Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion Hiker trash- WAG BAGs

From the posts here and on the Whitney Portal site- It sounds like some friendly user maintenance is due. I'll be carrying a stronger trash bag on my trips on the mountain- to pick up abandoned Wag Bags.

It doesn't do any good to bitch about the @#%* who left them- a) they are't there or on these sites;and b)obviously don't care. Educate if you see someone leaving a bag; but once its left- not their problem.

If we wait for "the imaginary bag person" or a Ranger to pick them up- Whitney will start to look and smell like Everest with its trash. I don't like people trashing "my yard" when I walk in National Parks; and pick up non bio-degradable stuff when I see it. I carry protective gloves and purell anyway for first aid and keeping my hands uncontaminated when using my bags; so its no big deal. I carry a trash bag to put my used bags in, and carry it on the outside of my pack to keep accidents from happening in the pack; so one or two more in it won't matter.

If we each picked up one or two WAG Bags on the way down; the view, odors and flying critter situation would improve.

If you're not part of the solution- you're part of the problem.....

Hey JAGCHiker, thanks for the extra effort to pick up WAG bags. A lot of people including myself think this WAG bag solution is not the best way to go for this situation. Even so, it doesn't help to whine about it and nobody should leave their WAG bag behind. There's a long thread on this forum with lots of background history and current info about this topic at Solar Toilets vs Carrying WAG Bags

Thanks again for being one of those "imaginary bag people" picking up after others.

Thanks for the positive comments.

The Wag Bag vs. Toilet Facilities discussion is the bigger 'poop" issue that will take a year or more to resolve planning and resource/budget issues; even if the Forest Service wanted to do something today. I'm not saying they don't want to; it just takes years to implement a project of this scale in the government; as touched upon in the discussion.

I appreciate toilet facilities; such as those on Mt Rainier and the Grand Canyon Main Trails. Having talked to those who service the different types that have been used; I also understand the challenges involved to maintain such facilties. I also see the misuse of them and the deposits left between them - when nature calls triggered by heat/exhaustion; so they are not a 100% cure all.

What I didn't see in the discussion were immediate solutions to the poop issue. We have to go, there are no facilties, hard to bury above the tree line(where the fatigue/exhaustion caused issues occur; let alone the overnight use impact), and a procedure that is different than one is used to(LNT practice). This is a practical solution we each can do to improve the environment, until a better solution is implemented.

If we don't take positive action ourselves to protect the Mt. Whitney environment from human caused biohazard/pollution/poop & tp; more regulations could be developed to further restrict the area's use. If special interests are so concerned about SEKI and horses/mules- what is to stop these concerned parties from filing to save Mt Whitney because of human poop all over the mountain?

The effects of popularity- more use-generates more abuse- resulting in a place that we don't want to go to, or gets restricted so we can't....

This WAG BAG question is interesting after all the discussion regarding pack stock use in another thread.

I have backpacked in the Sierras for over 40 years, and have seen no improvement vis a vis reduction of human waste in the mountains. Many people seem to think that if "nobody sees my poop and used toilet paper" that it's okay to drop wherever it is convenient to them. I can take you to areas along the Bishop Pass trail where used toilet paper, candy wrappers, ciggie butts, broken glass, fishing equipment, etc. continue to reappear, even after packers and others have made the effort to remove it. It would take a small army of volunteers and months of work to pick up all the stuff near my favorite trail.

Most of my backpacker friends are pretty considerate and careful with what they leave behind, but the more occasional, vacation trip backpackers seem to be the major offenders. There seems to be an attitude among some people that goes along the lines of "Oh, well, I won't be back here, so it doesn't matter if I leave a little trash; it's out of sight behind the bushes." Please, don't ask me to give you "official statistics" on this, because I don't think such a study has ever been done; backpackers are a much more elusive target than packers. And...packers are much more responsible than the average backpacker.

