Mt Whitney Webcam
Mt Williamson Webcam
Feature Topics
Who's Online
1 registered (Bianca B), 11 Guests and 79 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
3492 Members
10 Forums
5381 Topics
49677 Posts

Max Online: 382 @ 11/07/12 05:45 AM
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Topic Options
#9588 - 12/15/10 12:21 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: Ken]
CaT Offline


Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 694
Loc: Blacklick, OH (formerly SoCal)
Originally Posted By: Ken
The comments are kind of what I've come to expect from a mass of uneducated people, and people with agendas.

For the most part, I would agree; however, I was one of the commenters to one of the articles, or should I say, I relpied to one of those comments. wink

CaT
_________________________
If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)

Top
#9589 - 12/15/10 04:13 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: CaT]
Tomcat_rc Offline


Registered: 11/05/09
Posts: 49
Loc: Ridgecrest
If they are going to 7 days a week requiring permits, are they addressing the "no show" permits going back into the system the day prior. I assume it will be a system similar to Whitney. That works pretty well. Show up by noon the day prior or call at least call and confirm.

Top
#9590 - 12/15/10 04:16 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: Tomcat_rc]
Bee Offline


Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 1261
Loc: Northern California
As it stands, there is no redistribution program planned for the unused permits. (a real weakness in the system)
_________________________
The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.

Top
#9591 - 12/15/10 04:20 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: Bee]
Tomcat_rc Offline


Registered: 11/05/09
Posts: 49
Loc: Ridgecrest
Thanks for the response Bee -

Any ideas if they will address this in time before the summer season or to whom we would write to express our concern?

Top
#9593 - 12/15/10 04:37 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: Tomcat_rc]
Bee Offline


Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 1261
Loc: Northern California
Tom,

My buddy Rick (eeek) is sort of the Yosemite Information Guru, go to his site Yosemite News he may have the contact info (the first thread of the night is about the permits)
_________________________
The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.

Top
#9598 - 12/15/10 07:14 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: wagga]
RoguePhotonic Offline


Registered: 12/08/09
Posts: 558
Loc: Bakersfield CA
What I think bugs me the most about this thing is that it's justified mostly because of "safety".

Safety is our responsibility not the governments.

Say no to the nanny state. wink
_________________________
FlickR

Top
#9599 - 12/15/10 08:16 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: RoguePhotonic]
Akichow Offline


Registered: 04/07/10
Posts: 659
Loc: SF Bay Area
I read these posts for information about hiking, permits, health issues related to hiking, and the like. And maybe to find some folks to climb with some day. The things that unite a group with a shared interest in climbing one fabulous mountain in the Eastern Sierras. I think I'll leave politics for, oh, I dunno, Dancing with the Stars.

Top
#9601 - 12/15/10 10:29 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: CaT]
Ken Offline


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 742
Loc: Los Angeles
Originally Posted By: CaT
Originally Posted By: Ken
The comments are kind of what I've come to expect from a mass of uneducated people, and people with agendas.

For the most part, I would agree; however, I was one of the commenters to one of the articles, or should I say, I relpied to one of those comments. wink

CaT


Like the shock expressed about the comments posted on the death of Michelle on Baldy on the TV link, I had also posted there....but I knew that my comments were not the ones eliciting shock. Likewise, I don't think I made it past all the nonesense to see yours, either. I'm sure my opinion would have gone up. smile

Top
#9602 - 12/15/10 10:37 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: RoguePhotonic]
Ken Offline


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 742
Loc: Los Angeles
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
What I think bugs me the most about this thing is that it's justified mostly because of "safety".

Safety is our responsibility not the governments.

Say no to the nanny state. wink


Sorry to say, you don't get to make the rules, me either. People start dying, and other people (LIKE US) write their Congressmen about the negligence and lack of performance of the Park Service, and the next thing you know, the head of the Park Service is hauled before a committee of Congress to explain this dereliction. Sh*t, of course, flows downhill, and the local managers lose their jobs, get poor job ratings, etc, etc, etc.

This is US taking responsiblity for our safety, demanding it from the gov't.

But I'll enjoy watching you fill those potholes on Flower Street this winter........

eek

Top
#9606 - 12/16/10 09:54 AM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: wagga]
RoguePhotonic Offline


Registered: 12/08/09
Posts: 558
Loc: Bakersfield CA
I really doubt it's the hikers or climbers that write their congressman and demand that they make us all put on our floaties. It's more like all the people that their biggest outdoor activity is going to Walmart read in the paper that someone died on a mountain and they certainly have an opinion of it. I guess the age old saying is right "The death of a single person is a tragedy, the death of a million people is a statistic" as people will get far more worked up over a single death then hundreds of thousands.

I suppose we could follow that logic of taking control of our safety and beg the government to make the dangerous activities we engage in illegal but I don't think I like that approach.
_________________________
FlickR

Top
#9611 - 12/16/10 06:55 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: RoguePhotonic]
Ken Offline


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 742
Loc: Los Angeles
RP, You may find it highly educational to read the case "High Sierra Hikers vs US Forest Service", it is easily found on the web.

This case which occured in 2004, had to do with allotment of number of pack station permits on the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses.

The net effect, after the appeals, were to divert half of all the budget of the Sierra NF (other than fire)for something like 5 years to complying with the mandates of the lawsuit, which had primarily to do with documenting current conditions in the backcountry (which had largely been neglected due to budget cuts. They had made a decision to concentrate on actually DOING maintenance, over documenting of maintenance(the documenting process is unbelievably detail oriented-it requires wheeled measuring devices and noting things to the nearest foot). It had a simlar, but not as large effect, on the Inyo.

Just ask any employee on either forest about "THE lawsuit"......and stand back.

Top
#9612 - 12/16/10 07:33 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: wagga]
RoguePhotonic Offline


Registered: 12/08/09
Posts: 558
Loc: Bakersfield CA
Isn't that a bit different if it applies mostly to pack stations? It seems to ask to regulate something that is not related to your own actions.

I'm not sure what kind of things they go through with trail work in the national parks. Since the crews are paid i'm sure it's allot more.

I was able to join another member of the PCTA in a 2 day survey hike to assess work and all the work we scouted on 30 miles of trail was completed in less then 8 months from the survey.


Edited by RoguePhotonic (12/16/10 07:36 PM)
_________________________
FlickR

Top
#9620 - 12/17/10 09:30 AM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: RoguePhotonic]
Ken Offline


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 742
Loc: Los Angeles
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
Isn't that a bit different if it applies mostly to pack stations? It seems to ask to regulate something that is not related to your own actions.

I'm not sure what kind of things they go through with trail work in the national parks. Since the crews are paid i'm sure it's allot more.

I was able to join another member of the PCTA in a 2 day survey hike to assess work and all the work we scouted on 30 miles of trail was completed in less then 8 months from the survey.


To the first point, I think that in both cases, the regulations are about things that directly affect hikers, and as such, it is hikers who tend to be vocal about them. I'd speculate that it is hikers who attend the public scoping sessions, write in comments, and get the most involved. That is only based upon my biased observations, but I've seen nothing that contradicts that.

To the second, not entirely sure why we are talking about trail work, but it is definitely different in the parks (they use chainsaws in wilderness, for example)

To the third, the survey that you were involved in was "working" survey, of the older, practical type, done for the specific purpose of getting work done. This is not the type of survey of which I speak.

The type of survey I'm talking about is commonly referred to as TRACs (TRail Assessment And Conditions Surveys). It requires extensive training to be able to perform. The primary tools are GPS, cyclometer, tape measure, clinometer, and camera. The GPS is an electronic device that records features based on the triangulation of satellites. The cyclometer (a wheel with a counter) keeps precise linear measurement of the trail and its features, and therefore helps to determine where productivity factors need to be measured. The tape measure is used to measure signs, diameter of trees, radii of switchbacks and climbing turns, and other trail features as needed. The clinometer is used to measure the trail grade and side slope. The camera is used to capture photos of features.

The survey forms are hard copy documentation of the information taken by the GPS unit. These forms allow for a feature to be recorded using a code from the data dictionary, condition of the feature, a task code and a position in either feet or GPS-recorded location (depending on the trail type). The form also allows for measurements of the feature and severity levels to be recorded.

The data dictionary is a comprehensive reference document that has the set trail features, tasks, units of measure, and severity factors. It both standardizes and organizes features and their associated tasks. The data dictionary includes the feature type, feature category, feature codes, task code, task description, task condition class, and task severity factor. The data dictionary is then used to help fill out the survey form. There is both a hardcopy data dictionary, to be used with the hardcopy survey forms, and one programmed into the GPS unit for electronic documentation.

Productivity factors are the physical factors influencing the trails, such as the side slope, soil type, trail grade, brush and regeneration vegetation and the timber type. Knowing these factors help the department determine the cost to reconstruct or maintain the trail. Productivity factors are taken in locations that are determined by the trail class type. Trails are assigned classes, ranging from minimally developed (class 1) to highly developed (class 5). The detail with which we survey is directly related to each trail's class.

A highly experienced team might be able to survey about 4 miles of trail in good condition per day.

a nice essay on all this, from which some of the above was taken:

http://www.thesca.org/motracs/node/136560

I've gone through Tracs training, and been involved in such surveys......ugh!

Top
#9628 - 12/17/10 03:17 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: wagga]
RoguePhotonic Offline


Registered: 12/08/09
Posts: 558
Loc: Bakersfield CA
I agree that hikers are going to be more involved in all this stuff but I find it unlikely that they will fight for regulations that restrict their access to an area to make it more safe for themselves.

Quote:
To the second, not entirely sure why we are talking about trail work


You mentioned too much documenting and not enough action with maintenance.

All that sort of documenting would be a nice job I think although a bit excessive.
_________________________
FlickR

Top
#9630 - 12/17/10 06:41 PM Re: Half Dome Permit System Misfires [Re: RoguePhotonic]
Ken Offline


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 742
Loc: Los Angeles
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
I agree that hikers are going to be more involved in all this stuff but I find it unlikely that they will fight for regulations that restrict their access to an area to make it more safe for themselves.


All that sort of documenting would be a nice job I think although a bit excessive.


As to the first, it seems like I've seen that play out in several ways, a number of times.
On Rainier, they got together to support a climbing fee increase that paid for the climbing rangers program, that was soley for climber support/safety. Those rangers could restrict access when they thought it neccessary. That program still has wide climber support.

I guess we'll see what happens on Half Dome.

As to the second, having to do that on every Trail on the Sierra was the effect of the hikers' lawsuit. For several years, little maintenance got done.

Top
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2