27313Re: Tuolomne permit
- Feb 13, 20131 & 2.
I don't think they go out of their way to state using other trailheads at all. They only list two trailheads, making it seem that those are the only two ones, and don't mention other trailheads as a possibility. In my mind, if they were to go out of their way to endorse using other trailheads, they would simply state that.
A loophole is the same regardless if it is fairly obvious or buried as you say in thousands of pages of tax law. It's still a loophole. And yes, loopholes are legal, but that doesn't make them ethical or something that should be done.
3. We have heard plenty of stories about rangers being irked by JMT hikers using non-traditional trailheads, so your experience might be different. You might have encountered one but they just didn't say anything about it. Plus, I doubt that a backcountry ranger in sequoia knows the intricacies of the different trailheads in Yosemite and wouldn't know the difference between traditional and non-traditional trailheads.
I agree that the rangers would want more hikers in the backcountry but only to a point. I bet they wouldn't want unlimited hikers or too many hikers and still would want limits on the number of hikers entering an area.
This alternative trailhead thing seems very odd to me. The whole purpose of a trailhead quota system is to limit the amount of people in a certain area so that there is not overuse. But with an alternative trailhead, after spending a day going somewhere you don't really want to go, you can go where you really wanted to go in the first place but was full. How does that limit overcrowding at all? Plus there is a multitude of alternative trailheads, so as long as you spend one night away from the JMT, you can hike the whole JMT. It's practically unlimited. I don't get how that makes sense. Have you had anyone not be able to get a JMT permit using some sort of alternative trailhead? With all the limitations on Half Dome in the recent years, I'm just worried something like that will happen for the JMT too and make it harder for people who try to do the right thing.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Roleigh Martin wrote:
> Good points. The way I look at it is I see these things happening:
> 1. Yosemite goes out of the way on their JMT page:
> to state
> *John Muir Trail*
> If you plan to hike the John Muir Trail as a continuous hike, you only need
> one wilderness permit
> the entire trip (you do not need a "Whitney stamp"). Most people begin the
> hike at Happy Isles (its traditional start in Yosemite Valley), however
> many people begin at Lyell Canyon (Tuolumne Meadows) because permits for
> this trailhead are slightly easier to obtain. There is no special JMT
> 2. Abiding literally by the above does not seem like that akin to going
> through thousands of pages of tax law to find a loophole. It seems to me
> when people get these less popular permits to do the JMT, they're just
> following the above paragraph to the "T". It seems to me that those in the
> Park Service who say "yea but normally hikers do it via routes a,b,c" are
> not talking based upon any published rule but rather traditional pattern
> recognition of how permits were done.
> 3. Some of the backcountry rangers I've talked to on the JMT tell me that
> they're job security is dependent upon having adequate hikers do remote
> backcountry long distance hikes and they're all for seeing people on the
> JMT. I have not met one backcountry ranger who is irked by JMT hikers who
> are doing the JMT via non-traditional entry TH permits.
> 4. As for your comment about half-dome hikers and the JMT, I wonder if
> that is not already happening, for the number of JMT permits seems to be
> far higher than those who complete the JMT. I know we've had this
> discussion before so I will grant you that the JMT seems to be getting more
> popular, but that has to be very recent in light of conversations I've had
> with backcountry rangers only 2-3 years ago about usage on the JMT. Back
> then, (a few years ago), rangers were complaining about the lack of
> backpackers now versus 20-30 years ago.
> Visit my Google Profile (lots of very interesting research
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>