before doing so could introduce any risk to others who might attempt it bare
naked with wet hair expecting a graded trail.

Incidentally, I was relieved to find that there was no summit register to
litter the spectacular exposed summit.  Some spots just don't seem to need
them.

So, was I nice, or was I naughty?

Eric Hirst
eric@milton.u.washington.edu