Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Dosewallips Access and ONP Access in General (Cont'd from TR Thread)
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 3580 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
PostTue Dec 18, 2018 9:07 pm 
Anne Elk wrote:
while he realized the necessity of building public support for wild lands protection, Manning arguably saw further and anticipated the consequences of over-use. Don't know if, in the last decade of his life, Spring ever got out to see some of the destruction. He might have modified his POV.
First, one must distinguish between overuse and misuse. Those are two entirely different issues and need to be mitigated by different measures. Some in this thread and elsewhere have bemoaned the trashing/destruction of places in or near the wilderness. They have suggested the solution to that is to make access more difficult by not maintaining and repairing access roads. That only shuts out individuals with limited time/skills/fitness to those areas. It concentrates them in other areas which only creates overuse problems elsewhere. I would like to insert a tangent here because there is an underlying implication in these discussions that making access more difficult somehow keeps out the riffraff, the tourons. It is often said that you only have to get ten miles or so from the trailhead and you lose all those "undesirables". My experience as a volunteer backcountry ranger in ONP taught me that is a myth. I came across many people trashing the backcountry many miles from the nearest trailhead. Many of these encounters were way off-trail also. And most of them were long-time backcountry travelers, with lots of experience. Yet many still trashed places. Ira Spring was correct. "I feel you need a lot of people -- 'green bonding,' they call it -- to become aware of their surroundings," he said in an interview at his home. "It takes thousands of people to make a dent" in convincing federal lawmakers and bureaucrats of the need to protect forest and park land for hiking and to provide money for trails. ... He said Manning wants to protect wilderness "by telling people about it and not wanting them in. ... I like to let people in to see it for themselves." Rumi

"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 2410 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist
PostTue Dec 18, 2018 9:41 pm 
"Tourons" - that's a good one, Rumi - I had to look it up (it even has a Wikipedia entry). I understand your point. Decades ago, I figured one wouldn't run into such on tough trails, like Lake Constance. Then I found bullet casings on the trail, and macaroni on the lake bed near shore.

"There are yahoos out there. It’s why we can’t have nice things." - Tom Mahood
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostWed Dec 19, 2018 1:38 am 
RumiDude wrote:
"It is often said that you only have to get ten miles or so from the trailhead and you lose all those "undesirables". My experience as a volunteer backcountry ranger in ONP taught me that is a myth."
^ Thanks. My experience travelling on trail as well as off trail has taught me the same. But, as Josef Goebbels was so fond of saying "If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes accepted as truth". ... and its' not tangential to this discussion at all - that myth is the basis of the argument for keeping roads closed.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 501 | TRs | Pics
Brian R
Member
PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:08 pm 
Quote:
I beg to differ. I'm much less inclined to visit old favorite places because they're so over-run now. Even 20+ years ago I avoided day hikes off I-90 for just that reason. I've always tried to start earlier, go farther, come back later and do harder hikes in order to find some solitude, or relative solitude. That doesn't work so well anymore, and hiking mostly solo, going off-trail (like in some of those amazing TRs that Yana used to post) isn't wise. Accessing beauty and getting exercise isn't quite enough; if I wanted to encounter crowds and the effects thereof, I'd go to Disneyland, or Everest. rant I'm just a fussbudget that way; maybe some other members can relate.
Annie, no disrespect intended here, but "overrun" is often just a bit misused. Where physical damage to wilderness can be demonstrated--and not reasonably mitigated--then maybe some elitism and limits are in order. More often, however, I hear the word overrun used to describe a social condition. Before there were Ira and Harvey, there was Asahel Curtis who said sarcastically, regarding access to the much smaller Mount Rainier National Park, "this area alone will accommodate all the people I know whose habits are such that they cannot enjoy a mountain if someone else is looking at it.” True, it is no longer reasonable to expect solitude on most trails along the I-90 corridor (although there are still a few I know of). But why do so many urbanites turn to government to enforce solitude in other places? And if it's "enforced" by the hand of government, is it real at all? or worth enjoying? Solitude is found--or earned. Not enforced.
Quote:
Clearly a pattern here, and one could suppose most of it has to do with funding...our gov't just consistently fails to make our parks/forests a priority, and somehow, we just accept it.
Again, no disrespect, but this simply isn't true--at least as it relates to trailhead access and the repair of popular roads. What's more, we all pay an annual fee for these roads to remain open.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
coldrain108
Thundering Herd



Joined: 05 Aug 2010
Posts: 1858 | TRs | Pics
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
coldrain108
Thundering Herd
PostThu Dec 20, 2018 12:58 pm 
RumiDude wrote:
My experience as a volunteer backcountry ranger in ONP taught me that is a myth.
my anecdotal experiences from 35 years hiking in all areas of the ONP (not just one trail with an amazing natural obstacle keeping the uncaring masses out - the Queets River) taught me that it is not a myth...

