Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board Conditions On Baldy

It is heartbreaking watching these fires. Prayers, safety and peace for all.

Has anyone heard confirmation of the condition of the Sierra Ski Hut?

Great photos Shin! So sad to hear about this bear behavior.

Was the backpack unattended?

Mt. Baldy got snow.
Please get the update at: https://10064ft.com
You may see some activities on Ski hut camera this weekend.
Unfortunately, Mt. Baldy is still closed till 12/31/2025
Local Mt. Baldy regular, Jim, sent a letter with 10 reasons several weeks ago to the Deputy Forest Supervisor at Angeles National Forest requesting for timely re-opening of Mt. Baldy. The letter was well received on several points, but the decision had still remained the same. There may be a possibility to reopen one of the trails by the end of 2024 according to the response card from ANF.
If we express our views more, they may reconsider their decision sooner.

Icehouse canyon, 3T, and Manker flat/Fire Road loop are open. We can hike Ontario, Bighorn pk, Cucamonga, Etiwanda, Timber, Telegraph, and Thunder Mountain.

All fire departments have done extraordinal efforts to save Mt. Baldy community. We must thank you for their great efforts. The lower part, 7500 ft, of Bear canyon trail was completely consumed by the fire looking from Ontario peak.
Please spend as much money possible even a cup of coffee at local businesses in Mt. Baldy community.

Have a great hike except Mt. Baldy.
P.S.
Hi Snacking Bear,
I didn't know whether the pack was unattended or not.

For those looking for more information, and maybe some good news, about the trail closures on Mt Baldy, I contacted the Angeles National Forest office in Arcadia and pleaded our case for reopening the mountain. Pasted below is the response I got:

Hi Jim. I’m the District Ranger for the eastern half of the Angeles National Forest, including the Mt. Baldy area. I was forwarded your note to Deputy Forest Supervisor Tony Martinez concerning the closure of the Baldy Bowl Trail, and am responding on behalf of the Forest.
As I imagine you’re aware, the Bear Canyon and North Backbone trails to Baldy summit were both heavily impacted by the Bridge Fire and will be unsafe for hiking for a long while. Loss of tread on steep slopes, potential for landslides and debris flows, and lots of dead standing trees are all hazards that will persist along these trails for at least a couple years. As such, it’s imperative for us that the visiting public – who are often unaware of the normal hazards in wild lands, let alone post-fire hazards – are kept off of those trails until we can assess and mitigate those hazards to the extent possible. I agree with several of the ten points you listed on your original note to DFS Martinez, but I strongly disagree with your point #4, that “hikers will not be tempted to illegally use the trails that do need protection.” Since the closure order went into effect, our signs have been repeatedly removed or defaced. We have no regular presence at Baldy summit, nor would it be feasible to try and maintain a presence there. We know from long and constant experience that many visitors either do not read signs or do not heed their message. For all of these reasons, I have no confidence that the Baldy Bowl or Devil’s Backbone Trails can remain open and give access to Baldy summit, without some visitors (whether knowingly or not) then choosing to go down one of the other two trails that I think you agree need to remain closed. As such, the Baldy Bowl trail, the Devil’s Backbone Trail, and their surrounds will remain closed. Once we have gotten through the first post-fire winter and rainy season, we will reassess the hazards in this area.
You suggested on your added note that we might be keeping some trails closed because we are “fed up” with rescuing unprepared hikers. However, the Icehouse Canyon, Chapman, and Three Ts Trails all remain open, along with the road to the Baldy Notch. So there is still a beautiful and challenging loop hike option in the Baldy area that is available to everyone. Our closure order really is about the hazards on the landscape created by the Bridge Fire, and preventing access – whether direct or indirect – to those hazardous areas.
Thanks for your interest in the Angeles National Forest, and for your understanding.
Best,
Matthew Bokach
Monument Manager

We have seen these arguments before, for closures that lasted for years in the San Gorgonio and San Jacinto areas. While I can follow the words, the logic seems inconsistent with the fact that these areas are normally open in the winter, when the hazards are considerably greater than the ones cited. The closures we saw in the San Gorgonio and San Jacinto areas lasted for years, presumably because the FS could not or would not devote sufficient resources to correct the cited conditions in a timely manner. Even when they were corrected, there were long delays because of waits for 'inspections that have to be done'. The conclusion I draw is that the FS simply does not care about some of the most popular hiking areas in the country, and perhaps the world.

In followup, I also contacted Congresswoman Judy Chu, who is the representative for the district that includes Mt Baldy. I got a formal letter back, but the letter completely dodged the topic of reopening Baldy. Instead, it listed her accomplishments in Congress. I had hoped for better...

