Mt Whitney Zone Forums General Discussion WAG bags left on trail

What's going on with people leaving their WAG bags on the trail? We saw around 20 of them in various places on the Main Trail. Are people leaving them to retrieve later? Put the WAG bag in your pack and take it with you!

It is despicable that people can't be responsible for taking with them, whether it be up or down, their wag bags, and garbage they produce. Yesterday, the ranger that hikes the trail asking for permits and packing out micro trash had seven wag bags in her back pack of which one had leaked on to her arm. She had six pairs of shoes tied to and in her hands, and a full pack of wag bags, bottles, and trash that had been pulled off from trail camp on down the trail. I find it extremely sad, that some people don't think of their actions and items and how they effect anything or anyone else. Just another reminder of how some people ruin things for other people. If you are big enough to go up a mountain, be big enough to take everything you brought in, off and out with you.

This has been a problem for years, especially after the USFS removed the toilet at trail camp. The USFS needs to bring those "unsightly" toilets back, and perhaps install several along the trail for those folks who don't know the proper way to shit-in-the-woods.

One of my favorite hikes, the Bishop Pass trail, is also polluted with human waste at most of the better camp sites. When I backpack there, I avoid the more populated areas and get way off the beaten path to select a camp site.

Another popular hike, the Camino De Santiago, in northern Spain is notorious for the amount of human waste along the route, most of which is left by European hikers.

While tempted to blame certain ethnic groups at Mt. Whitney who have bad toilet habits, I realize it is a universal problem. I believe that when a trail becomes famous, like Mt. Whitney, it tends to attract people who have little knowledge or regard for human impact on the environment. Mt. Whitney is a tourist magnet for people who have the need to add it to their "bucket list", regardless of the mess they leave behind.

Well said

Got to wonder what it costs to haul off toilet from trail camp. Maybe some signage at trailheads and pics of damage could help. Maybe, increase the permit fees and make it so you get your deposit back on your return of full wag bag!

Excellent suggestions. Have them sign-out for their wag-bag and then inspect on return. If no wag bag on return, then cite 'em and fine 'em. Problem is...it would require a 24 hour shit inspector at the trailhead.

lol 'shit inspector'

I heard couple years back park services was sued by an angry adventurer over the adventure pass, not sure about the result but I know it was ruled against the adventure pass. It was my understanding that if there is any facilities like toilets and you must have an adventure pass in your car.

This is that thing, I dont think any of us mind to pay extra fees for such facilities, especially for Whitney zone, increase the fees put couple toilets, problem solved.

This is a lot of the reason they stopped allowing camping up on top of Half Dome a couple decades ago. There was so much human feces building up everywhere that they couldn't do much of anything about it.

Here are several old threads, and a video to watch:

  Torching Whitney Toilets --   Garry Oye got really upset over this one.

  Whitney Waste Solutions: WAG bags, toilets, or ???

From 2011:   Solar Toilets vs Carrying Wag Bags

It could easily be done with a vending machine. When you pick up your permit you leave $100 (or whatever) deposit on your credit card and get your WAG bag. When you finish your hike you go to the machine at the trail head (or close by) and have your WAG bag barcode read. It then deposits it in a tamper proof bin designed to be easily swapped out and hauled away. Your card is credited back the deposit. You leave your bag somewhere, you lose the deposit.

I'm pretty sure this is more or less what the do on Aconcagua right? If the Argentinians can do it, the USFS should be able to make it work too.

Excellent idea, DUG!

I’ve read dozens of schemes like this for making people use and remove their wag bags. They are all either totally unworkable or trivial to defeat.

Pay your $100 deposit and then leave the bag in your car. (That’s the smart thing to do; if you lose the bag, you’re out $100.) Climb the mountain and poop wherever you like. Get the bag out of your car and have it scanned. If the machine weighs the bag to make sure you used it, just scoop a little dirt into it, or poop in the bag at the trailhead. Even with a live 24-7 bag inspector (obscenely expensive), there is no way to confirm that the bag contains ALL of your poop from the trip. And what if you did a dayhike or one-nighter, and didn’t take a crap?

I would think that hikers who assumably appreciate nature and etc would understand that they need to be responsible and do their part to preserve the beauty of whitney.
I agree that you cant police what people put in the bag or if they use their bag or not. But if a hiker is issued a bar coded bag and that bag does not show up as bar coded into the trail head deposit station then that hiker could get a fine. That would at least be a way to keep the bags from being left on the mountain. Kind of like red box works.......terd box.

These people that hurt the environment undoubtedly cause increased fees and quotas.

People have been vandalizing vending machines since the days when they dispensed candy for a nickel. What do you think will happen the first time someone with a bag of shit doesn’t get his $100 back? Does the machine keep the bag anyway, depriving the hiker of the evidence that he used and returned his bag? Or does it return the bag of shit to the furious hiker? If the machine goes down, what will the next 50 hikers do when they can’t get their $100 back or deposit their shit? How will they collect the deposit in the off-season when permits are self-issue? And who empties and repairs the machine in the off-season when the road is closed?

As I said before, these schemes are either totally unworkable or trivial to defeat. They are usually both.

We can try to educate everybody, and shame the jerks who don’t want to be responsible. Or the USFS could re-install the outhouses.

Aye there's the rub. Is silly to pretend that toilets don't belong in a "Wilderness" area where Inyo issues 100 permits a day. They may be backed into a corner, however, since the toilets were removed without all the necessary approvals, and it may open a real can of worms to start the approval process up again. Meanwhile . . .

The solution is rather simple to me:

Stamp every bag with a permit number.

The Rangers patrolling the trail see bags left behind. They jot down the permit number.

Once back at the ranger station they pull up the permit and inform the permit holder that they will not be issued another permit for a yead.....or 5 years.....or life as far as I'm concerned.

Simple and would fix the problem.

BB

Devices like this rely in part on the hawthorne effect. If someone thinks they are being monitored and because they want their $100 deposit back a vast majority will comply.
Also consider the penalty threshold and probability of being caught for the two acts. Flipping your wag bag down one of the backside main trail windows with no one watching is almost a zero risk and only a fine if caught. Taking your ice axe to a national park service device with cameras and in the portal with people sometimes around is potentially a federal offense and is a much more risk adverse behavior
You would have multiple readers if one failed. In the unlikely event of a total system crash refunds could be credited for those who requested them during that time period.
Unmanned reader technology devices and their security and monitoring have been vetted for decades.
There are half a million atm machines in the us and all the comparable barriers are managed. Managing an unmanned atm device is way more complex than a terd bag device.

I've also been known to need to take a dump going up the Mountaineers Route and several times while hiking to the Gambler's Special I had to offload a gas station burrito. Those old toilets coming back would not have helped me in either situation.

thank you instagram and facebook for bringing more idiots onto the trail

I don’t like the government-issued WAG bags, so I make my own out of two Ziploc bags. (I’ve been doing this for 20+ years.) If I leave it by the trail, there will be no permit number on it. If I just crap under a rock, there will be no permit number on it.

As I keep saying, these schemes are either totally unworkable or trivial to defeat. This is kinda fun. You guys keep proposing “simple” solutions that will “fix the problem”, and I’ll keep shooting them down. You can inconvenience the people who follow the rules, but there are a thousand ways to get around carrying your poop out if you don’t want to be responsible.

I don’t like the government-issued WAG bags, so I make my own out of two Ziploc bags. (I’ve been doing this for 20+ years.) If I leave it by the trail, there will be no permit number on it. If I just crap under a rock, there will be no permit number on it.