This will really annoy the "Whitney Addicts" on this forum, but I think really severe restrictions are needed on the Whitney trail. Like what? 1) No more day trips permits to the summit, 2) restrict the number of overnight trips per party to once per year, 3)cut the number of overnight trips from the Portal to six permits per day, 4) allow a maximum of four people per permit, 5)allow Portal originating overnight trips to July and August only. The Whitney Trail needs a long overdue rest from its hiker generated abuse.

Yes, those would seem to be "severe restrictions" alright.

Interesting that rules on pack stock in the wilderness are apparently too strict and should not be modified, but we need these hiker rules on Whitney? I'm just saying...

Oh Bob, you've just kicked over the hornet's nest. I did that a some years ago on the other board suggesting a very high fee structure to limit traffic on the MMWT...if limited use is what you want to accomplish. I hope you've got a good flame resistant suit.

Actually, Bob, if one is looking at the spirit of Wilderness, your suggestions are much more in line with that philosophy.

I believe that if someone sued on that basis, something similar to what you've proposed would be the result.

I think the real problem here is the reason all these folks are even going up the mountain - the paved highway to the top. If it wasn't so easy you could Segway up the main trail, perhaps the volume would drop, and the quality of climber would improve on average - hopefully with matching higher quality behavior.

I find that someone suffering a little more for a goal tends to have more respect for that goal and the area they are in.

That being said, I honestly don't give 4 mule turds about the main trail. The other routes are too crowded for me as it is...the main trail can be left to the sodomites, etc. I'd imagine after I try for the east face/buttress route this summer, I won't head up Whitney again - too many other beautiful and less-traveled mountains nearby.

Ah hah! I think I've spotted the real problem.

The "good" backpackers are Bob's friends. It's those damn "vacation" backpackers who are desecrating the wild places.

What's the solution? Get them to backpack when they're not on vacation? Become "Backpackers who are Friends of Bob's" (BPWAFOB)'s?

And Burchey - you might look up "sodomites". Is that really what you intended to say? I mean - I know lots of people who have hiked Whitney, including myself, and to the best of my knowledge, none of them practice sodomy.

Well, maybe one or two. What they do on their own time is their business.

You might look it up - I meant it in the more historical sense, or biblical sense if you like.

Plus I just like the word Sodomites

Burchey, honestly, I saw as many wag bags by Iceberg Lake as I did by Trail Camp last year. Same day, I went up the MR, and down the MT. I used to think like you until I saw that. I was a little shocked, expecting the scramblers and climbers would take better care of their trail and environment. That doesn't seem to be the base.

Bob, I disagree. Your proposal is excessive and extreme. It'd make the wilderness less accessible to people. There are people who trash it regardless, but if most folks cannot experience and access places like Whitney to appreciate, they'll also not care what happens to it as well.

I agree with Burchey that there are much more beautiful and spectacular peaks all along the Sierra. Give people the Whitney trail and places like Half Dome. There are hundreds if not thousands of places for others who want something to say other than I've been to the highest point in the contiguous U.S. I'll leave it at that.

Probably one of the best opinion-based posts I've seen online.

Concise.

Logical.

You don't belong here

Not sure if I've heard this one, but how about a Whitney Education Class that could be held every day for 30 minutes at the Visitor Center where permits are picked up. The class could be mandatory for first time hikers on Mt Whitney. The class would be held once a day at a specific time, and if you don't attend, you don't hike :-) You're already in the computer if you've already hiked.

I think one of the problems with the current system is that potential hikers actually have to read what the rules are on Whitney. Making it mandatory for hikers to sit and listen to a ranger educate hikers could do wonders. I know people are told the rules as they pick up permits, but they are usually so excited to pick up their permits and the rest of their party is off looking at a 3-D map..... Just the idea of making them sit still for 30 minutes while someone relays the do's or dont's may help...... and as a control freak, it just makes me feel better.

There is that ugly attitude again: I've seen the Sierra, so now it's time to keep all the commoners out.

