In other news...

Use this forum to post links to news stories from other websites - ones that other hikers might find interesting. This is not intended for original material or anecdotal information. You can reply to any news stories posted, but do not start a new thread without a link to a specific news story.
Post Reply
User avatar
Eric Peterson
Posts: 4070
Joined: May 11th, 2009, 5:39 am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

In other news...

Post by Eric Peterson » December 2nd, 2017, 11:58 am

Anyone else hear about this, or is this old news?

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/n ... 907557001/

User avatar
Water
Posts: 1097
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: In other news...

Post by Water » December 2nd, 2017, 8:04 pm

:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

keyboard typing and mouth become frothy

Yeah.. this came up. It's bad. How is somewhere like Waldo Lake Wilderness or Diamond Peak wilderness getting anything on par with Mt. Hood Wilderness, yet you'd consider doing permits for the below, but not the above? What's with the incongruous policy between FS districts/units?

you can go to any of the wildernesses area they list for restriction, on a busy summer weekend, and find private places that are extraordinary. The permit process is highly flawed in many instances. Does anyone really like the hassle of the enchantments? If seeing 200 people on South Sister's south route bugs you, maybe don't go there? or go on a weekday? or start your climb at midnight for sunrise? etc etc. But yes, 500,000 acres of central Oregon needs the same restrictions as a postage stamp sized piece of Washington? uhg. And don't get me started paying simply to go hiking... $6 a pop on top of NWFP that you don't need but they want you to have? And the online permit system? If I was wealthy I would abuse the system and book multiple reservations, have my friends do so, all for 14 day stays, etc, why? to be an asshole? no. to highlight the egregious fault of this system. The same idea that clicking a link will save the world - nope, it won't. half the permits or more will be snatched up when they become available, by people with more dreams than action, and such you'll go to these places with less folks than allotted, much of the time, while there's someone who would love to hike there but can't.

I joked about being frothy from this, but what a goddamn misguided way to go about managing the forest. Going to tell me that these areas in Oregon see more people than washington? and only enchantments need permits as far as i know.
Feel Free to Feel Free

BigBear
Posts: 1517
Joined: October 1st, 2009, 11:54 am

Re: In other news...

Post by BigBear » December 3rd, 2017, 5:13 pm

Welcome to the party, Eric. There has already been one public comment & ignore session by USFS. Hope you're a rich man, because the $6-$12/hike fee plus the unambiguously prohibited NW Forest Pass will put these trails out of my wallet's reach. Say goodbye to equal access, this is the first step in the privatization of what used to be public land.

Thankfully, the trails are getting longer than I can hike, so I won't be frothing at the mouth as much as I would have 20 years ago. For you youngsters that want the freedom to do/go wherever the mood takes you, you need to start writing letters if you want to hike in the Cascades in the future. Keep playing Candy Crush and that's what your recreational opportunities will be starting in 2019. