With only 4 miles between us and a hot shower, we strolled right past the mouth of Kane Gulch on our way to check out Junction Ruin. Then, the plan was to tick off another mile - or so - of the trail out, in search of a nice slickrock camp site for the night.
But oh, how plans change.
When visiting rock art and ruin sites, be respectful.
This is most easily done by following the Leave No Trace principles; leaving the place exactly as you found it and taking with you only photographs and memories. In case that is not clear enough for some reason, here are examples of respectful behaviors:
High above the wash, there was no way we were going to get ourselves up to this gem of a ruin.
As we approached the enormous alcove in which Junction Ruin sat, it began to rain. The storm we'd expected on the previous day was finally rolling through, and while the raindrops were huge, the shower passed quickly, all evidence of the moisture gone in a matter of moments.
While we grumble about the gray skies at home, here, they were a treat!
A dry spot to defy gravity.
Junction Ruin was named because of its location at the confluence of Grand Gulch and Kane Gulch. It dates to Basketmaker II times, though there is little evidence that remains. Pueblo II and Ill times are better represented. An extensive site consisting of three levels, the lower level contains 28 features, the middle includes 14, and the upper alcove, which is now inaccessible, consists of 17 features.
The function of individual structures may not always be apparent, but storage cysts and structures, habitation rooms, kivas, and defensive structures have all been identified at this site. There is also a strong representation of varying architectural types here, including both wet and dry laid adobe masonry and jacal, or waddle and daub (mud plaster laid over a matrix of sticks).
Specific structures like storage cysts and other above-ground structures were used to store food (corns, beans, and squash) or water. Storage structures tend to be smaller with smaller entryways, which would have been closed using a rock or door slab. At some of the storage units here, you can still see the lintel across the inside top of the doorway, which prevented the door slabs from falling inward. Storage units generally lack any soot and smoke blackening.
Habitation rooms tend to be larger and have thicker walls and a larger entrance than storage units. The walls and ceilings are typically blackened from smoke and soot, indicating that the Ancestral Puebloans made fires inside for warmth or cooking. Ventilators and deflectors are also generally present as a means of ventilating smoke from the structure, similar to a modern chimney.
Three of the features on the main lower level are kivas. They would have had roof beams and roofing material such as juniper bark, and an opening would have been present to enter from the roof into the kiva by use of a ladder. The ventilator shafts, small niches, benches, and plaster are still visible.
The defensive structures at this site have been identified as the entire upper level. To the left of the site and midway up is a ladder platform, which seems to have provided the only access to this upper level. If you look closely above the platform, you will see the remains of a portion of the original ladder, which has now been bolted into the wall for stabilization purposes.
I don't care what the BLM says, a few sticks do not make a functional ladder (on the left).
The red mortar remnants on the ceilings and walls to the back of the alcove indicate that there had been a wall or previous structure there which has since fallen.
The rock art at the site includes both petroglyphs (pecked images) and pictographs (painted). There are numerous positive and negative handprints using white and red paint. Yellow and orange abstracts, spirals, and anthropomorphs are also present.
Memories of those who enjoyed this place before us.
The large rock in the middle of the lower level contains many grinding areas, stone manos to grind corn, while many of the grooves may have been used for sharpening these grinding tools.
A grinding slick (left) and metate (right), along with two manos.
Some of the artifacts collected from this site by early archeologists included ceramics, ground stone, lithics, bone tools, and perishable artifacts including sandals; cordage, textiles, basketry, corn, squash, wood, hide, and coprolites. Information can be gained from these artifacts now and in the future with new and updated scientific technology.
Junction Ruin was stabilized in 1966 and again in 1984. Careful site visitation will aid in keeping this site from further deterioration. The rock art was documented in 1992 and was part of a research program in conjunction with the BLM and Earthwatch.
BLM Info Sign
Climbing into the lowest level of the alcove, a small room off to the side - away from the heaviest traffic, and thus in better condition than most of the more accessible ruins - turned out to be my favorite. Perched on a narrow shelf, it appeared to have had several phases of construction. First, the larger main room, originally with two entrances. Then, an addition on the back. And at some time, sealing up of the entrance facing away from the cliff.
There's a lot of history to see here when you look closely.
The main lower-level structures of Junction Ruin.
Kiva view.
Shadow of the past.
