Direct route from NW

GPS trace on 24k map. P1 is a parking spot by a stream on FR 402.
When I walked up to P2, I realized that a modest-clearance car/truck (e.g. my Subaru Outback AWD) could make it that far, saving nearly 500’ elevation gain and at least 1.6 miles RT. The switchbacks N of P2, as shown on the USGS map, have been obliterated by landslides. This route involves no side-hilling, no gratuitous elevation gain, and no (really) nasty talus. "fj" is a very faint junction where a good trail soon starts to the S around the side of the hill.


Post a Comment
Viewing: 1-4 of 4
A Bit

A Bit - Jun 7, 2008 9:47 pm - Voted 10/10

Nice route

I drove up & parked at P2. The road was in good shape with just a few rocks to deal with and sagebrush pushing in from the sides. No need for 4wd.


MoapaPk - Jun 17, 2008 7:45 pm - Hasn't voted

Re: Nice route

Yes, it looked more attractive than the normal sidehill slog! A friend took his HC 2WD up there. You just have to have faith that you can turn around up at the trees... because if you try to turn around down low, you can get in trouble with 2WD!


MoapaPk - Feb 10, 2009 7:50 pm - Hasn't voted

Re: Section = 1 square mile

The black lines are for the 1 km utm grid; the 1 km bar is correct. Sections are usually bounded by red lines, and aren't always consistent about size.

It's confusing on these maps -- sections are just sporadically indicated, but most newer maps have the UTM grid everywhere.


MoapaPk - Feb 11, 2009 2:17 am - Hasn't voted

Re: Section = 1 square mile

It's the UTM grid -- exactly 1 km sides so people can pick utm co-ords, with the corner of the map as reference. The same map has sections in a few places. The UTM grid is unrelated to the sections.

Look here for an example of inconsistent sections -- NW of waypoint WR4, e.g.

The 100k map for the same area has elevations in meters... and sections in miles! The sections are often slightly skewed (not exactly 1 mile wide), and are on the map almost for historical reasons.

Viewing: 1-4 of 4