I fixed your "boxing in", and took a look at my photos - Dec 26th, 2009 was the day you showed it to me.  Hard to believe that was over 4 years ago!

Bryon Boyce said This could be a lot of places but I'll make a wild guess to get things started - Rhododendron Creek.

You're right in saying that it's a creek, but it's not that one.  Actually, I don't think this creek has a name. It does feed into a named creek, which is a fork.  

Don said: Good one Kirk! I have no clue where you are, except maybe around 4000' or higher for it looks like there are huckleberry bushes in the photo. Don

  You're pretty close on that estimate of the elevation!

Hey Kirk, is this trail a current district trail or an abandoned one? Don

Don said: Hey Kirk, is this trail a current district trail or an abandoned one? Don

  I think it's been abandoned by the Forest Service, but I wouldn't consider it abandoned by TA.

So does this 4000' elevation abandoned trail that crosses a no name creek that runs into a named fork creek happen to be in a wilderness area? Don

Don said: So does this 4000' elevation abandoned trail that crosses a no name creek that runs into a named fork creek happen to be in a wilderness area? Don

  My first thought was that this isn't in a wilderness area, but I checked the map and I was wrong. It doesn't seem like a wilderness area because, if I remember correctly, you can see a road less that 100 feet from where this picture was taken. And the road is not in the wilderness area.

A lot of wilderness areas have roads on their boundaries, but some areas that have been added recently have roads and clearcuts included, and some of the roads are even paved! Am I the only one seeing this? Has anyone read the original Wilderness Act that was passed in 1964 that sent us down this road in the first place? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy wilderness areas that are truly wilderness, but some of these new ideas of wilderness bother me. Don

Yeah, I'm not sure why this road was excluded from the wilderness boundary. It doesn't seem to go to a trailhead, or anything else for that matter.   Ok, here's another clue:  If I remember correctly, the trail in question crosses the road and the stream goes under the road at the same place. So you don't even have to get your feet wet when you cross the stream!  After crossing the road, the trail reenters the wilderness area as it continues down the hill.

If you are where I think you are, there is a TA trail at the end of that road.   D

D said: If you are where I think you are, there is a TA trail at the end of that road.   D

  Why yes, there is a trail access (for a neighboring trail) at the end of the road. Although, when we hiked that trail, we began that trail at the bottom of the hill.

I have excused myself from this contest, since I believe I was with Kirk when he took that photo.  I think Donovan knows where it is, he just doesn't want to answer because he would need to find a new photo!

Donovan said If you are where I think you are, there is a TA trail at the end of that road.   D

Well, it's been a week of quiet on this topic, so I'll say:  I think I was where you think I am when I took the photo in question.  I declare you the winner of this round of "What trail am I on?".   Your turn..........  

Wait a minute. That kinda reminds me of being "slammed" by long distance carriers in the post regulation bonanza.   I will see what I can find.   D 2

What trail am I on?

Well, it's been a week of quiet on this topic, so I'll say:  I think I was where you think I am when I took the photo in question.  I declare you the winner of this round of "What trail am I on?".   Your turn..........

But you never said WHERE the photo was taken?!!

It was the White Iris Trail at the road crossing in the new addition to the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in our district. This was the new addition to our wilderness system that I was ranting about earlier that has roads and clearcuts included, not exactly what I call wilderness attributes. There are  clearcuts in some of the other "wilderness areas" also like the Roaring River Wilderness in which they left some of the more eye sore clearcuts out, but labeled them as possible future additions. I guess you can interpret the law any way you want too these days. D. that new post of a trail  looks like  it isn't in a wilderness area. Don

Not yet.

Yeah, I know the Prez has a pen and a phone and 3 years to fulfill his campaign promises. So watch out for the new land grab. Is this new trail post one of those trails that isn't on the current map (2002)? 12 years and still no new district maps. Don

It is one that they failed to get on the map. At that time they were wanting to run a pipeline right through there so clarifying that it was a full protected "system" trail (and hence not an asset needing protection) may have been part of the calculus if there was any.   D 2