After looking around, reading through the information thoughtfully provided by the BLM, and @mini.turbodb's first unsupervised experience of signing a logbook, a quick time check - it was 5:45pm - reminded us that we'd still planned to head a little way up Kane Gulch to find camp for the night. This obviously wasn't necessary to stay on schedule - we were a full day ahead of our plan at this point. Rather, after a single night in the tent, we all preferred the slickrock-under-the-stars experience and hoped that a shelf or two would present themselves as we climbed out of the canyon.
The only problem was that we were all ready to be done for the day, and after a quick chat with a mom and son who'd come down through Kane Gulch - who estimated it was a couple miles to the flat slickrock site they'd seen on the way down - we decided we'd search around the junction a bit more to see if we could find something acceptable.
Visiting Grand Gulch for a day hike requires a pass, and camping below the rim requires an overnight permit. Both are inexpensive and help to fund our public lands. They need our support more than ever.
For more information, check out BLM Utah Cedar Mesa Permits and Passes Information.
Flat enough.
What we found wasn't perfect, but with two-and-a-half sleeping spots that didn't offer perilous ramps over the 20-foot-tall drop to the bottom of the wash, we decided the risk - with a few strategically placed rocks - was worth it. As a bonus, it had a great view!
We admired some of the upper-level structures of Junction Ruin throughout the evening.
This would be our last dinner on the trail, and we had the choice between two of our favorite Peak Refuel options: Chicken Pesto Pasta or Sweet Pork & Rice. Ultimately we decided on the pork, and before long the little Jetboil was bubbling away with all the cooking necessary for our tasty treats.
This really is an amazing little bit of gear for boiling water. Three cups in less than three minutes.
The wind picked up as we ate, making us doubly glad for our mostly-dust-free slickrock site as we watched the sand swirl around those camped in the wash below. And, as the light faded from the sky, it was a pleasure to hear - from her own mouth - how @mini.turbodb had mostly enjoyed everything we'd done, even if she'd complained along the way.
It was only a few minutes after sunset when we crawled into our bags, dreams of showers dancing through our heads.
I woke up in the middle of the night just as the moon was rising, illuminating the wall with Junction Ruin, but not yet bright enough to obscure the stars.
The following morning...
We were all up with the sun the next morning. Our last night on the trail had been the coldest of the bunch and while we'd been warm in our bags, we were looking forward to getting the blood moving as we ascended some 700 feet over Kane Gulch's 3.5-mile length.
Last breakfast of protein bars. Today's menu was s'mores. We did not want s'more after the first bar.
Time to up!
We'd stumbled into a great decision when we'd decided to camp at the junction the previous evening; our bodies mostly recharged as we set off up the canyon in good spirits. The elevation profile for the day would be S-shaped - it'd start with a gradual slope, followed by increasingly steeper terrain until we reached the canyon rim, at which point it'd taper off again - a nice taper-in-and-out for our final push.
As we shuffled through a grove of oak, last fall's leaves created a monochromatic mosaic on the ground.
Hello, spring.
Before long we were gaining elevation, and I was keeping an eye out for the relatively few cultural sites I'd marked on this section of my maps. The first of these was a tower ruin that I thought we'd be able to see from the trail. Spotting nothing along the cliffside where I'd expected to find it, I dumped my pack and searched for a way to access the higher levels, hoping that it'd be nestled into an alcove and invisible from below.
Alas, even after scouring the 25- 50- and 100-foot ledges above the wash, I came up empty. Returning to the trail I relayed my failure, bummed that we'd missed one of our final chances at ruins.
At least the view from high above the wash was one to remember.
Then, as we rounded the next gentle curve in the trail, I spotted it! The problem hadn't been the height at which I'd expected to see Tower Ruin, it'd been my placement of waypoint - based on a description I'd read in a trip report - for the ruin along this stretch of Kane Gulch. Yay!
Tower Ruin.
Not knowing if there was anything more to see than the single structure, I asked if either of my two companions wanted to climb up to check it out. The kiddo - itching to get out - opted to stay behind, but @mrs.turbodb was game, and soon we were scrambling up a faint footpath toward the base of the sandstone wall.
The lighting on the ruins wasn't great when we arrived, but a nice sunstar made for a reasonable consolation prize.
The pattern on this potsherd was the most interesting we'd seen all trip!
I really liked this simple glyph we found on the wall.
A few faint pictographs of a nearby panel.