Since I have no expectations of forgiveness, I don't do it in the first place. That loop hole needs to be closed to everyone.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Dec 20, 2018 3:28 pm 
nice attempt, but you don't have a clue where I've been. thanks for playing, though! wink.gif I'm loving the fact that since you guys can't come up with any legitimate arguments you're stuck resorting to personal jabs. Carry on! lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif lol.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 3580 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
PostThu Dec 20, 2018 6:51 pm 
coldrain108 wrote:
RumiDude wrote:
My experience as a volunteer backcountry ranger in ONP taught me that is a myth.
my anecdotal experiences from 35 years hiking in all areas of the ONP (not just one trail with an amazing natural obstacle keeping the uncaring masses out - the Queets River) taught me that it is not a myth...
Maybe because as a volunteer backcountry ranger I trained myself to notice a lot of bad backcountry behavior that most people never notice, my experience does say that it is a myth the further from the trailhead you get the better backpackers behave. I have actually observed lots of really bad backcountry practices as well as finding the evidence of it. One particular incident stuck in my memory when I caught a fella repeating the behavior after I had previously requested him not to do. There are many older experienced hikers that feel entitled to do as they please. My guess is that the percentages of trashy backpackers is the same, whether near or far from the trailhead. The raw numbers are certainly less the further from the trailhead, but the percentage is likely the same. I have met people that have no idea what LNT is or means, yet they are ethical in their backcountry behavior because they are ethical and have good sense. Conversely I have come across individuals with many years of experience and yet they thumb their noses at LNT and common sense backcountry practices. Anyway, I still notice A\a lot of stuff that others do not, though now I do not bother to correct everything I see. Rumi

"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 2410 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist
PostThu Dec 20, 2018 9:46 pm 
BrianR wrote:
"overrun" is often just a bit misused. Where physical damage to wilderness can be demonstrated--and not reasonably mitigated--then maybe some elitism and limits are in order. More often, however, I hear the word overrun used to describe a social condition.
Agreed; I own it, 100%. I might never visit some of my favorite places again because I recall what they used to be like and somehow it's not as enjoyable when I pass someone on the trail every 20 minutes and there's a crowd at the end. So yeah, your Curtis quote is relevant. The uptick in damage (some of it deliberate) is also discouraging. But we outdoors aficionados also have a habit (like most of humanity) of always thinking of something in terms of our own wants. In more reflective moments I do worry about the increasing pressure we continue to put on other critters. We've been pressing in pretty hard at the edges of what's left to them - everywhere. Social media & a lot more disposable income are contributing. So I don't get enthused about re-introducing grizzlies to the N Cascades; it will end badly for bears. Just like DNR's abortive wolf reintroduction program: initiated in spite of what could have been foreseen as inevitable (the current culling b/c of ranch predation), but they went ahead anyway. But I digress. Re your comment on fees - I doubt they're intended to "keep roads open" - they likely supplement basic CG maintenance, et al. Without having the time to research details, it's pretty well known that the NPS/NFS budgets have been under-funded for decades, and the failure to repair roads are just part of the huge backlog of deferred repairs of all kinds. Rumi's additional points re bad behavior not being confined by distance or improved by "age" are noted. Back in the day, before I ever stepped foot on a wilderness or NP or NF trail, I read a lot of books about "how things are done" out there. These days, not happening so much. Maybe we need some kind of social media education blitz for LNT principles.

"There are yahoos out there. It’s why we can’t have nice things." - Tom Mahood
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostFri Dec 21, 2018 12:15 am 
Anne Elk wrote:
Maybe we need some kind of social media education blitz for LNT principles.
The issue of social media and its effects on user loads and detrimental impacts has been bandied about here for several years. The "LNT" people (the website) added a new "rule" to their list just recently - there's a thread on it here somewhere. The argument that closing roads is going to "save" wilderness just simply isn't based in fact. It's all personal opinion and speculation run amok, all based on little anecdotal snippets about this little area or that little area or over here or over there. In the larger picture it's simply not credible. If it were, somebody would have come up with some definitive evidence of it being so. Nobody has, because it's a myth. Spring was correct. You have to have the people out there to support wilderness and stewardship. When you shut them out with road closures, or making access more difficult, you lose your support base. I encourage you all to come up with some more nonsensical and ill-informed personal jabs though - I'm enjoying the entertainment. lol.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 2410 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist
PostFri Dec 21, 2018 1:35 am 
ski wrote:
...personal jabs...
huh.gif huh.gif Ski, hope you're not talkin' to me, since nothing of the sort was intended. headrub.gif I'm not necessarily attached to the roads debate, but do wonder how much access is too much, before we negatively impact an area (LNT nothwithstanding) just by being there. But this is coming from someone who thinks we hit a realistic ecosystem carrying capacity around 1800. biggrin.gif Have a pleasant holiday.

"There are yahoos out there. It’s why we can’t have nice things." - Tom Mahood
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Dosewallips Access and ONP Access in General (Cont'd from TR Thread)
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum