Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Byrner
Mountain climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
I'm glad to see NPS taking action. When people die, the local media wonders why guides aren't on every stretch of the trail evaluating people and their abilities. When NPS issues a permit and charges 1.50, climbers moan even though we'll be on other routes. I admit, the Ticketmaster pricing needs to be changed.
How is this different from Whitney? Any other area in the Sierra?
Sure I hate more regulation, but it's needed. That trail looks like a stockyard on most summer days and the impacts are everywhere. Hopefully we'll see less pooped toilet paper 3 feet from the "highway".
|
|
ATS
Social climber
escondido, ca
|
|
Seems unenforceable...or worse yet, randomly enforced
|
|
tom woods
Gym climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
It actually seems pretty enforceable to me. Just have to have a guy sit at the shoulder between 11:00 am and 3:00 pm three days a week.
As far as the plan goes, I think it will work. So a couple of people sneak by the rangers at 5:00 in the evening? The point is to reduce the crowds that come pretty much in one big afternoon chunk.
400 people, a quarter of whom will bail, means 300 people will summit on the weekend days. That's a drastic reduction.
This plan will work to reduce crowds, the question is of necessity. Does the park really need to do this?
If yes, then the question becomes is the number right?
|
|
tarek
climber
berkeley
|
|
Dingus,
Yes I really care. It's the precedent: I regard the cables route as a technical climb and this proposed regulation of a technical climb. And I don't think you want to get into what grades people who are opposed to these permits climb (e.g., Coz opposes). I feel strongly that the number of people climbing this route should be safely maximized, not reduced, with provisions for closing the cables entirely in case of bad storms. Plus all that has been written.
Also, for me personally, the freedom to be able to run up there whenever is important to protect.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
If you are going to have a ranger up there enforcing, why not just have him/her meter traffic onto the cables, like commute time freeway onramp meter lights?
Might just speed things up, but if not, the longer lines will prompt people to start earlier.
No permits bs needed. The freedom to fire up there anytime retained.
|
|
tarek
climber
berkeley
|
|
because, monolith, that would involve too much common sense, and not enough absolute creeping control.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
I believe the rangers had no power to enforce the ascension of the cables except in extreme emergencies only ( could be wrong), hence this permit thing.
When we were recovering one of the victims a couple of years ago who slid/fell all the way down to west side base we came back to the shoulder to wait for the helo back to the valley floor.
A storm was now approaching again and these 4 people show up and walk by us in sneakers and Venice Beach clothing. I asked "We're not letting them up there?".
The ranger in charge said we have no authority to stop them.
So I tell the 4 people what the conditions are (terrible, ice and snow, and for how they were prepared) and suggested they not go as we just recovered a body from the accident day before.
It took them a while to get it into their head that it wasn't a good idea to go up there with a snow storm approaching. Also told them if something happened later after we left we will be hours before we could respond as we would loose the helo due to the weather.
They turned back.
|
|
Srbphoto
Trad climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
I guess the crux of the problem (gratuitous climbing lingo) in Werner's example is: if they had a permit they purchased 4 months ago and this was their only shot, would they have continued?
Fortunately, we will never know.
|
|
David Wilson
climber
CA
|
|
Dingus, I don't buy the argument that if we are not immediately affected by these permits, we should have no complaints. After all, much of what's being discussed is that these permits are a bad precedent as well as a bad solution to the actual problem. So I ask, are you for these permits as they are proposed in the first post from the NPS?
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
How much is the fine for non-compliance?
|
|
FangnClawed
Ice climber
High Falls, NY
|
|
hmmmm
as a granpop and veteran of getting arrested in Yosemite for not following lame ranger stipulations
I would claim a weightier voice on this issue. I am surprised that there has not been at least one death every week since the '50s. The scariest thing I ever did on Half Dome was descend the cables - you can still find the bloody death grip indentations of my fingers on selected lengths of the cables. While recovering across the saddle I recall observing a tittering ditzy lady in some kind of Miami Vice pumps skidding from wooden cross piece to wooden cross piece, laughing merrily - unaware that she was a centimeter and a millisecond from DEATH! I would never allow my grand kids OR MYSELF to be below anyone on these cables whose safe climbing ability I was not 100% confident of. So I would never go there except early in the morning or way late in the PM on a non peak season weekday. Which is pretty much how everything out of doors has to be approached nowadays - even a visit to the North Pole. That is the way it is - too much population - too much popularity. These kinds of proposed regulations are already prevalent throughout the NPS and Baxter State Park and most anywheres. I would propose the solution is to reduce the population - grease the cables - promote death and other forms of population reduction - promote birth control - promote solo climbing for uninitiated novices- promote skinny 3 mm ropes with carborundum coated flimsy carabiners. If we don't start now you might have to wait in line for an hour just to drive past the entrance gate of some National Park -- Oh? you have to do that already ??
|
|
Loomis
climber
*_*
|
|
Lame and shame on the NPS!
|
|
Srbphoto
Trad climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
It's all REI's fault. The NPS should fine them.
|
|
GDavis
Social climber
SOL CAL
|
|
I really don't buy the "if they only had the permit for that one day, they would be more willing" argument.
Sounds a lot like "This is their only day hiking in yosemite, so they will be more willing."
If they indeed have multiple days that they are in the park, they can go on a monday or a thursday. I'm sure many people can only visit the park on weekends, but if you've ever been in the park on a weekday, you would see its not 'much' different.
Does having that permit push people up the Whitney trail who would otherwise not be as psyched on it? Hard to tell, but I would venture that it has more to do with their limited vacation days and time in the parks rather than the chance of having a permit on their hands.
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
Denied your dream of standing on top of Half Dome by the new NPS permit quota on Day Hikers?
Call/email your Congressman & Senators. Ask them to instruct the NPS
to install another cable to solve the congestion issue on Half Dome,
and remove the denial of service Half Dome Day hikers Permit restriction.
.
Suggest you'll vote for his/her challenger in the next election if action isn't taken to stop denying access to Half Dome.
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
Well true.
but can't hurt to grease the bureaucratic skids.
|
|
ron gomez
Trad climber
fallbrook,ca
|
|
So if most of us here are CLIMBERS and Jesse says the permits won't pertain to TECHNICAL routes, we're doing a lot of wining about something that won't effect us...........right now! Maybe later the technical routes will fall under this, but I'd be the first to admit, too much traffic. The first time I did Snake Dike there was hardly a trail to the base(early 80's), the last time I did it(2008), I followed cairns all the way from Little Yosemite to the base of the route...and it was dark! My first comment was to take the cables down, that would eliminate most of the traffic going to the top, reduce the safety concern as far as hikers go and remove unnatural gear in the back country. Largo had a good counter about a relatives trip up there. I wish some other alternative solutions would come up here that might lead to some constructive criticism(I've seen add another set of cables). Jesse delivered a good message, let's come up with some solutions! There IS too much traffic back there.
Peace
|
|
qigongclimber
climber
|
|
Didn't see that anyone else had posted this: More background information on the NPS decision to institute permits is in this blog: http://mrhalfdome.wordpress.com/ , which includes graphs, Checkpoint Charlie at the start of the Sub Dome steps, and more.
My own personal opinion on this is ambivalent. I remember in the early 70's when the first voluntary permit system showed up for backpacking in the Washington Cascades. At that point, it was obvious we were screwed. Then the permits became mandatory. Then they spread all over the place. In the mid-70's, they were already required for climbing in the Tetons. You have to get a day-hiking permit for Whitney now. There are many other examples. If you look at the big picture here, climbers hate the idea of a bureaucracy interfering with their experience of the wilderness, which should be free and accessible for everyone, anytime. That's the nature of the experience. On the other hand, let's all realize that times have changed and there are way more people in the world. i've come to terms with the permit system, fees and all, only because it has, in fact, kept the places i like to go and enjoy from becoming overrun and enjoyed to death. I don't like the permit system, but I put up with it. I think that requiring permits for HD on the weekend will probably just move the problem to mid-week so that eventually, it will end up being from May to September or so, just like Whitney. Good luck to the NPS on trying to control it.
|
|
Miwa
climber
|
|
Tarek - A) Everyone agrees that the number of people climbing the route should be safely maximized. It seems that the NPS is trying to come up with that number and has started at 400. The fact that this is a temporary fix while a more long-term plan is developed has been clearly stated in the press release. B) Close the cables in a storm??? Are you honestly suggesting that slippery slope? Close The Nose when storms are anticipated, close the park when it looks like rain. This will succeed in saving lives. I agree with your line of thinking that the potential of a massive accident cannot be eliminated. Reducing the number of people only succeeds in decreasing the magnitude. Listen to former stzzo. C) And you want to talk about your freedom to run up whenever you want? Try "running up" on a Saturday afternoon when there are 1100 people on the trail/cables. The crowds have already stomped all over your precious freedom. D) There is no slippery slope of permits on climbing routes unless they are dangerously crowded. We've all had ugly days on crowded routes but we can thank condensed classics-only guide books with a 5-star rating for making our favorite routes uber-popular and crowded. But nothing is as dangerously crowded as Half Dome. I don't think you could argue that. Your suggestion to close the route in storms presents a far more slippery slope than a permit system.
Werner - You are probably correct that LE can't forbid people to access any wilderness area, they can only strongly recommend against it. But in the same moment, SAR staff must accept risks, and lots of them, when rescuing the ja-mokes when they enter into an epic that they aren't prepared for. Helicopters in t-storms, short hauls/rescue rigging on slippery steep rock. I'm sure you know better than anyone here what those risks are all about.
Toreador - I'm glad that you pointed out that 2 lanes will double the problem. Why didn't anyone else see this? Two lanes will have twice the capacity and people will go up or down whichever one looks less crowded and the traffic jams/accidents will continue, or increase.
corniss chopper - As far as I know, DNC has nothing to do with the management of Half Dome and there are no financial motivators in the permit system. $1.50 per permit seems like it is just recovering the costs of operating the reservation website and doesn't stuff anyone's pocket. Campgrounds will always be full with or without Half Dome hikers, have you ever tried to deal with the reservation system? Campsites sell out in a matter of nano-seconds.
People in favor of more signs and more holes/stanchions/cables in the rock - While I imagine that safety will always trump wilderness or any other law out there, putting more signs and more infrastructure so more people can hike to the most cliche summit in the park is like building another pizza deck. How many languages would you convey your message on your sign? How would your magic signs be different from the stern warning already at the base of subdome? Electronic? I'm telling you that other people's cell phones impinge on my wilderness experience and I can assure you that an electronic fixture of a sign would be a thousand times worse.
--jm2c--
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
Two lanes will not double the problem.
The park is already at capacity(campsites, lodging, parking) during those months. There won't be double the number of people going up to half-dome because the word is out that there are two lanes.
A simple keep to the right sign(and peer pressure) should keep the two cable death grippers in the right lane. Passers will spill into the left lane, but the far left cable should be relatively free for descenders.
In short, two lanes will reduce the congestion which has been blamed for the safety problem and unless the park increases overall capacity, there won't be more people up there.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!