14ers.com

Some of the wording I've read in the other thread and in other web searches leaves me wondering. The signs (apparently at the junction and near the TH) that say the Bross trail is closed are NFS signs, not privately placed signs. Really what I'm getting at is: has any LANDOWNER said "no", or are the parties that are working to SECURE ACCESS (CFI, NFS, TMI, etc), worried about pissing off a landowner they can't locate who will in turn ACTIVELY deny access. A totally valid concern.

To be clear, I'm not trying to start a discussion about private property / whether you do or don't think it's ok to tresspass / fees / punishments / imminent domain / whatever. If you are one that thinks ignoring private property is ok, i think you aught to at least have the sense not to advertise it.

Has any landowner (of Bross) said "no?" Answer is "yes."

Regarding if the signs are USFS signs vs. privately placed, the kiosk at the Kite Lake trailhead was installed by CFI several years ago; with funding, design work, and construction assistance provided by the CMC. The sign up high at the trail junction to the Bross trail was placed, also several years ago, by CFI. The family that owns Lincoln, Democrat, half of Bross, was consulted during the signage process.

Just wondering if the guy on the ATV who said he belonged to a family owning part of Bross gave a name? This would be helpful to know.

The access issue for Bross isn't dead, but will take a lot of work. Conversations are starting up again. And to repeat, the names of all owners, including the fractional owners, are known.

Thanks Steve, that's exactly what I wanted to know. I hope the talks are fruitful.

The last time we were up there, we ran into a guy on an ATV who said his family partially owned one of the Bross summit claims, and he wanted to see it. We asked him for permission to go to the summit and he said "sure".

Same thing happened when we were there (probably the same guy). He was telling all climbers to go ahead and climb to the summit.

SteveBonowski wrote:Just wondering if the guy on the ATV who said he belonged to a family owning part of Bross gave a name? This would be helpful to know.

Sorry, it was about three years ago and I don't think he said. He did say he was visiting from out of state (I think Kansas).

I do appreciate the effort you and others are putting in to get this resolved, Steve. I hope my nitpicking doesn't come across as criticism, as I know how hard people are working on this.

FWIW, South Bross is on public land, if you need a substitute 14er summit, jdawud. Getting to it from the public trail without trespassing would be tricky, but should be possible. Here is a suggestion Bill made last year about this:
http://www.14ers.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3&p=408554" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've looked at Bills post on the "public summit", and that's what I'll probably do. I was hoping that perhaps the issue was close to being resolved, which was my reason for posting on this thread originally.

The problem is I "need" to climb Bross to complete my 14ers thru hike this summer. Since the "public summit" is soooooo close to the true summit and is only 25' lower (still 14k+), I think I will consider it valid to report it as "summited". I don't think there will be any way to do it without catching crap from people, the 'purists' will say that I should have trespassed, the law abiders will hang me if I do.

In the long distance backpacking community we say "hike your own hike", well I'll just have to "climb my own climb" too.

----Junaid
http://www.14ersthruhike.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

jdawud wrote:The problem is I "need" to climb Bross to complete my 14ers thru hike this summer. Since the "public summit" is soooooo close to the true summit and is only 25' lower (still 14k+), I think I will consider it valid to report it as "summited". I don't think there will be any way to do it without catching crap from people, the 'purists' will say that I should have trespassed, the law abiders will hang me if I do.

I'm sure most people wouldn't consider 25' a big deal, especially on a mountain like Bross. I've not done it yet, but it looks like the terrain is about as easy as you can get.

I don't think there will be any way to do it without catching crap from people, the 'purists' will say that I should have trespassed, the law abiders will hang me if I do.

I wouldn't worry about the "purist" if they really do complain. Technically, on Kanchenjunga until recently, you were supposed to stop a few feet away from the summit in respect to the locals feelings that the mountain is sacred. For decades, the true summit remained untrodden until someone intentionally broke the pact. All those people stopping a few feet from the summit out of respect still got credit for the peak. The first ascent of Kanchenjunga is always quoted as being in 1955. The deal was that you were to climb as high as possible to a point that you were 100% positive you were to reach the summit if you wanted to. Expeditions stopped 15-20 feet from the summit.

Sorry, it was about three years ago and I don't think he said. He did say he was visiting from out of state (I think Kansas).

Was it on July 4, 2009 by chance? Just wondering if it was the same incident.

.

bonehead wrote:From Urban Dictionary "jdawud" isn't defined yet.

Try searching users at 14ers.com? Or I am missing the subtle saracasm again?

So are there any access issues if I want to try Democrat's North Ridge this summer?

Scott P wrote:

Sorry, it was about three years ago and I don't think he said. He did say he was visiting from out of state (I think Kansas).

Was it on July 4, 2009 by chance? Just wondering if it was the same incident.

No, it was September 26, 2010. There are a lot of fractional Bross owners out there, I guess.