Calihawk best responded to that thinking in the Half Dome thread:


Mt Whitney is a rock. It'll still be there in a million years, well after our civilization is gone. Wag bags left behind do not affect the rock, and limiting access will not affect the mountain. The wag bag problem is a current one that affects the rest of us, but it doesn't really affect the mountain. We can and should work to find solutions to the WAG bag problem, but no matter what we do, Mt Whitney will be just fine.

Agree 100%. If these rules were in place, I wouldn't have had the hut at the summit as my goal after surviving cancer and a hip replacement. Same can be said of several hikers from both sites.
Anyone who's been at the summit, knows the incredible and sometimes spiritual experience many people have at the summit, including survivors, wakes for loved ones and just plain achieving a goal that is one of the only goals you can have that is difficult, but attainable.

Way to go Steve

Yes, I've got on my flame retardent suit; looks like it will get a workout. That's what I get for offering a few overly-extreme solutions to a problem that some people on this forum would like to ignore. I confess to being a pot-stirrer, but sometimes that's what it takes to get people to wake-up and do something about a problem.

So, Steve, since you felt free to throw a thinly-veiled insult in my direction, what solutions to the wag bag and trash problem would you like to suggest? Or would you rather just leave things the way they are? I can't believe you like the current situation regarding wag bags.

You falsely assume that I am one of those who want to "keep the commoners out," but you missed the point in your haste to pass judgment on a wilderness philosophy that you might not share. When it comes to the wilderness, I will always be a "commoner," just a temporary visitor.

I confess to being a pot-stirrer, but sometimes that's what it takes to get people to face up to a problem. Oh boy, I'd better really button up my flame retardent suit now...ha ha.

I like people who stir the pot, keeps things interesting.

I like people who smoke the pot.

Not to derail the topic, but I saw two on Skyline. I had to do a double, make that a triple take. The nose doesn't lie though.

What's even more funny is that they caught up to me in about an hour and then flew past me like I was standing still. I know I'm slow on the trail, but didn't realize I was that slow. Shock and awe.

Now, now, Bob West! There you go provoking temper tantrums again (have we not talked about this before??). I know its tempting and incredibly easy to bring out all the red unhappy faces (too bad they don't have one with tears) But a fine upstanding Elitist(one that seemed to find time to participate in rescues...strange sort of elitist) such as yourself (I bow in your presence) can exhibit much better restraint when messing about with the unwashed masses (also known as commoners}. How dare you offer a unique and unrepresented position that actually addresses solutions rather than more complaints??? Don't you know that this is the Land of Rights? (They have not gotten around to adding all of the personalized entitlements to the Constitution, but I just know that they have saved a spot for one that allows for each and every citizen to hike anywhere anytime...It's a Free Country, after all). Cost? Oh, yeah, remember that 10ft pile of trash I told you about? (down there off the PCT near Lake Warren) Well, the beauty of it is that it will probably be there 100years from now welcoming me like an old friend, 'cause A)It's granite, by golly, soz nothing lost, nothing gained....except a 10ft pile of trash B) It's a National Forest, so no permits & no rangers to disturb the "Piece" -- that is, Piece of Trash. So you just shut yer gob about all this, Bob, 'cause there aint nothin' to worry about (in a few years, we will all grow so accustomed to those WAG Bags adorning the trail that they will almost seem welcoming buddies)

Your Friend always,

Bee

Bob, don't feel bad, I'm been labeled as one of those "pot stirrers" by a professional meeting facilitator. Every team needs one to get the very best result out of the group - to question assumptions and overcome groupthink syndrome. That particular team included a dozen engineers from 2 federal agencies, a state agency, local agency, and consultants tasked with selecting the best alternative for a $1 billion project. I'm still heavily involved in the project six years later.

But I disagree with the heavy handed approach you propose. I think well maintained solar toilets are the way to go, which was the original plan before they hijacked the environmental process with this wag bag experiment. Just contract out the maintenance and use llamas, mules, or a couple helicopter trips each season. It works great under similar conditions in Colorado, what, we can't figure it out here in California?

