Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion What is a wilderness experience?

I tell you the people I'd like to avoid - the Ranger behind the desk at the station. I'm sick of wasting half a weekend trying to get a piece of paper from them. I understand the need to check in - computers are better than people at that. And I understand the need to educate Joe Public, but after 127 bear lectures and a dozen real encounters with bears, I think I can give a better lecture. Why not get bear safety "certified" and mail out the permit? Do the whole thing online and have real-time GIS info of trail use and emergency contact info. If the Ranger has special condition information, post it online and let everyone know all at once. Half the time the info I get in the station is dead wrong because they've never been where I'm going.

I would love to be able to drive straight to a trailhead Friday night and take off on my schedule. Why do I have to wait around for the Ranger to open shop Saturday morning, listen to the bear lecture again, and then drive to the trailhead? I could be 10 miles down the trail.

The desk Ranger, that's the human encounter I would like to avoid.

One partial solution that Inyo and its partners at the VC seem not have considered is a system that Yosemite has adopted, modifying the permit-by-trailhead rule. Most rangers and permit literature will explain to you that your permit does not depend on your destination, but only the trailhead you use. Not so In Yosemite. For the Happy Isles (JMT) and Glacier point trailheads, there are separate quotas for certain first-night destinations, such as Little Yosemite Valley and Illilouette watershed. This is apparently to accommodate through hikers, who will typically blow right past the overused LYV site, hardly spending any time at all in the overused areas.

Why not institute a similar accommodation at the southern end of the JMT? I have long thought that it is an unfair and irrational restriction on would-be JMT through hikers wanting the classic south to north hike to make them compete with Whitney round trippers for trail access. ALmost as irrational as the current supposed trailhead permits which do not restrict access at the trailhead, but only at LPL and LBSL. How many JMT through hikers are going to be interested or satisfied with the mere 6 miles for the first day, to camp at TC with the Horde? Some, maybe, but even those would be spending far less time in the Whitney Zone then any over night permit holder, and use the trail less than a day tripper.

I would propose at least a no-TC permit, like the Yosemite no- LYV permits for Happy Isles and Glacier Point, and maybe a one-night only permit. This could take some pressure off the Yosemite trail heads, and accommodate the classic JMT route, without adding appreciably to the impacts in the WZ.

BTW: worst back-country dump I ever saw was Mirror Lake back in the day. Anyone remember that?

Beauty is to the beholder. Everyone can define this the way the want...and I do not have a problem with that. I do not consider Half Dome and Mt. Whitney wilderness during the three-season but the latter can be during the winter.

For me, it's the lack of people, even over highly traveled trails. I've been up Ice House Canyon and Mt. Baden-Powell at night and all I've seen are bright eyes staring at me. These are places that are not considered wilderness most days of the year but they were those nights.

The same applies to winter travel. I've was up Charlton and Baden-Powell this past winter where I did not see another person all day.

Let alone being off the gird.

Hate to break it to you, but there's a good trail for the entire north approach to Lamarck. South side has a good trail for a hundred vert or so, then a reedunkulous number of ducks leading through the talus to another trail headed through the Darwin Bench. Jus' sayin'.

My wilderness is BIGGER than yours!

Unrelated - desk rangers are a necessity because we don't have a minimum IQ requirement to go into the mountains.

One of them is necessary.

I guess he meant not a maintained trail like the JMT, so that was the distinction of making Lamarck a more-wilderness location. Of course, one could say there are very few true wilderness routes anywhere in the Sierras as there have been animal or Indian trails for centuries.

getting back to the point:
Same thing with NPS here in the east. They want to revegetate overused rocky outcrops like Mary's Rock on the AT, remove other similar sites that may have guardrails or walls.
Mary's Rock

How about numbers of people? The most classic Virginia hike is Old Rag mountain with a small bit of low grade scrambling. It now has a day-permit system of sorts. So instead, I just go midweek in the winter when there are far fewer people and better air clarity.

"an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man"

"retaining its primeval character and influence,"

"without permanent improvements"

"protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions "

"with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable"

"outstanding opportunities for solitude"

Seems to violate almost EVERY line and defining element of wilderness, eh? As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words:



Is that part of what I'm saying clear, Steve?

That's the meeting I just returned from. Sorry I didn't make it last year, to hang with you Bob!

Can't be, since this wilderness belongs to me. I'm just really good at sharing.

And, oh, irony: this coming from the guy who doesn't believe in permits.

(But I agree with you, my sweet!)

