HikeArizona.COM

Pulled out of my driveway and noticed the orange glow in the pre-dawn hour coming from Pusch Ridge. Then drove down the block and noticed the same glow coming from the Tortolita's.

The fire in the Pusch Ridge Wilderness is below Bighorn Peak and doesn't appear to be hitting Pusch Peak or the Cleaver yet. Luckily it's not windy this morning or we could have a huge mess on our hands.

Over in the Tortolita's as best as I can figure it looks like the fire is at the very end of the Wild Burro trail near where it intersects with the Ridgeline trail.

Last news report I saw was that the Pusch Ridge fire is being monitored and can't be accessed due to the terrain. Our local fire crews are all over in the Tortolita's working on it.

--------
2020-06-29 Changed Subject from Two Fires In NW Tucson to Bighorn Fire since the other was contained long ago and did not affect hiking much if any.

https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/6741/

That has got to be one of the dumbest and illogical things I've seen. An non-elected bureaucrat is tyrannically passing a decree which is contradictory in nature and exempts a politically powerful organization from the decree. Oh, and the BS justification is, "The purpose of this Order is to protect public health and safety from potential hazards related to the Bighorn Fire." Never mind the fire ended 9 months ago! Talk about just stupid.

I can drive on roads as they appear in the burn scar in the order, and walk off trail over huge areas of the burn scar, but hiking Romero Canyon is unlawful? However, if I come from Sabino on the AZ Trail, I can hike that just fine. Except, once past the Wilderness of Rocks Trail, I have to stay low in the Wilderness of Rocks and on the AZT to remain lawful, as continuing up the Mount Lemmon Trail is unlawful, but only if on trail. I can freely enter the forest off trail, in that area, and being on forest roads is also entirely lawful.

So, in conclusion, someone who should have no authority over you, for your own health and safety, is closing trails, but not the forest areas directly off trail, with the exception of specific trails so long as part of the AZT, regardless of their conditions or whether they may or may not be subject to some hazard from the long out fire (but as written not erosion or other rainfall related hazards post fire), but you can be on roads all over the burn scar, and all over the forest areas in the burn scar so long as NOT on a trail. Talk about retards retarding!

Guess, I'll be ignore this idiocy.

http://chng.it/LCdCDb2vVg

There. Squeek! Squeek! Make some noise, and irritate these unaccountable tyrants.

Feel free to share this on Facebook, in facebook groups, and in meetup groups, anywhere people might have interest in logical, well managed forests and recreational access to them.

@Jim_H
Sounds good to me.. time to repost your recent triplog and photoset to The Forbidden Zone.

Jim_H wrote:Feel free to share

Where's the "shared on Twitter" guy when you need him!?

@chumley
Who was that?

@andrewp
I was scanning old posts thinking I might find a link to the order which did expire November 1. I didn't imagine that, which is good, but they had extended that? I don't supposed that order exists anywhere.

Then again, maybe who cares, as plenty of people have been hiking these trails, and will continue to do so until it becomes too hot. Sadly, Romero Canyon and Catalina SP to Mt Lemmon are a little different, as that starts on state park land and the added layer can cause put off some hikers.

The order never made much sense to me. It seemed like there were a couple things they were unwilling to prohibit, and those exceptions made a mockery of everything else.

Jim_H wrote:I was scanning old posts thinking I might find a link to the order which did expire November 1. I didn't imagine that, which is good, but they had extended that? I don't supposed that order exists anywhere.

@Jim_H
The original order, which was set to expire in November, was modified at least once prior to that date and that's what opened Sabino Canyon as well as the unburned sections of trail. This happened in, I think, early October. Prior to expiration the order was modified again which included an extension to May of this year as well as the opening of additional trails. There were more modifications since then which opened up more trails. The latest update (from 4/1/21) changed the expiration date again and actually cleaned up some of the ambiguous language. The primary contradiction is still there in that it's perfectly OK to be inside the burn scar as long as you aren't on a trail.

AFAIK it was always a modification to the original order.

@andrewp
So, this most recent stupidity is an improvement?!? Oh, my god. No wonder myself and several others just stopped paying attention.

Jim_H wrote:Then again, maybe who cares, as plenty of people have been hiking these trails, and will continue to do so until it becomes too hot. Sadly, Romero Canyon and Catalina SP to Mt Lemmon are a little different, as that starts on state park land and the added layer can cause put off some hikers.

So to muddy the waters, I went up Pima Canyon yesterday and at least to the portion up to the dam the burn scar is tough to see. It's starting to green up and I had to stop a few times to see where exactly it was. But the trail itself is in fantastic shape, it's cleaner than it's ever been.

The closure from CSP will probably be the only one that people take notice of, they are the only trails that have signs and barriers to entry.

Jim_H wrote:So, this most recent stupidity is an improvement?!?

@Jim_H

Yeah, at a minimum I think that they proofread this one.

In looking at it again it appears that the other major change here (aside from the date) is that this removed all restrictions on the camping and picnic sites as well as Rose Canyon.

@SpiderLegs
I would have been perfectly willing to ignore those, too. My shuttle hiking partner is understandably less enthusiastic about doing so, since they also would have come from 6 hours away. I won't be changing anything for front range hikes, however. Neither is anyone else, for that matter. Why do they bother with these asinine confusing, contradictory orders that they don't enforce and no one observes? It's like they want to play some ridiculous game.

@andrewp So, camp grounds are open, the overall forest area is open, but certain lengths of trails are theoretically closed? See my last sentence to Spiderlegs. This is insanity.

Weird, they took the closure signs down at the Finger Rock th so i thought it was open. Plus there were quite a few people hiking to Kimball the day I did it.

@RedwallNHops
People going to The Window too.

At last count, 4 people care!

@Pivo
If only Cindy Coffer Chojnacky had asked Gregg Sasek why blackened snags of burned pine and oak are a hazard to hikers on trails, but not a hazard to hikers off trails.

I think this quote from the article sums it all up.

I am not in a hurry to reopen

Gotta love the FS finding another way to take the summer off

@friendofThundergod
Reading comprehension helps with context.

The Forest Service will have the final say, but I am not in a hurry to reopen the Bypass route,” he said

The person who said this does not work for the forest service. Rather, he is Matthew Nelson, director of the Arizona Trail Association.

@chumley
Reading comprehension is apparently not my strong point, similar to how being a decent person is not your strong point.