Torching Whitney Toilets

My short-term solution: Provide WagBag disposal dumpsters at the Outpost and Trail Camps. Use stock to empty them as needed. It would be better than having the bags discarded all over the mountain.

Now, now, Sierra Nevada, only those making reservations get to pay the fee.

What sealed the deal for that opinion was him calling Sierra Nevada at his place of employment to dress him down. There are a few adjectives I could have used to describe him but the one I did use was more than fair.

It seems to me that without support from powerful friends Garry Oye could not have done this.
Do you know by any chance who may be supporting Garry?

I don't think it is a matter of power and support. The National Forest budgets have been cut over and over again by the federal executive branch, and so they have been working with fewer and fewer staff over the years. The old toilet system was a mess and an annoying nuisance for the rangers to maintain.

Mr. Oye was the Whitney District ranger, and all he needed to do was get the support of the remaining small number of administrators and rangers running Inyo N.F. I am sure he made a great sounding case for the pack-out system. And at the time 10 years ago, the llama-based solar toilet system in RMNP was not a well-known operation. So, with a good-sounding solution and no better alternative, he ramrodded it through.

Too bad he ignored SEKI administrator and public comments, and the NEPA process, too, along the way.

Now that more information has been made available, we can all see that there are better methods of dealing with the situation. The biggest problem to moving ahead are a willingness of Inyo N.F. to adopt something better, and just as important, varied opinions by the hiker community.

If you were to open up a discussion among hikers, there are a wide range of responses. I've seen reports from people claiming they don't mind hiking the entire JMT or hiking an entire week and packing their poop for the entire trip. I have seen alarming responses where people say Inyo should only allow a tiny number of hikers on the Whitney Trail, (while in contrast, RMNP doesn't even have quotas where their toilet system is working). And then most hikers on Whitney today simply accept that they have to carry and use WAG bags, even though there is no enforceable order requiring it. So therefore, we have the situation that is in place today: Hundreds of people daily handling and carrying biohazard waste for hours and days in their packs next to their food and gear.

I am hoping this information will become more widely known, so maybe a change for the better will eventually come about.

Garry Oye has left Inyo National Forest and is employed by the National Park Service. So his impact on Whitney is history.

I understand that a WAG bag/Garry Oye thread was deleted on another forum.
Was it because of my question or something else?

...Garry Oye has left Inyo National Forest and is employed by the National Park Service. So his impact on Whitney is history.

As a business owner, I can fully appreciate the fine line that Doug, Sr., walks when it comes to message board content. It does not matter whether the personal attacks are fact-based or not: it serves no purpose to carry such vitriol on a board that is meant to be an extension of both the WPS and the recreational opportunities surrounding it. It is Doug's board and he has expressed his feelings about bringing rants, complaints, finger pointing, etc., to a venue that was not designed to host such topics.

I guess we just don't agree on the what's appropriate. If the information was inaccurate or unrelated to Whitney, I would agree with you. IMHO, if it's something that affects everyone reading the forum, and the discussion is meaningful and polite, then let the conversation proceed.

To put it simply: Doug does not want this topic on his message board. It is HIS board, and his rules. There does not have to be an explanation for his rules, as it is his "kingdom" and he is the king.

If people want to take their issue to the public, than they will have to seek out another forum.

To put it simply: Doug does not want this topic on his message board. It is HIS board, and his rules. There does not have to be an explanation for his rules, as it is his "kingdom" and he is the king.

If people want to take their issue to the public, than they will have to seek out another forum.

Wag Bag threads ... They're usually the most viewed of any topic.

Always appreciate a good pun.

I cannot tell jokes, myself, due to the fact that I was not raised in an English speaking environment, so humour did not quite gel.

Car wrecks are the most viewed events along our freeways, but that is not a justification for causing them. When you run a site, you can decide how to deal with topics where people build car wrecks to see how many will look.

Dale B. Dalrymple

I would like to ask people who have complained, PLEASE give the specifics where anything written by myself or others is false or incorrect.

The wilderness act directly and specifically makes illegal what you want to do. If the USFS moves forward with what you want, it will be sued silly.

There has been a remarkable change in federal managers. Where in the past, there was a "wink, wink, nod, nod" approach to violating the Wilderness Act when convenient, that is no longer the case, and there are zealous defenders of that Act, both in the gov't and outside.

So, before anything else, one would have to ask the question "is a permanent structure CURRENTLY legally build-able in wilderness". Federal managers have gotten legal opinions, and they are told "no". Cite your legal opinions if you think different.

How strong IS the public outcry to replace the toilets? I ask this because most folks I quiz on the topic simply shrug their shoulders and say "its only a one-time inconvenience, anyway" (most people are not 100+ trips up the trail)

I would like to see a few of those folks speak up here.

[to Ken] Your letter brings up the same health and sanitation issues that we are trying to raise now.

Edit typo: Ken's letter said Hepatitis "B" not "A" - hey I'm not a doctor.

Interesting that you worry about lawsuits, Ken. I recall your email to me about SierraNevada bringing on a lawsuit over the bypassing of the NEPA regulations.

Unfortunately the unnamed district ranger used the same "wink, wink, nod, nod" approach by bypassing the NEPA process and ignoring the SEKI and public's input. In fact, I have a copy of your own letter written 1/24/04, opposing replacing "the Whitney trail toilets with a pack-it-out system". I'll be happy to post it here.

Your letter brings up the same health and sanitation issues that we are trying to raise now.

...
Interesting that you worry about lawsuits, Ken.
...

Unfortunately the unnamed district ranger used the same "wink, wink, nod, nod" approach by bypassing the NEPA process and ignoring the SEKI and public's input. In fact, I have a copy of your own letter written 1/24/04, opposing replacing "the Whitney trail toilets with a pack-it-out system". I'll be happy to post it here.

Your letter brings up the same health and sanitation issues that we are trying to raise now.

DBD, it is revealing and refreshing that you support something other than the wag bag pack-out system.

As for your crude description of this process, I do not understand how bringing to light completely new and revealing information on how the current situation came about can be described as you have.
...
I think your description could use some moderation.

...
Seems more like a case of shooting the messenger here.

Now can we PLEASE move forward? ...

Undoing an act of legislation?? It would seem that Sysiphus would have better luck getting his boulder up the hill.

dbd: Oh good grief! Would you PLEASE write a clear and concise paragraph or two as an example showing how you would present the wag bag/toilet history along with a point to move forward.

What "table" are you talking about, Dale? All I see is a bunch of empty chairs and a pile of ashes. There's nobody at a table.

Moving past all the "shoot the messenger" nonsense, ...

What's your proposal for getting new solar toilets on Whitney?

I see it more as a threat to inject some common sense than an actual solution.

Would you please copy the links into a new thread with a title about the contents of the links? They don't seem on topic to "Torching Whitney Toilets" and it will make it easier for people to search and find the positive posts in the future.

Two cents from a new visitor to the forums: I definitely agree an "Installing Solar Toilets at Whitney" thread would promote a more forward-looking and positive discussion. The current thread is as much (or more) about why the old toilets were removed, and assigning blame. While that's helpful and important context, it doesn't do anything to improve the current situation, but turns a lot of people off with its angry words.
...

I Do appreciate the factual information that you unearth, SN, as the discussion really could not go anyhere without a starting point. (documents of past change) I for one poo-poo'd the idea of ammending a Wilderness Act. It is good to be proven wrong with FACT.

PS STEVE WILL HAVE TO CHANGE THE THREAD OVER, AS I AM NOT VERSED IN THE PROCESS AND MAY TANK THE LINKS

Ken, dbd: Is there no end to your rants? I have asked repeatedly for positive, forward-looking ideas, yet all we get is more of the same. Any more will be deleted.