Oh, I believe in permits. Permits are for folks who filter Sierra water directly into their bear can.

Yeah, I don't want to lower the employment rate in Bishop, and someone has to sell those Smokey Bears and T-shirts anyway. Some people rely on desk Rangers to plan their entire trip for them. Ever been stuck in line behind that scene? There goes another hour of daylight. Just mail me the piece of paper please. Unless you don't bother with it, eh Burchey. I'm just quoting Laura.

They are finally starting to direct mail permits for Desolation Wilderness through Recreation.gov. Finally. Now if the rest of the Forests and Parks can figure it out...

Timing is everything. This is a Friday morning in July. It's the same at the ice cream stand in the Valley, you can have it all to yourself at 10am or stand in line at 2pm.

If only we could figure out a way to hollow out the torso of the rangers, make them into a mobile solar toilet - use the blank permit slips to wipe with. Solved!

Of course: Go wherever I damn well please when I please to do it. But why stop there? Clear cut the woods, build a cabin (or a 37 room house), dam the stream (or just crap in it), and... (ok, I'll stop before getting more colorful).

For many people, a wilderness experience might be one of the following:

1. A Country music concert
2. A night alone at a Motel 6
3. A really bad day at work
4. Enduring the poor English grammar of some news anchors (they went to college, where?).
5. Attempting to define the term "Wilderness Experience."

Any more additions to the list?

Sorry, I can't help it... This is such a serious topic...LOL.

And that's not an overreaction or anything, right? It's not even close to what I said. I'm not talking about taking over the land. I'm talking about being allowed to visit it. You know, since our tax dollars pay for it and all.

I don't stand in the way of others from doing what they want, and in return, I don't want anyone standing in mine. But I also don't expect to have someone come to my rescue when I screw the pooch. I just don't see what doesn't seem fair about that.

What I wrote went well beyond what you said and I'm sure it was not what you meant. You are probably a very reasonable person. I obviously intended to be hyperbolic. Along with going where you want to go, when you want to go there, is doing what you want to do. Just being there has some impact and many people like to do things that escalate the impact rather quickly. So, limits come into the discussion. Indeed, they are the discussion. In the civilized world, limits are a function of government.

"I don't stand in the way of others from doing what they want, and in return, I don't want anyone standing in mine. But I also don't expect to have someone come to my rescue when I screw the pooch. I just don't see what doesn't seem fair about that."

I believe that would be the operating principle in Mogadishu, but you don't live there. The public lands are held in trust for ALL Americans, not just the ones who would defile them any way that want, because they are "theirs". You've obviously never owned property with someone else, or you would know that you have to make collective decisions for both your benefits.
If you've lived in an apartment, you don't simply bang on the walls, because it is "yours".

This was all laid out a long, long time ago in "The Tragedy of the Commons", and explains why your approach inevitably leads to the destruction of the resource. Every time.

Great concept of wilderness, I guess. Closed Ice cream stands or streets of new york:

My .02, which is perhaps only really worth .01....

Like so many other things in life, the few ruin it for the many (or in this case, have the many ruined it for the few? :confused:) .

I've lived in many apartments over the years, and it comes down to mutual respect. I don't bang on the walls because I don't want my neighbor to do it. That way we can both enjoy a higher quality of life. Unfortunately, there's always that drunk neighbor that turns the music up at 3am and knocks the dresser over.

Some people just don't understand how to be respectful, and as such, have ruined it for those who can.

Living right on the edge of Tahoe Nat'l Forest, there are plenty of places to visit where I won't see people, and the land is relatively untouched. And then there are areas where people have used and abused.

I guess to me, the question becomes how effective enforcement is. One example that comes to mind is the Kalalau Trail in Kauai. The permit process is respected by those that are most likely to respect the land. All of the squatters that go in and disrespect the land also abuse/ignore the regulations. Due to the remote nature, many are able to get away it for a long time. It's taken its toll on the area, and unfortunately has made the process more complicated than it feels like it should be to someone like me, who follows the regs. And despite the rules and attempts at enforcement, there are still people that 'sneak' in and overstay their welcome, to the detriment of the wilderness. So how effective, then, are the regulations imposed? It's seemingly the wilderness equivalent of preaching to the choir.

Another prime and local example would be the WAG bag situation, but I prefer not to go down that road.

For many, myself certainly included, the whole thing is really just sad. Sad that I have to jump through all the hoops. Sad that others cannot respect nature or each other properly. It just feels wrong to be in the "wilderness" when there are so many rules, regulations and steps just to get there!