Sawmill Trail near Idywild

[inVERt'D]

No, I didn't see it, but I'll keep my eyes open.

[Jay USN]

To All Jeepers:
This is to let you know that the Sawmill Trail near Idylwild, designated 7S05 is having a problem with illegal trails being cut out near the Kiln. The Forest Service is asking for volunteers to help block these trails toward the end of July. Unfortunately this illegal activity has been linked to MJR due to a run that was posted to that trail back in 2009. As you know (or should know) MJR does not condone or support any illegal off road activity and will not tolerate any such behavior. Please stay on the designated trails no matter where you are. It's what's best for us all.
If you would like to volunteer a day or two to help block the illegal trail, please post up here or send me a PM with your information and I will get you in touch with the right people.

Thanks to all of you who wheel responsibly.

Kurt

Kurt, I'm a new MJR member but not new to wheeling. Found this post, signed up and have some questions about the trail in question.

I did Sawmill last year - found a nice post on someone else's run report. Did my own research very carefully and learned that what the Forest Service calls the Sawmill Trail (for hiking) is not the same as what MJR, myself, and others drove up, apparently also called the Sawmill Trail.

According to the FS map, the "hiking Sawmill" intersects with 7S02 near the spur road to the equipment towers. The "driving Sawmill," which I drove, intersects with 7S02 at Stump Springs campground, about 1 mile further toward Toro Peak. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME ROUTE. See map in next post.

Careful examination of Google earth shows both trails leaving from the kiln turnaround -- one heading west, clearly the hiking trail, and one heading basically southeast, the driving trail. See image in next post.

Also, the Forest Service website info is terribly confusing. I found the following info last year on the Forest Service site, which convinced me that the driving Sawmill is legit:

[COLOR="#0000CD"]Sawmill Trail 5E02 -- Visitors can ride a horse or bicycle, hike, or use a four-wheel drive vehicle up the rough Sawmill Truck Trail road. The trail starts at the top of the road and connects with Santa Rosa Mountain Road. The road and trail ascend 3000’ to 7000’ and are within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. [/COLOR]

So the following questions beg an answer:

1) Am I right that there is some confusion between the hiking trail to 7S02 from the kiln, and the wheeling trail to 7S02 from the kiln? Might we be confused? Is the FS being clear about it themselves?

2) Kurt, exactly where was the illegal trail made? Along the hiking route or the driving route?

3) If we drive an old jeep road, and don't leave it, are we really guilty of making illegal trails? Because there is no sign prohibiting use of the "driving Sawmill" and certainly no indication that the FS wants us to stop at the kiln.

3) And, perhaps most important, does the Forest Service want to stop all wheeling beyond the kiln in the future?

I'm willing and able to help out with the trail work by the way.

Jay

[Jay USN]

Map where the hiking Sawmill and the driving Sawmill intersect with 7S02:



Google sat map showing that the driving Sawmill and hiking Sawmill diverge in separate directions from the kiln parking area.

[FishPOET]

7S02 Santa Rosa Mountain is different than 7S01 or 7S05 and until your post has not yet been discussed other than some folks were assuming it was part of the loop.

http://www.myjeeprocks.com/forums/showthread.php/19145



7S02 starts at Hwy 74 and dead ends at the Santa Rosa Indian Reservation before it gets to Toro Peak.

[Jay USN]

7S02 Santa Rosa Mountain is different than 7S01 or 7S05 and until your post has not yet been discussed other than some folks were assuming it was part of the loop.

http://www.myjeeprocks.com/forums/showthread.php/19145



7S02 starts at Hwy 74 and dead ends at the Santa Rosa Indian Reservation before it gets to Toro Peak.

I've driven to the top of Santa Rosa both ways, via 7S02 and 7S01. I guess you can turn both roads into a loop, starting and ending at CA-74 at different locations.

[FishPOET]

I've driven to the top of Santa Rosa both ways, via 7S02 and 7S01. I guess you can turn both roads into a loop, starting and ending at CA-74 at different locations.

It is not a loop. 7S01 ends at the wilderness border at the kiln.

[Russ Chung]

.....
1) Am I right that there is some confusion between the hiking trail to 7S02 from the kiln, and the wheeling trail to 7S02 from the kiln? Might we be confused? Is the FS being clear about it themselves?
.....
3) If we drive an old jeep road, and don't leave it, are we really guilty of making illegal trails? Because there is no sign prohibiting use of the "driving Sawmill" and certainly no indication that the FS wants us to stop at the kiln.

3) And, perhaps most important, does the Forest Service want to stop all wheeling beyond the kiln in the future?
.....