One thing is certain, the handful of individuals who are vandalizing the closure signs and barriers at the Manker Flats/Baldy Bowl trailhead are only reinforcing in the minds of the Forest Service that us hikers can't be trusted and don't deserve access to the mountain.

Thanks for trying. When was the last time anybody saw a uniformed FS Ranger on the trail? And was it an FS employee or a volunteer?

You wonder why I've been saying **** the gov't for a long while now...
Anti-human ********...

In Death Valley, they say you can't ride the damaged areas because it will cause more damage...the most moronic thing I've ever read...what's going to happen when they bring in the Heavy Equipment in (maybe) '26 to finally open...? I can tell you one pass with a Cat that is prepping for the repairs is going to make a few bike tracks disappear...

There should be a constructive way to resolve this social issue rather than expressing one-sided views to other. This is not the situation of who is right or wrong. There was an article on 12/20/2024 L.A. Times with various opinions about the Mt. Baldy closure till 12/31/2024.
There was a "To the Editor" comment by an individual on 12/24/2024 L.A. Times.

1) NF concerns about the safety of public from mudslides in fire damaged area and the recovery of natural habitat of the damaged area. Also, they "fed up" with unprepared hikers for SAR operations and vandalism by hikers.
2) The massive financial loss to local businesses and imposing inconveniences to local residents.
3) The environmentalist concerns about the environmental issues only.
4) Mt. Baldy is a very popular hiking and all other outdoor sports destinations to many Souther California residents.

This is my suggestions:
To close off only Bear canyon trail completely till the vegetation comes back satisfactory to environmentalist and NF by installing a visible sign for closure saying $5000.00 fine for entry or vandalism , one at near the visitor center and Manker flat. Keep open two other common trails, Devils backbone trail and Ski hut/Baldy Bowl trail, haven't been affected by the Bridge fire.
This will satisfy 80% of expectations of each party rather than the collision and explosion. Of course, all mountains along Icehouse canyon trails and 3Ts are open for public. But Mt. Baldy offers much more opportunities all the year round.

In order to meet the expectation of NF to Mt. Baldy visitors, all hikers should act responsibly with common sense and respect the law which we agree to obey. All the SAR operations in last several years could have been avoided if all hikers paid much more attention given to their conducts and consequences. Our tax dollar pays all the cost of necessary or unnecessary SAR operations, it is not free. Human cost can't be compensated or reversible for both sides.
We have to put our heads together to come up a good solution rather than arguing over forever.

Please ask your cat that there is a broiled fish with burned head, do you want to eat rest of the good part or not eat all because there is one part is burned. ( Hope, I am making some sense?)

Have a great Hike.

I think we all agree about such issues as hikers who litter and spray paint, hikers who trigger SAR operations by being unprepared and/or ignoring dangerous weather and snow conditions, people who start wildfires, and trail deterioration. We can sympathize with USFS decision makers who deplore the same things. But are they seeking to do anything constructive about these problems, or simply deploring them from their offices, and closing areas? If budgets are a problem, they could, for example, create and support a volunteer organization to provide boots on the ground. And have a website that provides information, advice and warnings, and serves as a vehicle for communication with hikers, in both directions.

Correction: till 12/31/2025, not 12/31/2024. I was wishful. Sorry.

An example of what another national forest, the Mt. Hood National Forest, is doing:

Mt. Hood National Forest

More proof the ANF is out-of-touch...

Spent some time yesterday looking at Regs...found this on an official (Angeles) FS Website:
Wilderness Guidelines and Leave No Trace Camping
If this isn't a stale webpage, it means that about 99+% of us are in violation of their version Wilderness Act...
I've been carrying a cell phone regularly for more than 30 years...even in the "brick" days, it was sitting in a pocket, or hanging from my belt...

Holy cow! If cell phones are banned, I assume the same is true of GPS and SOS devices.

Richard

I didn't carry a cell phone until after they were no longer "mechanized and motorized".

What octane fuel did your old phones use?


It appears that the page you referenced includes a cut and paste from a non-governmental organization. References from that page to their home page indicate that they have a great interest in raising money but provide little info.

Looking at individual national park and national forest web sites show warnings that cell service may not be available and the recommendation to use 911 if it is; no warnings against use.

Dale B. Dalrymple

I agree that it looked like a cut and paste from a non-governmental organization, and is not to be taken seriously. Still, it was on a USNF website. Whoever did the cut and paste either did not read it, or agreed with it.