We didn't linger long at Tower Ruin with @mini.turbodb waiting below, working our way back down through the rocks and juniper to find her chatting with the mom and son we'd met the previous evening at Junction Ruin. She'd pointed us - and the ruin - out to them as they'd waited for our return, and after sharing a few photos of what we'd found, we wished them well and continued our climb out of the canyon.
Getting higher.
Someone lose a giant tooth?
It was still before 11:00am when we reached the top sandstone ledge and the cattle gate that marked some "official" edge of Kane Gulch. The terrain changed dramatically here, the vertical giving way to a much more horizontal formations.
Almost there.
As we neared the ranger station, we the trail narrowed as it squeezed between two halves of a split rock.
Rumpley ripples.
Crossing UT-261 at 11:55am, Kane Gulch Ranger Station never looked so good. There, we'd pile into the Tacoma and shuttle back to the rental car that we'd left at the head of Government Trail to conclude what had been - despite a little complaining - a very successful First Backpack.
And - at least until she's older, and if she has any say - likely a Last Backpack as well. 
Our steel steed back to civilization.
Until next time, Bears Ears!
The Whole Story
This is easily one of my favorite sets of pics ever -- simply beautiful!
Well, that put a huge smile on my face! So glad you enjoyed it, Dave! 😁
There are so many trip accounts like this online that promote special and vulnerable federal landscapes like Grand Gulch / Bears Ears NM -- yet without any mention of how the area came to be protected, and how these protections are now imminently threatened by the current administration -- through revocation of protected status, outright disposal of public lands, increased development pressures, etc. This seems like a form of negligence and irresponsibility. Without clear advocates, we'll lose many places like this in the near future. Clearly you enjoy this country's public lands -- but do you appreciate them enough to use your platform to speak up for them?
Jack - First off, thanks for the note. I feel (and share) your passion for these places and the threat they are currently under.
I want to be a little careful in how I answer some of your questions - not because I'm afraid to share my opinion, but because I'm cognizant of how easy it is for the internet to turn into "us" vs. "them." This is a mindset that is fueled/promoted/rewarded by social media, and one that I am staunchly against. I will not have my blog turn into such a place; rather, I want to enjoy the wonders of nature and history, and share that wonderment with anyone who is willing to spend some time reading (no YouTube channel here, I'm just not "cool" enough).
I'll try to get into the topics you raised now, and I'm looking forward to where this leads if you care to reply. Please keep it constructive, to me, and to anyone else who replies to you.
[Jack]: There are so many trip accounts like this online that promote special and vulnerable federal landscapes like Grand Gulch / Bears Ears NM -- yet without any mention of how the area came to be protected, and how these protections are now imminently threatened by the current administration...
[Dan]: I just want to stand up for the many trip accounts like this one that exist on the internet and that were created prior to the current administration. To be fair to those trip reports (and they are the vast majority, simply due to how many there are and the ratio of years prior to this administration), there was no real reason for them to mention anything or take up a platform.
Further, many of the reports are guides to see a place or are even AI generated (simply to show ads on the page), so a discussion of the history and future protection of these places is well out of their scope.
That's not to say that current reports couldn't (or shouldn't) mention anything.
[Jack]: This seems like a form of negligence and irresponsibility.
[Dan]: I'm not sure I'd call it negligence, rather, I'd call it a different focus. As I mentioned above, I'm focused on relating the experience and wonder that I experienced when I was in a place. I started this blog initially so that my family would know what I was up to. I quickly found that I enjoyed the process and also being able to go back and relive some of my adventures. For some reason, other people found it interesting as well, and a few now read on a regular basis. And of course, I get newcomers (or at least, first time commenters - like yourself) who somehow find themselves lost on the internet. 😁
I did not start - and do not plan to change - the blog as a political commentary. There's so much political commentary out there today that it's overwhelming and divisive. Most of it - I think - are people yelling into their own echo chambers about how bad the other side is. Very little of it promotes fact-based discourse and a desire for levelheadedness and compromise.
And so, I don't think it's negligent or irresponsible. It's simply a story. And, to lead into your next point... in presenting a story that shows off the beauty of our public lands - whether it mentions the policies of the current administration or not - it helps make other people aware of our public lands and how amazing they are. Hopefully that resonates with them, so that when they hear news that suggests things like selling off that land to private parties, they think, "but wait, that land seems pretty awesome from what I read over at AdventureTaco... I don't want it sold!" And then, they talk to their representative.
