I climbed the summit of the compact range in December 2005. We were in the Big Bend area, staying at the Terlingua Ranch, which is north of the National Park about 20 air-miles, and about 60+ driving miles. When we arrived, I had no idea we'd be so close to the Christmas Mountains, and hadn't brought along any maps. After looking over some maps at the Terlingua Ranch office, and talking with the guy who worked there, I gleaned some useful information about the range and a possible way to the top. The man himself wouldn't grant me any permissions to enter on that land as the Terlingua Ranch does not own it. He didn't know who did, or had a vague idea, or maybe just wasn't telling me much. He was nice though, and did let on that an old mine road does work its way up to the range crest. I, of course, had no clue about the land-ownership status, other than it is probably private, as just about everything in Texas seems to be. As for how to contact the land-owner(s): no idea.

The day started with a surprise: dense fog! It didn't lift until late morning, and when it did the day revealed itself to be a gorgeous warm, winter Texas desert afternoon: clear and wonderful. The Christmas Range sat invitingly close just a few miles southwest. I was able to gather some waypoint figures from the topo maps at the Ranch office. The more-detailed 1:24000 quad maps showed all the ridges and things like that, but for some reason, not the old road. On the other hand, the broader 1:100000 map showed the old road. There was no way to photocopy the maps, so I took notes on a sheet of paper. This would have to serve as my 'map'. I drove some roads, and successfully worked my way to the base of the range. The aforementioned mine road is visible as it cuts up the side of the foothills, so I aimed for it. I parked in an open area well below the start of the mine road. Some fire rings and light garbage in the area suggested it is usedas an ad-hoc camp now and again. From the truck I walked to the base of the hills. The road was chained shut with a single light-gauge chain. That was it; no contact information, no signs telling me to get lost, nothing.

The hike went well. Not entirely sure I had the right road, I went quick to be sure. In time it worked up some lower hills, offered some great views of the Chisos Mountains to the south. The road reaches a highpoint about 2.5 miles in, then drops about 200 feet, then regains some of that elevation before ending very near the ridge proper at a small saddle. The summit was just a short quarter-mile walk to the north, mostly over rock and some game paths. The top is marked by a large rock cairn attesting to past visitors. The register had one other name in it from early 2004; I may very well have been the only person to visit the summit for all of 2005. It had taken me 1 hour, 40 minutes to gain the top, covering about 4 miles one way, with 1,800 feet of gain. The views were superb, but I only stayed maybe five minutes. The walk out took one hour, and I was back to our cabin by 3 p.m.

We spent some more time down in Big Bend National Park, including a great climb up Emory Peak two days later, on the winter solstice. We also retraced our drive up highway FM-170, the Texas River Road, through Presidio and up to Candelaria, staying at the Chinati Hot Springs before heading on home.

Here is some background about the Christmas Mountains that I have collected since our hike:

This link (9.94 MB, very big file) is a story written about the Christmas Mountains, including its history and the new "Christmas Mountains Association" (CMA) that leases and looks over the land these days. From what I can gather, this seems to be a summary of situation: The land was purchased by a land conservancy group (The Mellon Foundation?) in the late 1980s, with intentions on selling it to the National Park Service for inclusion into Big Bend National Park. The BBNP interested, but needs congressional approval to make such a large purchase, not to mention a detailed flora/fauna/etc. survey. Money and other issues get in the way. Land conservancy group unloads to private owners but deed restrictions are so severe that literally there is no legal development of any sort allowed in the Christmas Mountains. The Texas General Land Office (GLO) buys land, again thinking BBNP may be buying it soon for the Park. Again, deal falls through. The GLO still owns land, but allows the CMA to manage it. The CMA is a apparently a loose aggregate of locals living nearby who are willing to cover the lease costs and upkeep. The CMA is a non-profit with virtually no web presence at all. The Christmas Mountains are still for sale but the deed restrictions turn off all buyers. Land will probably (in the very long term) become part of the National Park, but in the meantime it is in a prolonged limbo.

I mention all this because a few months later I got an angry email from the leader of the CMA upset at my climb. He accused me of having no honor, ruining lots of hard work and upkeep, blah blah blah. I replied but have never received a reply to my reply. Interesting!

I got to thinking about this and came up with a bunch of questions and ruminations about the CMA and their management of the land. Some I asked in my letter to them. Some came to me after the fact. In no particular order...

• The most obvious feature (or lack thereof): no postings of any kind (signs, actual posts, etc), nor fencing nor any indication that the land was posted. Granted, in Texas you just assume it is, but still the onus should be on the landowner or manager(s) to at least have even the barest amount of notice about the nature of the land. The single light-gauge chain doesn't cut it for me. In their letter to me they mentioned the trouble with posting the entire property (20+ miles of fencing would be needed), or that vandals regularly rip up any signs. I am suspicious of this claim because in reality the range is essentially impossible to enter except from the main highway (TX-118) and the lone mine road from Terlingua Ranch. They could post these entrances and probably capture the attention of 99.99% of those who wish to approach the land. A sign of sturdy steel could be planted in a concrete base for less than $100 in materials. Their cries of no money or inability to do this don't wash with me all the way.

• The general "Texas" attitude toward land stewardship. This gets a bit convoluted so hang with me. Nowhere else in the country is land-ownership so prized a trait, and plays so significant a role in one's (families') social standing, as it is in Texas. Texas is unique in that almost all of its land is in private ownership - it came into the United States not as a territory but as an independent nation in its own right. It was never subject to the early Federal land mapping and land speculating that went on for much of the 19th century. In the rest of the western United States much of the open land is Federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, or state-owned trust land. Public access to these lands is (mostly) unimpeded. Arguments exist both pro and con regarding publically-owned and managed land, and privately-owned and managed land. Growing up in the west (as I have, in California, and later Arizona), you view these open lands with an entitlement for reasonable access, and treat them accordingly. (Yes, there's always the idiot fringe who ruins it for the rest of us.) One effect of this is the private land-owners usually do a better job of posting their property so that the demarcations are clear. Often, the private land-owners also understand their role as part of a large system of public and private lands; they are more apt to work with you if you have a request to cross their lands. I have had very good success over the years in gaining access onto these nominally-restricted properties (not 100%, of course). In Texas, the attitude seems to be closer to that of old-country barony. The simple act of owning the land is enough to grant the owner a heightened social standing and air of superiority. I hate to paint with a wide brush because I have had actually reasonable luck with private land-owners in Texas, but I have also come across many instances where the person was genuinely surprised I had the nerve even to ask, or angry enough to summarily shoo me away with threats of the law. The CMA seems to take on a small-time equivalent attitude of this stance. They do not own the land, but they manage it and by extension see it is 'theirs', something to show off. They view any entrance onto the land as negative and criminal, all under the quise of stewardship.

Anyway, I do not feel I damaged their land (I stayed on the road and on game paths) and I did not act dishonorably by simply being there, since it is NOT their land. As far as I am concerned, it's quasi-public until its status is finally settled one way or another.