As I keep saying, these schemes are either totally unworkable or trivial to defeat. This is kinda fun. You guys keep proposing “simple” solutions that will “fix the problem”, and I’ll keep shooting them down. You can inconvenience the people who follow the rules, but there are a thousand ways to get around carrying your poop out if you don’t want to be responsible. [/quote]

Ditto with the grand idea of bringing the solar toilets back. For every reason you drop as to why you think they should return, there are dozens of why the didn't work and won't work. It doesn't really matter if YOU keep shooting anyone's ideas down. We are just a group of like-minded folks tossing around ideas that will never come to fruition and you're not a policymaker. So I don't think anyone needs your blessing to discuss any idea. Thanks for playing, have a great Navy day............................................DUG

You are given a bag with a reader device and a $$$ hold is placed on your credit card. There are only two scenarios:

1.) You take responsibility to get your bag scanned into the collection device and you get your $$$ hold back on your credit card.

2.) Your irresponsible with your bag and you you don't get your bag into the collection device and you don't get your $$$ hold back on your credit card.

What if my bag is taken away by a tornado? What if a marmot eats my bag? What if north korea attacks the us and sets up central command on mt whitney? Well then, you don't get your deposit back.

The system is not designed to keep you or a bear from shitting in the woods. It is designed to penalize the awful people who leave their bags on the mountain. Whoever leaves their bags on the mountain deserves their penalty.

As for the tornado, you will be either either SOL or LOS or facing a lawsuit for improper disposal of fecal matter. Someone's house will be TP'd. HAZMAT up!

Marmots eat $h!+? That would be the perfect remedy since all of us ingest power bars and what not. Hey, this is good s_ _ t, man!

As for North Korea, the shan is going to hit the fit, or is it the fit is going to hit the shan. Either way, can they say MOAB!

Why are you so dead set on "shooting them down"? I don't really see how these solutions effect you much if you already have your systems figured out and aren't part of the problem. Why not be open to trying these ideas out?

I think BP is playing devil's advocate.

A solution for the problem isn't up to us here, though. It's up to the USFS to try something. Current system seems to be getting worse. I just hope they don't cut back on the number of permits they issue -- that IS one option. Some here are pretty sore about the way the old system was literally burned down, without the proper process of exploring all the options.

I'd like to see a llama pack train used to service wag bag collection stations at Outpost and TC. It's an option that could be tried for one season ...or even one month.

I persist in shooting down these “solutions” because they aren’t solutions at all. The very fact that I can easily shoot them down is proof that they aren’t solutions, isn’t it? Do you really believe that these “solutions” will magically work if I just shut up and stop poking holes in them?

The real problem is human excrement being left in heavily traveled wilderness where every rock already has five turds under it. A WAG bag with a turd in it may be an unpleasant sight/smell along the trail, but it’s better than not using the WAG bag at all. At least it might find its way to the dumpster if a ranger or someone else carries it down. The sixth turd under a rock or the turd buried in two inches of sand near the pond at Trail Camp will never be carried down.

A “solution” that uses a barcode, a microchip, your permit number, or some other scheme to identify your WAG bag only identified your WAG bag. A “solution” that imposes fines, denies you future permits, keeps your $100 deposit, or takes away your birthday based on what you do with your WAG bag only affects what you do with your WAG bag. You can still shit wherever you like, and bring the WAG bag down empty. These “solutions” don’t address that problem, and they probably make it worse. After all, if you’re out $100 for not bringing your WAG bag down, you’re going to want to take really good care of it.

Other than education and peer pressure, I don’t know how to get more people to carry out their poop. But I’m confident that a $100 deposit and an expensive WAG bag scanning machine at the trailhead isn’t the answer.

I mentioned the outhouses in a previous post. That would certainly reduce the poop left in the wilderness. However, there are problems with the outhouses, and I’m not taking a stand one way or the other.

In most places in the wilderness, traffic is light enough to allow digging a six-inch hole and burying it. This WAG bag business is only necessary in heavy traffic areas or where ground is too hard or frozen for digging holes.

BTW, many years ago, I read about spreading your poop as thin as possible on a flat rock and letting the sun decompose it. I tried it a couple of times in very remote places. In one case, I returned three months later and checked the results. There was clearly something on the rock, but it didn’t look or smell anything like poop. Please don’t try this at Trail Camp.

Let's cut the number of entries from the Portal to ten a day. Day hike or overnight. If you want to see Whitney, you start from farther away or you're one of the super lucky ten. Onion Valley to Whitney is still a doable day hike for some.