[Jack]: Without clear advocates, we'll lose many places like this in the near future. Clearly you enjoy this country's public lands -- but do you appreciate them enough to use your platform to speak up for them?
[Dan]: I agree 100%! I mean, I adamantly agree with you. I think putting history of a place into a blog post is great, and I try to do it often. There are some places that have so much history that I even create "Archive" pages that have more info than I think people can swallow in one of my stories. Here's a list. Here's one on a controversial topic.
I am not however an expert on the history of public land fights. I certainly know of the Bears Ears back-and-forth of the last four administrations, and I'm an advocate for it maintaining it's National Monument status, but without much more research, I'm not the right person to be making the arguments. I would however, happily invite you to educate me - and anyone who reads the stories - so that we're better informed!
When there are controversies around places I visit that I do know about - or that I think are relatively easily consumable/understandable in the context of the story - I do try to include them. I'll give two small examples:
At any rate, I want to reiterate that from your comment, I likely agree your positions on this topic, and I'm happy to have additional information added here. Please do educate me on the history, and specific details of the threat(s) they are under. Please keep it constructive, to me, and to anyone else who replies to you.
Dan -- I've responded to you below, mostly in CAPS for easier reading, not because I'm trying to shout at you or anything. Of course you're free to communicate whatever and however you want online, I just felt compelled to encourage you (and others who have platforms based on public lands adventure) to consider being more explicit about why you value these places and what can be lost if they are developed, sold off, etc. Anyway, hope in some way this conversation can be seen as productive and make us think about how we're each contributing (or not) to the kind of future for these landscapes that we'd like to see.
Jack - First off, thanks for the note. I feel (and share) your passion for these places and the threat they are currently under.
I FIGURED YOU MUST CARE, WHICH IS WHY I CHOSE TO COMMENT BUT ALSO POINTS TO WHAT I FIND IRKSOME --- WHEN PPL WITH PLATFORMS THAT DO CARE BUT DON'T USE THEIR VOICE TO EXPRESS UNDERSTANDING OR CONCERN ABOUT THE VERY REAL THREATS THESE PLACES FACE.
I want to be a little careful in how I answer some of your questions - not because I'm afraid to share my opinion, but because I'm cognizant of how easy it is for the internet to turn into "us" vs. "them." This is a mindset that is fueled/promoted/rewarded by social media, and one that I am staunchly against. I will not have my blog turn into such a place; rather, I want to enjoy the wonders of nature and history, and share that wonderment with anyone who is willing to spend some time reading (no YouTube channel here, I'm just not "cool" enough).
I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY OR HELPFUL TO GO INTO CONFLICT IN DISCUSSING VALUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US AND WHY. WHAT I SEE VERY OFTEN -- MAYBE EVEN TO SOME EXTENT IN YOUR POSTS I'VE SEEN -- IS PPL *AVOIDING* ANY DISCUSSION OF VALUES BC WE THINK IT MAY OFFEND SOMEONE OR BECOME 'POLITICAL'. IF SO, I DISAGREE. IF WE DON'T SPEAK UP FOR WHAT WE VALUE, AND THEN DEFEND THESE VALUES (LIKE PUBLIC LANDS), THEN THEY ARE VERY LIKELY TO BE DEGRADED OR TAKEN AWAY. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE POLITICAL AT ALL, BUT MORE LIKE "WHAT DO YOU CARE ABOUT, AND WHY?"
I'll try to get into the topics you raised now, and I'm looking forward to where this leads if you care to reply. Please keep it constructive, to me, and to anyone else who replies to you.
[Dan]: I just want to stand up for the many trip accounts like this one that exist on the internet and that were created prior to the current administration. To be fair to those trip reports (and they are the vast majority, simply due to how many there are and the ratio of years prior to this administration), there was no real reason for them to mention anything or take up a platform.
I DON'T THINK I AGREE. PART OF THE REASON ALL THESE LANDSCAPES ARE THREATENED IS NOT BECAUSE PPL HAVEN'T APPRECIATED AND ENJOYED THEM, BUT BC THESE SAME PPL DO NOT VALIDATE AND UNDERSCORE THE NEED FOR THEIR CONSERVATION IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND ALSO DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR STEWARDSHIP. THE VARIOUS THREATS HAVE RECENTLY INCREASED, BUT HAVE EXISTED FOR DECADES.
