Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion Interim Wag Bag "Solution"

Until a modern solution to the human waste problem is created maybe we could have a couple of Wag Bag "Drop" Boxes located near Outpost and Trail Camps. In the old days the solar toilets were located there and, if I remember correctly, a helicopter was used to remove the remaining waste.

Perhaps the undisciplined folks who are unwilling to pack out their waste would at least be willing to carrying their wag bag to the appropriate drop box. Unfortunately, I do recall that some people abused the solar toilets by dumping their garbage there. Maybe that would still happen, however, it would not cause a drop box to malfunction as those solar toilets did.

I realize that a helicopter is invasive and noisy but at this point 'friendly persuasion' does not appear to be working; something needs to be done.

I'm afraid that it will not solve anything. it will become full in a matter of days and then they will just be piled up next to the container.

The one solution I think would work would be to have a $100 deposit for EACH wag bag issued with your permit. the wag bag would have a unique barcode to identify it as yours. When you return the bag, scan it before dropping it into the box and your permit account is credited.

you could also issue some type or reward system as well. (if you bring one down that was not issued to you)

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this idea of collection bins. They can be sized so they do not fill up in a matter of days. How fast they fill up would depend on the size and number of bins. Also, some number of people would still carry their bag out.

Bins would help prevent people from storing their plump presents on the trail to be picked up on the way down. They could use llamas or mules to empty the bins more frequently without the impact of helicopters. On the negative side, the bins could get pretty stinky downwind.

As for any deposit/credit or punitive approach, they would need to finish their NEPA documentation to implement anything like that. This is all discussed in the thread on "Solar Toilets vs Carrying Wag Bags." Because they circumvented the environmental process, they can't issue a Forest Order requiring the use of a wag bag let alone require a deposit for one. It's strictly voluntary, but there really is no good alternative, so in effect it's a mandatory system. Then there's the cost of implementing a scanning system in an outdoor environment and the likelihood of it being vandalized by people who are not so happy with the wag bags in the first place.

In my opinion, they should install a modern solar toilet at Outpost camp. Contract out the maintenance to a Lone Pine packer using llamas or perhaps mules. Keep the Rangers out of it as much as possible. Maybe try the bins up at Trail Camp until they build a new toilet there once they realize it can be done. They still argue that it can't work despite success elsewhere under even more challenging conditions.

The reality of the situation is that hikers are not united on the issue and the Rangers do not want to maintain toilets. One Ranger was quoted referring to picking up errant wag bags as, "job security." Another thinks they should hire more Rangers just to pick up bags. Really they have more important stuff to do than deal with human waste. Contracting out toilet maintenance would get them out of this mess and provide the best environmental protection. But some hikers insist this heavily impacted area is some kind of pristine wilderness and they ignore that there are toilets in wilderness areas all over the Sierras.

Good points! Like the idea of mules to empty the bins.

If one reads through all the posts in the other thread, it becomes apparent that ideas and support are all over the map. There is no consensus among hikers, and a less than positive attitude within the Forest Service. The old toilets were burned down without a decent alternate plan, so now we're left with the only option of packing out the poop ourselves. Thank you Garry Oye.

It has been shown that in other locations, it can work with better-designed toilets. But that requires a whole lot more support than we have in the Whitney Zone.

The wag bag problem (and the water filter/not filter topic) is an issue that pops up every year in both boards and has been a subject of some heated debate at times. I'm surprised there hasn't been posters banned (maybe there has been??) due to the passionate back and forth of words at times bordering on insults. IMO, this is a difficult issue to resolve because it is focused on human nature and how to correct what those of us who care about our outdoors see as a destructive behavior in the careless disposal of waste. I'm no psychologist but it doesn't take one to realize the fact that correcting bad habits and changing a person's way of thinking is a tough, if not impossible task to undertake.

From my observation there appears to be three camps when it comes to tackling this difficult:

1) Punitive/punishment group: This is the group that has proposed measures such as bar coding or some sort of id method of the wag bags themselves in an effort to connect the bags to individuals and punish them through fines for not properly turning in used (or unused?) bags after their hike. I personally find this approach by itself to be flawed for a couple of reasons. One - it would be an expensive and overly complicated method to logistically employ and enforce. The Federal budget, as we all know, is stretched rather thin these days and the rangers time, as result, as well. Not to mention the long drawn out discussions and political debates and possible studies proposed that would ensue that could possibly drag out this solution for years. The actual cost of each bag would increase significantly depending on which method - bar code or id chip, further adding costs to an dwindling budget. Sure we could charge extra for permits but that would increase the cost (unfairly, IMO) of hiking especially for those who frequent the trail and as we all know the return on our wag bag investment will more likely than not be in the neighborhood of cents on the dollar due to government inefficiencies. Two, most importantly, there are those that would find a way around it. In my observations of people, I've come to the conclusion that there are individuals and groups out there that would seemingly expend more time, effort, and resources to get around doing something they don't want to do simply because they don't want to. It's true that it would require more energy and time to circumvent the wag bag turn in process but I've seen time and time again in my job (pharmacist) observing people going through great lengths to obtain meds illegally such as lying, falsifying legal documents, and facing arrest to get or do what they want.

2)The second camp proposes re-installing modern facilities at Outpost and Trail camps. I'm all for this however as mentioned before the money just isn't there plus due the long winded debates and proposed studies that have already dragged for years after removing the previously installed toilets I just don't see this happening any time in the near or distant future (maybe not in my lifetime).

3) The third camp, which I belong, seems to hold the minority view and that is educating hikers on the importance of practicing the policy of "Leave No Trace". This could be implemented in such forms as perhaps daily Whitney hikers meetings at the interagency manned by volunteers and rangers who, in addition to providing attendees with information about hiking Whitney, could also explain and teach the importance adhering to "Leave no Trace" and how it affects all of us and the future well being of the outdoors. There can be signs posted at strategic points on the trail (I personally would rather see a sign than a wag bag!) reinforcing these points. Lastly, and most importantly, we can talk to fellow hikers one on one and explain the importance of leave no trace, gently and patiently, wherever we meet them - on the trail, at our workplace, or at the store, wherever. This idea is cheap and we can implement it right now. Hopefully we can work to change peoples attitudes and behavior one person at a time, which will, IMHO, accomplish our goal of keeping our outdoor spaces as pristine as practically possible.

A simple solution is impossible. This is wilderness and you cannot build structures in a wilderness. Bear proof enclosures that can take ~200 WAG bags/day for a quota season are pretty damn big...and believe me WAG bags will not be the only stuff goes in them.

The problem was destroying the solar outhouses. With them gone, you need "in crowd" ...monied and influential groups to take up this cause or you will not be listened to.

Do a bit of reading.

The problem is a disgusting one caused by a bunch of narcissistic children.

John, people have been banned, and complete long-running threads have been deleted ...on the other board. And that is precisely the reason this forum exists. Providing an open forum where everyone can share and discuss important matters, without their well-thought-out messages being deleted, is the most important goal of this website.

I cannot stress strongly enough why people should help support this site by sharing and participating.

A little more on this "second camp" solution. First off, the money IS there. Special purpose user fees such as the Whitney Zone permit fee are required to be spent onsite (with exceptions of course), and people would pay higher fees for quality facilities such as new toilets. The new reservation system takes a cut, but there is roughly 20,000 x $15=$300,000 annually to start with. Money was never the issue building toilets or maintaining them for almost 50 yrs. Helicopter haul outs were expensive but still within budget. I'm not sure what those bags cost, but multiply it by 20,000 and you're over $100,000 a yr for sure, plus transporting those dumpsters and waste disposal fees. Clearly the current system is quite costly and not an issue. Rocky Mtn National Park is spending less to maintain their toilet system with llamas for similar hiker numbers in similar terrain and similar elevation. So installing toilets and maintaining them is not a cost issue, users will support it financially.

Regarding long-winded debates: I think debate is appropriate for a complex problem such as this. Fear of debate no excuse for making bad decisions or giving up because it will take many years to get a solution implemented. Just follow the process, stay with it and eventually the best solution should prevail. Some people are counting on everyone getting too weary to continue the debate, and yes, the odds are in their favor. They believe in the end, they will wear everyone down and the ultimate solution will be far fewer people visiting Mt. Whitney. That's the end game here, make toilets a boogie man, let the wag bag system fail, and then reduce the quotas down to levels similar to other popular trailheads in the Eastern Sierra. Easier to manage, less impact, a better experience for the few people who get to go. So add that as #4 in your list of solutions because that's the real goal of many people who oppose toilets.

Lastly, as much as I would like human nature to evolve and everyone do the right thing, I don't like seeing a fragile environment destroyed waiting for that to happen. And frankly, I think it's asking a lot for someone who filled up a bag to have to carry it round trip up the summit and all the way back down again. Not everyone is that committed and many will simply leave it by the trail and then pick it up on the way back down. If they hide it from view, there's a good chance it will be left behind. Human nature is what it is. Keep educating and making progress, but don't ruin a mountain waiting for results. Evolution is much slower than environmental destruction.

Interesting argument. 20,000? Where does that number come from? That's 111% of the TH quota for six months. Actual permits used?

Oh, and WAG bags retail for 2.50 - 3.00. I'd be surprised if Inyo pays half that. Besides, its a marginal cost, and you can't really compare it to what would be a largely fixed cost of the toilet installation and service.

I actually agree with your bottom line though. Toilets. They work. The WAG bag system has already failed, and speaking truth to stupid requires admitting that. The only alternatives are reducing the TH quota and toilets. Which work fine between Yosemite Valley and Half Dome, BTW, with a hell of a lot more traffic than MWMT gets. And yes, its in designated wilderness, too.

You got me Dog, I was throwing numbers out there about the cost of a wag bag. But I wouldn't use Amazon.com to estimate how much the federal government actually pays for things. If anyone could do some research and find out how much this wag bag program actually costs, that would be great. My point is still valid, cost has never been the big issue for this difficult problem whether it was toilets or wag bags.

As for the 20,000 number, the average number of hikers who hit the trail is about 17,000/yr. There are a lot of cancellations who don't get a refund and every person who takes a cancellation means they collect double. The $300,000/yr number is probably low but close enough. Again, if anyone could do some research and let us know the annual fees that are collected, that would be great. In any case, I think there's plenty of money to hire a Lone Pine packer to run llamas up the trail weekly for a few months and take it to the treatment plant. If it ain't, then people would pay a little more to have nice facilities.

Plain and simple, economics is a red herring. Let's get back to the real issue, do people want to enter a lottery for 20,000 permits or 3,000 permits (pick your own number if they reduce the quotas).

Edited to be as neutral, honest, and non-offensive as reasonably possible given the many ways people can interpret things.

And you got me on the trail use. I was only counting the 100 day permits. Add in the overnights and exits, and you get 165 per day. So the (revised) 17,000 is about 60 % of permit capacity. That's a little scary, to think how much higher the use could go under the current regs, with no waste solution.

Last 3 years in a row I have not seen an abandoned and/or used wagbag on the west side.

Different clientele? Just fewer numbers? Backpackers have more time to do their business? Backpackers have a bigger bag to store it in or on? Other reasons?

[url=[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/mfhi.jpg/][/url]

Harvey,

Sorry to burst your bubble but I saw one at about 12,500' on the west switchbacks to Lower Trail Crest in '09.

We saw (what I would consider) many bags up there this week. Even seeing (hopefully empty) bags in the pond at Trail Camp. It became a common topic of conversation, so much so that we dubbed the pond "Wag Lake", not a great way to remember the trip.

1. I found it very distracting, and put me off wanting to come back to this part of the Sierras.
2. There was a gentleman reminding everyone he could to take their bags out with them, and claimed he had collected 10+ bags and was packing them out.
3. A long discussion with the Ranger on Tuesday reassured me that this level of abandoned bags was not normal, and he was taking responsibility for having not been up there in a while.

Obviously it shouldn't be the responsibility of the Rangers to clean up after people, but until another solution is found, I guess that's the current situation.

This is early in the season and it is already a problem. It ain't going to get better...as monkey sees, monkey will do.

This is the first time I heard about them in the pond and that is disconcerting.

I am not a MMWT ascender. I approach the mountain from the west, refill my water on the 97 Switchbacks and exit the same day. To me this is all esthetics. I do not have worry about the water quality.

I were someone was going to use the MMWT this coming summer, I would be calling the current chief cook and bottle washer at the INF asking what are their plans to minimize the effect of the few, the proud, the narcissistic WAG Bag leavers.

I would be very interested to hear from the "dip & sip" advocates on this recent finding of wagbags in the water sources. Is this the beginning of the end of the celebrated tradition? (I grew up hiking amongst pack/stock animals, so the concept of 'dip & sip' is very alien)

My daughter and I were on the MMWT on 6/18 & 6/19 and both of us acknowledged the "carnival" atmosphere at Trail Camp and the lack of the wilderness feel was disappointingly absent . Fellow hikers were really friendly but everyone I talked (or attempted to) seemed to be in a huge hurry, even the overnighters we met on the trail. There was one exception and that was a lady who we met on the trail when I stopped to tend to a sore foot problem my daughter had just on the trail just before Trail Camp. She saw us the next day and asked how she was doing and was glad to hear that there was no more foot issues and I felt eternally grateful for her concern. The attitude on the trail was similar the what I get everyday on flatland - very rushed and not relaxed at all. It struck me as rather sad that people could be that way in such a beautiful and stunning place. I'm sure it's the same attitude that allows people to leave their used bags on the trail and not bother to pack them out. We counted 6 used bags at or around Trail Crest, with rocks on them, on the way up and I told my daughter that hopefully these people will pick them up on their way out. They were still there on our way down. Looking back we should have hauled them back out - my bad. We did take out trash form previous campers that was left on our site that was stashed under rocks and shoved behind boulders to obviously hide it.
One observation I had was that I saw no bags on the trail before trail camp, not even around Outpost which is a popular place to stop and rest. Not sure if that's a sign of hikers carrying their bags all the way to Trail Camp and just dumping them there or some peculiar GI effect TC has on people.
IMO, the dump stations at Outpost and Trail Camp would be a good idea if implemented correctly, meaning well marked and plentiful. This system worked fairly when on Rainier with their blue-bag system with dump facilities at Camp Muir and Camp Shurman. The contents are helicoptered out but the MMWT could definitely handled with mules or llamas. Plus more signs need to be posted higher up on the trail to remind hikers of there responsibilities on the trail.
One question I have, and perhaps someone may have an answer, is: Are the majority of abandoned bags from dayhikers or overnighters?

John - as a confirmed dayhiker, I'm CERTAIN it's those dammed overnighters!

The latrines were an apparition, most likely never to return. A new waste management system would take multiple well established groups to petition the Dept. of Agriculture for anything to happen.