Jay

Jay,

You are absolutely right. There is a lot of confusion about the Sawmill Trail and what are legal and illegal routes. FWIW, the official, authoritative document is the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) which does not show any authorized motorized routes in the area. However, as Doug (FishPOET) pointed out in an earlier post, the MVUM, which was published two years ago, has many errors and omissions which the FS has promised to correct. And as everyone has already stated, there is no signage to indicate that the route(s) are closed to motorized vehicles.

Apparently, John Ladley of the Forest Service is taking the current MVUM as gospel and therefore, he considers all of those routes to be illegal for motorized vehicles. (I'm just guessing because I've never met him and never talked to him; I'm basing my opinion on what I've read in this thread).

I cleaned my hard drive earlier this year and I deleted all of the maps that I downloaded during the Route Planning process, so I don't know if the omission of those routes was deliberate or accidental.

Before we volunteer to help close illegal trails, we should find out what the FS considers to be illegal and what they want closed to motorized travel. I don't want to show up for a work party and find out that I'm helping to close a trail that should remain open.

Russ

[inVERt'D]

Before we volunteer to help close illegal trails, we should find out what the FS considers to be illegal and what they want closed to motorized travel. I don't want to show up for a work party and find out that I'm helping to close a trail that should remain open.

Russ

My thoughts exactly, especially since I get the impression that someone may be on a fishing expedition. Sometimes, however, the best way to sort things out may be in person, and it's not a long drive for me.

[FishPOET]

I have talked with both Travis Mason and Greg Hoffman of the SBNF earlier this week. 7S01 is an open legal route up to the kiln. They are planning on putting fencing up across 7S01 at the kiln and on 7S02C blocking off motorized vehicle access to the wilderness.

[Jay USN]

Jay,

You are absolutely right. There is a lot of confusion about the Sawmill Trail and what are legal and illegal routes. FWIW, the official, authoritative document is the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) which does not show any authorized motorized routes in the area. However, as Doug (FishPOET) pointed out in an earlier post, the MVUM, which was published two years ago, has many errors and omissions which the FS has promised to correct. And as everyone has already stated, there is no signage to indicate that the route(s) are closed to motorized vehicles.

Apparently, John Ladley of the Forest Service is taking the current MVUM as gospel and therefore, he considers all of those routes to be illegal for motorized vehicles. (I'm just guessing because I've never met him and never talked to him; I'm basing my opinion on what I've read in this thread).

I cleaned my hard drive earlier this year and I deleted all of the maps that I downloaded during the Route Planning process, so I don't know if the omission of those routes was deliberate or accidental.

Before we volunteer to help close illegal trails, we should find out what the FS considers to be illegal and what they want closed to motorized travel. I don't want to show up for a work party and find out that I'm helping to close a trail that should remain open.

Russ

Appreciate your perspective.

I'll monitor this webpage to see what Kurt learns. If there's to be a work party this month something better be happening pretty soon.

Also, I'll suggest that if the issue is still unresolved, and the FS is amenable, that we weigh in about keeping the jeep trail open, and adopt it for trail maintenance.

[Jay USN]

I have talked with both Travis Mason and Greg Hoffman of the SBNF earlier this week. 7S01 is an open legal route up to the kiln. They are planning on putting fencing up across 7S01 at the kiln and on 7S02C blocking off motorized vehicle access to the wilderness.

Timeframe? If that's the solution do they still need a work party?

[curtis]

Questions
1. Is 7S02A a legal Trail?
2. How long is 7S02C?
3. What possible good does it do to block 7S02c ( which connects 7S02A and 7S01)
4. Alot of trails border the Wilderness and go through the wilderness, so whats the difference on this trail?

Also say I want to take my Grand kids to see the Kiln and Toro Peak before I get to old. So to go to the Klin and then back track down to 74 and back up 7S02A to toro peak is more strain on the environment than going up 7S02C. So give me a break!!

[RAT]

Questions
1. Is 7S02A a legal Trail?
2. How long is 7S02C?
3. What possible good does it do to block 7S02c ( which connects 7S02A and 7S01)
4. Alot of trails border the Wilderness and go through the wilderness, so whats the difference on this trail?

Also say I want to take my Grand kids to see the Kiln and Toro Peak before I get to old. So to go to the Klin and then back track down to 74 and back up 7S02A to toro peak is more strain on the environment than going up 7S02C. So give me a break!!

All this presents no better reason to get involved. Getting out there to see what is going on goes so much farther than any other type of action.

[Jay USN]

All this presents no better reason to get involved. Getting out there to see what is going on goes so much farther than any other type of action.

Forgive me for being dense, but are you suggesting that the club gather at the spot and review things, or that we meet with the Forest Service before they make a final judgment on what to do? I think the latter is very advisable. And sooner rather than later.

[RAT]

It is a suggestion that more people get involved. But I am planning to be out there if and when this work day is scheduled.