Once more up on the soap box:

I was hoping to see more support or additional ideas on how to clean up our play yard.

What I see is support of my last line and attacks on one anothers viewpoint-
'The effects of popularity- more use-generates more abuse- resulting in a place that we don't want to go to, or gets restricted so we can't....'
Burchey doesn't care because Mt Whitney has turned into a place he doesn't want to go to anymore; and Bob wants to restrict its use. Neither approach cleans up the mess...

If concerned hikers each pick up a little bit; so they leave where they go better than they found it; We become the army of volunteers, who over time; keep the place we enjoy-clean.

Otherwise, the control freaks will limit how, where, and when we can enjoy the wilderness- a much more insideous method of keeping the wild places wild- the ultimate goal of those special intrests. Eventually they'll control even those places Burchey seeks. Hopefully for him; he'll be to old to enjoy those places by then.

Bob , Bob

wow everything you said will actually do nothing, great job. Do you work in congress? I feel your pain and frustration but i dont think thats the answer, i admit i have had similar thoughts. All of your limitations will not get rid of the problem but lessen the trash by a 1% (meant to be a small number not actual) percent margin that will probably be barely noticable.

All you know everybody who gets that once a year overnight permit will all leave some poop for you.

I think education is key. Now what can a class actually do. Well i have been in situations where taking a class and has opened my ignorance/attitude toward a issue. If people did have to take a class, see some nasty pictures, maybe walk out back of ranger station where a setup wag bag area was so they could smell it and see the nasty mock area to simulate what is actually out there, it just might have more of an effect.

Confronting people prior to the issue has power. also by having a class it might convert one person or two in the group who might put pressure on their friends once out in wilderness to live up to the rules.

maybe the class should be longer than 30 min, like the hunters education class. After taking that class i had a different outlook on certain issue. maybe the class should be 8 hrs with a fee that gives people a license. that would weed out people who are once in a while backpackers who dont care about mother nature.

I wont burn you because i feel your pain but i disagree with you on all accounts.

Picking up errant WAG bags is a noble thing to do, but let's not forget that it wouldn't be necessary if they stuck with the preferred alternative in the Environmental Assessment to replace the old toilets with new ones.

WAG bags left on the trail was a predicted impact described in detail in the EA. They also predicted more cat holes, side trails for people looking for privacy, and concerns for water contamination. They implemented this voluntary wag bag solution fully informed of what was going to happen.

Thanks again JAGCHiker for going the extra mile to pick up after others and for trying to recruit help in that effort. We need more people like you out there.

Ken, you're probably right about what would happen if Inyo was sued over this. That would be the easiest way out for them - just cut way back on the usage. SEKI had a similar response over the HSHA lawsuit over commercial packers. Instead of working out a compromise after HSHA won in court, they just shut down the entire permit system for commercial packers. After Congressional pressure, they started taking permit applications at least. But SEKI would probably be happy just doing nothing, losing the entire season and blaming it all on HSHA. I could see Inyo reacting similarly just because it's human nature.

I thought of an idea or two back when this issue was discussed a dozen times earlier. I think I finally have a winner. Corks. Everyone will be issued a cork at the interagency center. It will be dutifully inserted at the portal and we can hire a couple of special rangers to check for compliance.

reminds me of a joke about a pig a cork and three monkeys. Or is it three pigs and a monkey? I never remember the details to jokes.

Hello... my name is Chris and I am a vacation backpacker (I live AWAY from the Sierra and have to actually request time off of work, aka vacation, in order to do any backpacking... I actually know people who -gasp- come from OUT OF STATE to be vacation backpackers in the Sierra....). My segway is currently being retrofitted with larger tires in order to be able to climb the stupid granite stairs below Trail Camp (I had to carry it last time, Sorry Mom... I forgot to tell you it was in my backpack... maybe thats what kept us from reaching the summit). In addition to my confessions... I'd like to say that I am that person who reaches Trail Camp and is so exhausted I can't see straight (yet... I still manage to find my Wag Bag and use it).

I spent all day thinking of scathing replies to the preceding posts on this thread, highly offended by the offhand stereotyping that I saw being tossed around by some people I respect. But decided to semi-behave myself...

What it really comes down to is this.... There are city folk, day trippers, overnighters, old people, young people, experienced outdoor folks and newbies who love and adore and cherish the wilderness and Whitney. Then again... there are city folk, day trippers, overnighters, old people, young people, experienced outdoor folks and newbies who abuse those same things with every step they take and breath they breath (really? Smoking and dropping cigarette butts at 14K? I can barely BREATH at 12K!)

What is the solution? Putting solar toilets back in? That might help in the immediate areas where the toilets are, I'll admit that much ... however... unless there are solar toilets every mile or so... people are still going to drop trow on the side of the trail and do their business.... the "exhausted elevation affected" people (oh wait... I fit in THAT category too).... who have a sudden urge aren't going to cross their legs and hobble their way uphill to another port-a-pottie...

I like the idea of hiker education. I am all about education. Requiring some sort of attendance at a sit-down lecture before you are allowed to receive your permit is a fabulous idea. I think that the permit group leader AND second should be (at the least) required to sit down and learn about not only wag bags, but fire rules (can I have a campfire at Trail Camp?), trail safety (the bear canister is sooooo heavy), and weather safety (its just a little thunder....).... maybe Inyo could partnership with A-16 and/or REI and when speakers who cover certain topics lecture at their stores they can sign off on a permit lecture form saying that so-and-so met the qualifications for the Wilderness Education Lecture and can get their permit (this would allow for those after hour pickups and for walk-ins who don't catch the lecture before permits are issued in the mornings).

A reduction of hiker traffic might be an answer… but I'm not sure it would have the effect that Mr. West is thinking. If the percentage of "good" people to "bag" people is 50/50…. Lowering the permit numbers will reduce the people allowed on the trail, but it isn't going to ensure the "bag" people are kept out versus the "good" people.

Is there a cure all solution to keep Whitney (or any other trail clean)? No… not really. There will always be rude, inconsiderate, uneducated, ungrateful ingrates wanting to hike Whitney and being awarded permits… those are the same people who "vacation" in places like Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Zion, Bryce, Yellowstone…. You name it you're going to find them there.

And just because I wouldn't be me if I didn't respond … Burchey…. Sodomite is Sodomite no matter where you find the definition. Read the Bible story about Sodom and Gomorrah… Also, You may be able to breeze up paved highways like Mt. Whitney without so much as batting an eyelash or loosing your breath, but most of the rest of us Mere Mortals DO suffer a little to get where we're going (or more then a little). We use front-country, yet challenging (to us at least) trails like Mt. Whitney's Main Trail to celebrate remission from illness, recovery from injury, betterment of ourselves… or just to celebrate life…..So maybe you should step down off your testosterone poisoned, I am GodLike, hear me roar my betterness then all of the little underlings pedestal…. And be a productive member of the conversations…..

And if all else fails… I think I know a wholesale cork supplier that Inyo can contract with….

Only the permit holder is named.



This is what is required in SEKI. Whether it does any good, I don't know. It DOES require a lot of man-hours, for sure.

Bob, my experience is that it is the pot-stirrers who achieve change and advancement. A healthy debate about assumptions is always good, though not always welcome.

I can't fathom, for example, the justification for all the permits on Whitney, when for a nearly identical mountain, Langley, it is far, far more restricted. In fact, I think Langley is about right.
Whitney is ridiculous. But the difference is not understandable from a resource perspective.

It is strictly a political issue.

Chris.

Darlin.

Deep breath.

I'm not sure why you're taking such an offense to some of the things you've mentioned here. You say you use your wagbag properly. We can assume, with all this passion you've got, that you don't leave other forms of trash behind. You aren't part of the problem. Why so angry?

It's probably apparent from my picture that I'm a man - I'd assume that's where you're getting the testosterone poisoned thing from. I apologize for my unhealthy balance of male hormone - it's something I've been dealing with since childhood. I'm not sure how it plays into this discussion but I'm open to new theories.

As far as the sodomites thing goes, I don't retract my comparison to those masses of people that do go up the mountain, and decide to leave trash/feces filled bags where ever they please. They lack compassion for their surroundings and fellow hikers/climbers, and are distasteful human beings. I know the story of Sodom and Gomorrah - the people wanted to have their way with the Angels staying in Lot's house, and he said take my daughters instead, and they said no, so he gave them a couple wag bags which they promptly used and stuffed under a rock near Mirror lake.

Whether you enjoy facts or not, the main trail for Mt Whitney is relatively easy. It's well marked, not that steep, and is very popular so it would probably be tough to find yourself in trouble and without human contact for very long. Because of that ( and combined with the highest-mountain-thing ) there is a very large volume of people that make their way up it every season. If the trail was harder, less people would go. I'm not sure how you could argue otherwise - just look at the other routes on the mountain that are more difficult and receive less traffic. Less traffic = theoretically less poop/trash. Again, no me importa - cover the whole main trail in power bar wrappers and crap. Who am I to say that the users of that path can't jack it all up? I promise to not call the litterbugs mean names any more as well.

Bob, sorry if you felt insulted. I appreciate your contributions to discussions on this forum! On the other hand, I get pretty riled up when anyone brings up cutting back access to the wilderness as a first resort to some problem. There were so many people in the Half Dome thread on this forum and a Yosemite forum, willing to let YNP cut the numbers going to Half Dome yet again, without even trying, in fact, some even condemning the idea of trying other options.

It is not you -- it's just the idea of cutting back the numbers being the preferred choice. I hear it so many times from so many people. Nearly always it is from those who spend more time than most in the mountains, those with more technical climbing experience, those who have been hiking longer than others. And the attitude is nearly always an arrogant condemnation of the Vacation Hikers, or Disneyland Tourists; Flip Flop hikers; Commoners. There's an attitude in there that I call ugly.

And what bothers me more, is that this same attitude can be found in the National Park and National Forest people who set the policies. It really fires me up, because myself being a commoner, I can't get access to the wilderness due to tight quotas, yet when I have gotten the last available permit, hiked into some backcountry spot, I never see a soul! There is something wrong with that picture.

Just one thing Bob: re-reading your five suggestions for the Whitney trail, I just cannot see how you can then write "You falsely assume that I am one of those who want to keep the commoners out" Maybe you can explain who you would keep out. I am puzzled.

Finally, for solutions to the WAG bags left behind... Here are two suggestions I like:
1. Charge more per hikers in the Whitney Zone. Use the money to add foot rangers to keep better eye on things.
2. Put an identifying mark on each and every wag bag, so those left behind could be tracked to the hikers leaving them.

Also rebuild the several toilets that were taken out.

I like the education idea, too. Maybe a ten-minute course, and a 5-minute test to make sure people actually learned what was said. Miss too many on the test, take the course again!

There are quite a few ideas that should be tried BEFORE cutting the numbers.

Actually, Steve, that is EXACTLY what you should see in a wilderness experience. You posted about this before, and I responded, and the whole concept apparently sailed over your head.

Wilderness is NOT the same as "backcountry". It has specific characteristics:

"A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain."

Within wilderness areas, the Wilderness Act strives to restrain human influences so that ecosystems (the Wilderness Act, however, makes no specific mention of ecosystems) can change over time in their own way, free, as much as possible, from human manipulation. In these areas, as the Wilderness Act puts it, "the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man"—untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.

The specific wording of the Act says:

DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS


(c) A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.
=======================

I remain dumbfounded at how people can just IGNORE THE LAW. I don't see how it could be clearer:

"retaining its primeval character and influence"
"without permanent improvements or human habitation"
"imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable"
"outstanding opportunities for solitude"

How do permanent toilets fit into that?
How do 160 people a day fit into that?

Steve, you describe a wilderness experience, as it was meant to be experienced, AND YOU COMPLAIN.

What's up with that?????

Thee. Best. Quote. Ever!

> ...AND YOU COMPLAIN.
My complaint is that I almost did not even GET THE CHANCE to have that wilderness experience.

> What's up with that?

I see almost nothing in the definition saying I should not encounter others like myself, hiking in, carrying everything that I need in and out, leaving no trace, taking nothing but pictures and grand memories.

My (and others') presence does not bring permanent improvements or habitation, and does not change the area's natural condition. In fact, the trails are the biggest imprint of man's work.

As for "outstanding opportunities for solitude": How far from others do you need to be for solitude? I can find solitude from the masses at Trail Camp -- it just takes maybe ten minutes.

But it is pretty obvious from the behavior of most campers, that this solitude issue is over-emphasized practically every time restrictions are tightened. Most campers will plop down right next to others, rather than spending the ten minutes to walk 200 yards away to find their solitude.

I see nothing in the Wilderness Act requiring the wilderness gatekeepers to emphasize solitude to the degree they use it. These wilderness areas encompass millions of acres, with millions of "opportunities for solitude". Yet the gatekeepers use that phrase to prevent so many from having ANY wilderness experience whatsoever, resulting in zero opportunity for solitude.

Ken - would you clarify this statement? I've day-hiked Langley several times, and never needed a permit. It's a longish hike, but not nearly as taxing as Whitney.

I've not needed to look into permits for overnight stays in that area - is that what you're referring to in terms of restrictions?

Wilderness means a certain degree of solitude.

Backcountry means not being able to see the front country.

Whitney is neither.

But, that being said, and at the risk of upsetting my boss' husband: Bob, when I go north in a few weeks, I'll be a touron climbing in a new range. I suppose I should stay home?

More seriously, anyone who treats my backyard responsibly is welcome here. Educate yourselves, practice leave no trace ethics, hike and climb with good judgement and safety. If you insist on acting like asses, I, for one, have no problem calling you on it. To your face. Confrontationally.

In the meantime, while y'all fight over quotas/poopbags/camping spaces/definitions/watevah, I'll be out playing in the grandest backyard for which any girl could ever wish...

Ken, the specially designated Whitney Zone is not typical "wilderness" as found in the hundreds of thousands of acres elsewhere in the high Sierra. For example, the permanent man made habitable stone masonry structure on the summit would have to be removed in order to comply. The Whitney Zone needs to be managed as a unique area under special regulations due to it's immense popularly.

The need for toilets has been recognized since the 1960's as a critical component of a responsible waste management program for this special use area. It's only recently that a different approach has been tried and the results are obvious. Hence this thread and all the discussion about how wag bags are not an effective stand-alone solution for 17,000 people climbing this trail every year.

That's not to say wag bags wouldn't be part of any comprehensive waste management program for an area like this. They are indeed good to have been toilets (as SoCalGirl described), for the summit section above trail camp, and in the winter. Bring all available tools to bear on this problem including solar toilets, wag bags, education, and more oversight.

Even if the permit numbers are scaled back, this will always be a heavily impacted area as people will come in from other trailheads or hike through illegally at night. People will not go away and neither will their waste. It needs to be managed.

Well said, Laura. You are indeed lucky to live so close to this, but more importantly you get up and take advantage of it. I've noticed that most people do not take good advantage of the outdoor opportunities surrounding them. Keep going and keep posting your stories! We're expecting a book some day.

Yee Haa! Let us know how your trip goes, but don't tell us where on this forum, 'lest we all rush there and turn it into another Whitney Experience.

By the way, I seldom share what I post here with my wife; she would just tell me to STHU (like some folks here might wish...ha ha).

Steve, I don't want to keep anyone out of the backcountry. It is always a delight to meet newbies on the trail, and see the wonder in their eyes.

Never assume you know what is going through an old man's mind! What the young achieve through energy and brute force, the old achieve through steath and deception...LOL.

I agree with most of your suggestions (surprise, surprise), but still believe numbers ought to be cut back. Whew, finally we might be getting somewhere.

Maybe what is needed is a few S&^$% inspectors at the trail head, doing "bag counts", full or empty. Absent their assigned bags, have them run back up the trail to retrieve theirs...hmmm...probably won't work either.

Okay, I will back away from my "vacation backpackers" statement and say that the blame for the trashing of the backcountry can be shared across the spectrum of hikers and packers, not just the occasional travellers.

Happy hiking, my friend.

Yes, education will certainly help, but there is always the factor of free-will (a little theology here). Nearly every high-school has vehicle safety classes, complete with wrecked cars and fake corpses, but there will still be some kids who refuse to believe the lesson applies to them.

We can know what is expected of us regarding our behavior, but when the moment of decision arrives do we always, unfailingly, do the right thing? Those who say they never sin, lie.

Aye, remember that the Giraffe was designed by a committee.

I agree, bring back the toilets!

So, instead of going for the emotional argument, let's look at why there is a problem.

I know a couple of hikers who have no desire to use anything but modern sanitation facilities. They only do dayhikes up Whitney. So in general, they are not the problem.

If someone is willing to eliminate/defecate/take a dump outdoors, it really isn't any different to dig a cat hole or get it into the green bag. So that's not the problem.

The problem is in carrying the package up and down the trail with the associated stench trail. Who really wants to be hiking 10 feet behind the guy in the backwash of his dangling poop bag? Not me.

So what's the solution. I love win/win, two birds with one stone solutions.

There's also a shortage of overnight permits. At least from my perspective, since I didn't get one this year.

How about two permits being reserved every day for walk in wag bag haul persons (one for outpost and one for trail). The Designated Poo Hauler sets up a drop point and they collect during the day while the DPH is hiking to the top (sans poo). Then the DPH picks up the accumulated packages and brings them on down the hill. I hike alone, so I wouldn't have to worry about a hiking buddy swimming in the backwash.

Another way to handle it is like an aluminum can deposit. Everybody puts down $5 with their registration. If they return a full wagbag, they get their deposit back. Sure, a lot of people will blow off a five dollar deposit and leave their wagbag up on the hill to avoid carrying it. But there are going to be people who think "hmm, 20 bags is $100. I'm willing to carry a bag of poo for a couple of miles downhill for $100."

I know, I know, it won't work.....but what we have now doesn't work. Maybe providing incentive to some hikers who can gain something by the removal of wagbags can benefit everyone.

"DPH" -- ROFLOL!!!

I personally like the numbered wag bag-linked to the permit idea, which has been mentioned more than once in these discussions over the months. It shouldn't be too difficult to implement.

As for backwash smell, my recollection of using these was that not only do they contain an effective smell-absorbing cat-litter-like substance (which allows for multiple uses of the same bag incidentally), but also that the plastic bags seal well enough (and the plastic is thick enough) so that the smell doesn't get out. Even assuming it did get out, I'm pretty sure the odor would quickly dissipate in the dry mountain air and would be be limited to possibly the first couple of feet behind the hiker carrying it, and unless another hiker was continuously tailgating the allegedly odiferous bag at very close range without either falling back out of "smell range" or just passing the hiker carrying the bag, then lack of common sense would seem to prevail at that point.

Actually, I would think those MT dayhikers who want to use only modern sanitation facilities would be at high risk in this discussion. Since there are no such facilities on the MT, 22+ sometimes jarring miles over a very full day is a long way to go for most people without the use of any such facilities or without digging a cat-hole or using a wag bag.

CaT