Let's cut it back until all the current poop is broken down in 10-15 years. Or whatever. Meanwhile, we can educate people on the evil of poop and once the area is restored some, loosen the quotas up.

To make it fair, once you have gotten your magic permit for a portal entry, you can never get another one and have to use another trailhead.

If people can't mind their poop, we will have to restrict access to limit the shit.................................DUG

Dug, I agree. The Whitney region needs a long-term recovery period; 20 - 25 years might be even better. Let's give nature a long break to recover from human abuse.

Many people are not going to mind their poop, especially one-time visitors. Their attitude might be "Oh, I'm only here once...I won't have to look at it again." Out of sight, out of mind. It's similar to cigarette smokers who drop their butts on the ground; no consideration for other people.

Then, there will be groups that like to preach environmentalism (Sierra Club, Friends of the Inyo, etc.) who would scream and yell if denied "their right" to enter the wilderness whenever they like.

Are you all sure the bags are abandoned, or are people picking them up after you see them?
On my last trip we only saw them on the way up, but hikers had apparently claimed their poop for the trip down.

No, not all people are leaving their wag bags behind; no one has ever said that. Enough bags are left behind to create a mess for the people who do follow the rules.

Point conceded, some of the plastic bags of human excrement on the trail are only "temporarily" abandoned. But there's no way to tell which ones will be picked up by the owner on the way down and which ones are permanently abandoned. Either way, other hikers like yourself have to witness and avoid the crap bags on this "wilderness" trail. A mess is a mess and none of it should be accepted as OK.

Sierra Moutain Guides Blog Post

Toilets ARE a technically viable solution that are a proven solution on Long's Peak, Rocky Mtn NP since 1983. A properly designed and maintained toilet system COULD work just fine on Whitney.

There are many other issues with toilets, as with any solution for that matter, but the fact is toilets are technically viable on Whitney.

There are many other issues with WAG bags, as with any solution for that matter, but the fact is WAG bags are technically viable on Whitney.

Which simply shows that the discussion of technical viability in the absence of a clear plan to address the particular associated social AND political AND economic viability is pointless, bags or toilets.

Dale B. Dalrymple

Glad you agree that toilets are indeed technically viable, Dale. I consider that progress, considering where this topic was in 2011. Arguing that single point was what drew me into this heated topic back then.

Yes, we all know there are many other challenges to overcome to see a change to the status quo. It's easy to pee in the punchbowl, but if you have a plan to propose, please lay it out for us.

What I posted in 2011 in response to the concerns of ranger George about InyoNF's ability to implement RMNP's solar toilets:

There was no 'technical viability' issue in November 2011. That hasn't changed. And the whole statement still stands. Did you think it would be more colorful to misrepresent what my position has been since 2011?


Well, the first sentence seems issue free. The next phrase is colorful, but there is no punchbowl here. And what to propose? I did describe on this site what I thought it would take to motivate and enable Inyo NF to build solar toilets. Did you think it would be more colorful to forget that, too? Not to worry. It was considered too expensive and politically improbable even then. And what plans did you detail here?

Dale B. Dalrymple

Dale, the supposed reason the toilets were removed is because Inyo and others claimed they were not technically viable. As an engineer, I took exception to that and fought that battle over dozens of posts, research on backcountry toilet systems, letters to Inyo management, obtained public records from Inyo, phone calls with the Forest Supervisor and District Engineer. Any yet Inyo's website still implies that:

"In the past, toilets were located along the Mt. Whintey Trail. Despite numerous renovations and retrofits, they never functioned properly and were overwhelmed with waste. Sometimes the toilets and related cesspools overflowed. The toilets were removed several years ago."

I'm glad you were not in that camp back in 2011 but a lot of people were, and there are still people who don't agree that toilets are technically viable - just read this very thread. The tide has changed on that one issue since 2011 for many people on this forum, but its not "pointless" to discuss the technical viability of the toilets.

Again, if you have a plan for moving forward that covers all the challenges and requirements you laid out, please focus on that one topic. You seem to have good knowledge of public process so please focus on solutions. If you just want to warn everyone how difficult this issue is, please don't, we all know that and its a buzz kill. Keep it constructive.

Technically speaking, if the toilets were replaced and I needed to crap when going up via the Mountaineers Route, how would I handle that?......................................DUG

As a general rule, when you are in the wilderness and need to crap, you dig a six-inch hole, crap in the hole, cover it up, and pack out your toilet paper. In some overused areas, such as Whitney and Shasta, you are required to use a WAG bag and carry everything out. If there is a toilet nearby, feel free to use it instead of the hole or the WAG bag.

I hope this answers your question about the Mountaineers’ Route.

Glad to see you've toned down the snarkiness to a manageable level. Since a hole is impossible to dig in many parts of the Mountaineers Route (and the main trail), WAG BAGs seem like they are not only here to stay, but are the best option. Now, if we could just find a way to get lazy shits to bring them back down the mountain. We seem to have come full circle once again on this debate. I hope you are able to find something new to shoot down for sport on online forums. Have a great Navy day!....................................DUG

Wag bags are always an option, DUG. The problem is when its the ONLY option. Calling people names or threatening consequences will not change human nature. Some percentage will always find a way to get around carrying a bag of crap to the summit and back.

Its not that we've come full circle, the evidence of a failed system piles up, and the debate continues year after year.

I asked SierraNevada to recount the plans he had detailed here to resolve the solar toilet issue. His reply:

This is a recounting of the efforts made to confront the forest service, but it includes no suggestion on where a positive effort should be aimed. It's alwas been that way with him.


That's true. They did leak, That was because there was not adequate maintenance and that was because of budget and political problems. That's what ranger George and I said and what SierraNevada said in the discussion in 2011 that I had to quote above when my position was misrepresented.

It's not only pointless but also disruptive to a discussion trying to deal with WAG bag solutions. And rather off from what really went on in 2011.

I'm glad SierraNevada has come around to this view. It's a great time for him to start his first shot at it and move past the 'historic struggle' with the Forest Service,


I hope SteveC and SierraNevada can continue to move in this direction.

Dale B. Dalrymple

Your personal attacks are inaccurate and inappropriate, Dale. For the third time, if you have a plan to address the challenges you like to bring up that we're all aware of, let's see your plan. I've had a plan all along and I've done my part to move it forward.

Back in 2011, I proposed a phased approach to the Forest Supervisor that he showed interest in - to replace the toilet at Outpost camp and continue handing out wag bags for the upper mountain. Perhaps also try a collection bin at Trail Camp. Use mules or llamas to remove waste weekly using sanitary technicians or a private company. Very importantly - free up the Rangers to do more important work. If the toilets do indeed work well and improve the situation, then consider replacing them at Trail Camp as well. Continue handing out wag bags, but only to those who want to use them and commit to carrying the way up and all the way out. The key to success is giving people other options.

The Forest Supervisor wanted to know more about the toilet system at Longs Peak (Rocky Mtn NP) including design details and costs. He didn't seem to be well informed about the issues with the current system on Whitney that we discuss here about bags left behind and the piles of human waste. Unfortunately, the Whitney District Ranger at the time Ms. Woods, who is gone now, took the approach that toilets were not technically viable. That was the end of that. So once again, the technical viability of toilets is still a key issue.

It's also noteworthy that Garry Oye has retired from the NPS as a national wilderness manager. Garry was the person responsible for starting the wag bags when he was District Ranger at Inyo, which is fine, but he also burned down the toilets, which greatly complicates other solutions. And he did it without completing the environmental review process that was underway with a 50 page environmental assessment & public comments received. That should anger any true environmentalist.

Steve and I plan to reach out to the Forest Supervisor again this fall with hopes of restarting a productive dialog. Although I'm passionate about getting the facts straight about the situation on Whitney, it doesn't really affect me. I'm pretty much done going up that trail, but I do exit over Trail Crest at times.