HikeArizona.COM

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a government employee so this post may seem like biting the hand that feeds my family, literally...

Having said that, I've just spent about 3 days reading trail journals for the John Muir Trail from Yosemite to Mt. Whitney(my latest in a long line of trail fascinations and must do trails). In every trail journal, the writers speak of about 25 (ok, exaggerating a bit) different permits that are needed, 'if you camp here you don't need a permit, but you can only walk 3.175 miles the first day'. 'Oh, you can't poop here, but you can poop up here.' 'You can camp on this grass, but notthat grass.'

Is there ANY evidence that the absence of these rules would open the floodgates to profligates and scofflaws that would 'destroy' the wilderness? Has any Wilderness ever been destroyed other than perhaps by fires, etc.? Can a Wilderness that has existed for 6+ Billion years really even be destroyed? Are the people prone to lugging a 25+ pound backpack 50 miles from the nearest town even inclined to destroy anything, and would the absence of permits/rules invite those that would be?

I have to say that I have become somewhat disheartened at reading the journals, which is truly sad.

This post is ironic since politically I tend to lean let's just say left of center but on this issue, I couldn't be farther from that. Honestly, the only legitimate policy that I see are the fire restrictions, prohibition of ATVs, and maybe the bear canisters, maybe. These scenarios look less like the Freedom of the Wild, the more I read about them...

:SB:

No place starts with restrictions, and most places remain entirely free of them. The relatively few in place result from experience in those areas. I think authorities are typically quite judicious about the restrictions imposed. They don't benefit anyone but the users and they aren't any fun to enforce. Alpine areas, in particular, are easily damaged and slow to recover, and the JMT gets extremely heavy use, so I'm not surprised that it has more restrictions. The Appalachian Trail in my area is similar due to easy access for tens of millions within two hours. Without camping bans in certain areas, the iconic ridgetop views would be toilet paper farms, stripped bare of all burnable vegetation.

When I was at Arches it was nearly impossible to get pictures of the scenery without other visitors in the view. For that reason I don't mind the places (Arivaipa, and others) that restrict entry. Wilderness loses some quality when it is overrun with hordes of people. Also, many people are chronic litterers. I've seen trash, even light weight wrappers or cigarette butts, left everywhere people go.

azhiker96 wrote:When I was at Arches it was nearly impossible to get pictures of the scenery without other visitors in the view. For that reason I don't mind the places (Arivaipa, and others) that restrict entry. Wilderness loses some quality when it is overrun with hordes of people. Also, many people are chronic litterers. I've seen trash, even light weight wrappers or cigarette butts, left everywhere people go.

I respect your opinion and I'm certainly not advocating that I would like these areas to be overrun, and I enjoy the peacefulness as much as anyone but wouldn't it be a good thing if more people came? It doesn't exist for 'you' and I mean that in the most individual and rhetorical sense, not you personally, but it exists for everyone, i.e. the nature of it being public land means all.

I'm just sort of lamenting the fact that public lands often seem so convoluted, unwelcoming, complicated etc. and I have a secret suspicion that in the distant past it was to keep 'those' people from being able to enjoy them. I have read some criticisms of Muir and others that they were criticized even back then of this.

I'm sticking to my guns that the requirements that I have read in the JMT trail journals, permit lotteries, if you embark from here you have to camp here, you can't poop here, are just ridiculous overreaches. Permit LOTTERIES, are you kidding me? I have to win a lottery to enter public land!

I'm sure reading this, I probably might seem like one of those people you mention above, but something about this just seems wrong to me and I am fanatical about not leaving trash, etc.

I would imagine that permits and regulations are necessary to moderate high traffic areas, but I sometimes wonder if they are intentionally made confusing simply to deter people from visiting. If one area has many regulations and a complicated permit process and another nearby area has none, which do you think most will end up hiking in? Example: Yosemite is highly regulated, but just a few miles north lies the Emigrant Wilderness which has no permits and almost no restrictions.

Here's a video on one high-use area:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA0uADY ... guJKsTmnlg

johnny88 wrote:I would imagine that permits and regulations are necessary to moderate high traffic areas, but I sometimes wonder if they are intentionally made confusing simply to deter people from visiting. If one area has many regulations and a complicated permit process and another nearby area has none, which do you think most will end up hiking in? Example: Yosemite is highly regulated, but just a few miles north lies the Emigrant Wilderness which has no permits and almost no restrictions.

Here's a video on one high-use area:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA0uADY ... guJKsTmnlg

Your post enunciated well what I was trying to convey. I think you hit on the root of the issue, and that's what I'm NOT OK with. BTW, you could pile up all the toilet paper ever been buried at Yosemite and it wouldn't be the size of 1/20th of one of the mountains of the thousands within the length of the JMT. I think that 'impact' is typically vastly overstated. If an area is that pristine, close it completely. Be done with it.

Maybe I'm just crazy, but if I wake up one day, have provisioned properly and trained properly and am willing to follow a baseline/modicum of trail rules, I ought to be able to drive to Yosemite and hike the JMT without having to win a lottery to do so.

Jason Cleghorn wrote:you could pile up all the toilet paper ever been buried at Yosemite and it wouldn't be the size of 1/20th of one of the mountains

Of course it's illegal to bury toilet paper at Yosemite at all. Because believe it or not, 1/20th the size of one of the mountains, is still the largest pile of feces you've ever seen.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to see one square of used toilet paper laying around when I'm hiking through the wilderness. Does it happen even with permits? Yup. Would it be worse without regulations? Definitely.

As far as the process of permitting, I tend to think it's not intentionally made to be difficult. It is difficult because the process is designed by government folks or contractors that have no idea what they are doing. I see it at work every day. Incompetence is by far the largest factor in these things. Efficiency and simplicity are just not part of the program!

Ultimately it comes down to management of impacts. Whether you like it or not, people have an impact on wild places. And the more people who visit, the greater the impact.

It sucks that you have to "win a lottery" to visit some popular places. But wouldn't it suck more if those popular places were so overrun by people that they lost the intrinsic value that put them on your list of places to visit to begin with?

Have you been to Fossil Creek in the past few years? :roll:

Now I've gotta run and spray paint some bright orange arrows in the Superstition Wilderness. People get lost on a popular hike there and with bad weather coming in, I should do something about it.

azhiker96 wrote:overrun with hordes of people.

That's pretty much the reason I why I do mostly off-trail hikes, to get away from the hordes. I've gotten to enjoy it so much that if I happen to encounter two or more hikers on a hike, that was a horde.

Yes, in many cases I detest rules & regulations, especially since humans seem to have a very distinct tendency to break them, whether because "they don't apply to me" (see skillpore's post above), simply don't respect the world we live in or for whatever other reason. Yet it is just because of those reasons why many of the restrictions have been put in place.

Also, the more people flaunt whatever rules & regulations there are for a particular area, the more likely those areas MAY be closed completely to the public. Sure that still won't stop the scofflaws, but it will keep the honest folks out of those areas.

So what do we do about this issue?

I'm sure we could answer that in a moment... if we could answer the question of why Congress (including BOTH parties) don't give a pumpkin about anything that may be in the best interest of the majority of the public instead of the corporate lobbyists.
:STP:

Attempting to answer either questions is enough to

Jason Cleghorn wrote:I've just spent about 3 days reading trail journals for the John Muir Trail from Yosemite to Mt. Whitney(my latest in a long line of trail fascinations and must do trails). In every trail journal, the writers speak of about 25 (ok, exaggerating a bit) different permits that are needed

FWIW, you only need one overnight permit for the Sierras. That permit has your entry trailhead and exit trailhead and number of days on the trail. The only day hike permits you need are for Half Dome and Whitney. I know it seems confusing at first but I found the permit process to be fairly straightforward.

... but if I wake up one day, have provisioned properly and trained properly and am willing to follow a baseline/modicum of trail rules, I ought to be able to drive to Yosemite and hike the JMT without having to win a lottery to do so. If that were the case, big chunks of the JMT would look like Humphrey's Peak at 10:00 on Saturday morning in June: a solid line of people with 5-6 feet spacing as far as ahead as you can see. It would be like that just from Californians, not even counting the tens of thousands of people from all over the country and all over the world who want to hit that place in season.

Although apologies are a sign of weakness, LOL, I want to sort of apologize. I made my OP at a time I was in a tremendously foul mood and wasn't thinking completely clearly.

I do think there are bigger issues at play with how to balance access for all (more) taking advantage of the beauty of this country, but how best to manage the impacts of increased people.

Have a safe and Happy New Year and since HAZ drinks like a fish, at least do it safely and don't drink and drive. Or at least, far.

I don't drink, or stay up late, but Happy Western Civilization New Year anyway. (I prefer to start my year anew around the spring equinox, when I was born. Works better for me.)

azbackpackr wrote:I don't drink, or stay up late, but Happy Western Civilization New Year anyway.

X2

Is there something wrong with us folk who don't feel the need to start each new year tired and hung-over?
If there is, I'll plead :guilty: every year.

CannondaleKid wrote:

azbackpackr wrote:I don't drink, or stay up late, but Happy Western Civilization New Year anyway.

X2

Is there something wrong with us folk who don't feel the need to start each new year tired and hung-over?
If there is, I'll plead :guilty: every year.

No, I plan on staying in tonight, as I have every New Years Eve for the last 17 years. I don't drink much and prefer to get high on life and mountain air, LOL...

But I just wanted to extend well wishes to those among us that do partake...

I am generally unable (and/or unwilling) to stay awake past about 9 p.m. A life-long habit. But for the 2000 celebration our town (Springerville) was having a huge fireworks display. I went to bed at 8 p.m., setting my alarm for 11 p.m., got up, and went with the family to watch it. We had to sit in the car with the heater running, covering ourselves with quilts and sleeping bags, though. Very, very cold.

I used to hike up in Coyote Buttes before there was a permit system - I generally had 'The Wave' to myself. Not the case now, with a lottery, etc.
In many cases a permit system creates a false demand as it appears to some to now be exclusive.

I do not mind paying fees for access and I don't mind most restrictions with the exception of closed after dark.