ALSO, THESE PLACES DIDN'T PROTECT THEMSELVES. IT HAS REQUIRED REAL EFFORT AND PERSEVERANCE FROM EVERYDAY PPL THAT CARE ENOUGH TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. NOWADAYS, THERE ARE MORE THAN ENOUGH APPRECIATORS AND PROMOTERS, BUT VERY FEW OF THEM DO MUCH OF ANYTHING TO SUPPORT LAND STEWARDSHIP, ETC.. THIS IS IN MY VIEW A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM, AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE QUALITY OF OUR PUBLIC LANDS HAS DECLINED IN RECENT YEARS. "THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS" -- SO MANY ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO "TAKE", BUT FEW THAT GIVE BACK OR STAND UP IN SUPPORT WHEN THREATENED.
Further, many of the reports are guides to see a place or are even AI generated (simply to show ads on the page), so a discussion of the history and future protection of these places is well out of their scope.
CREATING MORE DEMAND AND RECREATIONAL PRESSURE -- WHILE AT THE SAME TIME DOING NOTHING TO PROMOTE ETHICAL STEWARDSHIP -- IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. THERE IS NOW LOTS OF EVIDENCE OF DEGRADATION RESULTING FROM THIS LEVEL OF "PROMOTION AT ALL COSTS" IN SO MANY PLACES ON OUR PUBLIC LANDS -- I BET YOU'VE SEEN IT. SHOULD WE JUST AVOID SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT UNFETTERED PROMOTION, WITHOUT RAISING THESE ISSUES?
[Jack]: This seems like a form of negligence and irresponsibility.
[Dan]: I'm not sure I'd call it negligence, rather, I'd call it a different focus. As I mentioned above, I'm focused on relating the experience and wonder that I experienced when I was in a place. I started this blog initially so that my family would know what I was up to. I quickly found that I enjoyed the process and also being able to go back and relive some of my adventures. For some reason, other people found it interesting as well, and a few now read on a regular basis. And of course, I get newcomers (or at least, first time commenters - like yourself) who somehow find themselves lost on the internet. 😁
I did not start - and do not plan to change - the blog as a political commentary. There's so much political commentary out there today that it's overwhelming and divisive. Most of it - I think - are people yelling into their own echo chambers about how bad the other side is. Very little of it promotes fact-based discourse and a desire for levelheadedness and compromise.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU BECOME POLITICAL. OF COURSE IT'S YOUR BLOG AND YOU'RE FREE TO COMMUNICATE WHAT YOU WISH. PRIMARILY WHAT I'M SAYING, AND WHAT WAS TOUCHED IN READING YOUR BLOG POST, IS A COMMENTARY ON WHAT I SEE ONLINE -- WHICH IS TONS OF PROMOTERS BUT FEW PPL WHO EXPRESS WHY THESE PLACES ARE IMPORTANT TO THEM, WHAT THEY VALUE ABOUT PROTECTED AREAS, ETC. A WORLD OF "LANDSCAPE CONSUMERS" WITHOUT CARERS OR STEWARDS CAN ONLY LEAD TO ONE OUTCOME AND IT'S NOT A POSITIVE ONE.
And so, I don't think it's negligent or irresponsible. It's simply a story. And, to lead into your next point... in presenting a story that shows off the beauty of our public lands - whether it mentions the policies of the current administration or not - it helps make other people aware of our public lands and how amazing they are. Hopefully that resonates with them, so that when they hear news that suggests things like selling off that land to private parties, they think, "but wait, that land seems pretty awesome from what I read over at AdventureTaco... I don't want it sold!" And then, they talk to their representative.
MY VIEW IS THAT PROMOTING THESE PLACES, WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THEY CAME TO BE CONSERVED AND WHY THEY'RE IMPORTANT, THE VARIOUS THREATS THEY FACE, ETC. -- IS 'WEAK TEA'. IF YOU CARE ABOUT A PLACE LIKE GRAND GULCH, WHY NOT MENTION THAT IT'S AT RISK OF BEING DEGAZETTED AND LOST TO DEVELOPMENT? DOES REAL CARE NOT TRANSLATE TO A VOICE, OR A CONCERN? ONE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE AN EXPERT OR HISTORIAN TO DO THIS, IT CAN JUST BE A SIMPLE OUTGROWTH OF CARING AND APPRECIATION.
