Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion Hiker trash- WAG BAGs

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