[Jack]: Without clear advocates, we'll lose many places like this in the near future. Clearly you enjoy this country's public lands -- but do you appreciate them enough to use your platform to speak up for them?
[Dan]: I agree 100%! I mean, I adamantly agree with you. I think putting history of a place into a blog post is great, and I try to do it often. There are some places that have so much history that I even create "Archive" pages that have more info than I think people can swallow in one of my stories. Here's a list. Here's one on a controversial topic.
I am not however an expert on the history of public land fights. I certainly know of the Bears Ears back-and-forth of the last four administrations, and I'm an advocate for it maintaining its National Monument status, but without much more research, I'm not the right person to be making the arguments. I would however, happily invite you to educate me - and anyone who reads the stories - so that we're better informed!
When there are controversies around places I visit that I do know about - or that I think are relatively easily consumable/understandable in the context of the story - I do try to include them. I'll give two small examples:
In each of the stories for this Grand Gulch trip, as well as a previous trip to the Lower Grand Gulch, I included a highlighted note informing readers that permits are required. You can even scroll up and read it in this story. There, I mentioned that "[Permits] are inexpensive and help to fund our public lands. They need our support more than ever." This may be a small acknowledgement of the current situation, but I added it purposefully to raise the issue that they are under threat and need our help now.
There have been times - as with Worth More than Gold | Inyo West #1 where even the title of the story alludes to the threat these places are under. In that story, I have a lot of history for Conglomerate Mesa and am quite clear on my position.
I APPLAUD YOUR ATTEMPTS (SUBTLE AS THEY MAY BE) TO ARTICULATE THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC LANDS OWNERSHIP, PERMITTING, TAKING CARE AROUND HISTORIC RESOURCES, ETC. I DIDN'T MEAN TO IMPLY YOU DON'T DO ANY OF THIS, MY COMMENT WAS SIMPLY AN ENCOURAGMENT FOR YOU TO CONSIDER WHERE IT FEELS RIGHT TO YOU TO BE MORE EXPLICIT -- NOT FOR ME OR ANYONE ELSE, BUT BECAUSE YOU CARE AND YOU KNOW FIRST-HAND WHAT'S AT RISK.
IF THE PEOPLE WHO SPEND A LOT OF QUALITY TIME OUT IN THESE PRECIOUS LANDSCAPES DON'T SPEAK UP, THEN WHO WILL? AND IF NOBODY DOES, WHAT IS LIKELY TO BE THE RESULT?
What a wonderful family trip, appreciate it as backpacking was one of my joys as was hiking and cycling. It was great to be able to follow your journey, enjoyed it so much. And thank you for NOT turning this into a political discussion/argument, we get enough of that on social media. If someone wants to be an advocate for/against they is no shortage of groups for everyone and, personally, I get real tired of the people who want to force their decisions on the rest of us. I always look forward to your next adventure, you respect the outdoors and it's beauty and I appreciate you sharing it all with us.
As always, glad to hear you enjoyed it John!
And don't worry, this blog is not turning into a political discussion or argument, though I may share my feelings or opinions at times (sometimes subtly, sometimes not) when I feel that it applies to the story, or when I'm asked about it in the comments. I'll always strive to do that in a way that is respectful, honest, and in search of conversation/compromise, because - like you - I see WAY too much of the conflict and hatred everywhere else (and especially on social media, which STOKES it for their own gain).
I like to think back just a few decades, to the days when neighbors - perhaps on different sides of the aisle as it were - would still get together in front yards or at neighborhood barbeques to share food and fun and have a great time. Conversations could be had and differences discussed in a way that left everyone feeling heard and realizing that despite our differences, we still have so much more in common.
EXACTLY! I have friends that I worked with for many years, we have political and other differences but we're still friends and we don't get into arguments over our differences and I think it's terrible that there is so much hate now, name calling, attacking people and their property, it's crazy the way things are polarized. I find your adventures a good release from it all! LOL. One thing we seem to agree on is keeping our forests, trails, outdoors free from trash and preserving it's beauty.
Agree with Dave’s comment - this essay has some of the best pictures on your site…and that’s saying something
Been there myself and if you catch it on a clear day, the contrast between a dark blue sky and the warm colors of the rocks is stunning.
Thanks, as always
Thanks Rob, always nice to hear when I've captured something that resonates. Glad to know that you've gotten to experience it first hand; it's a special place!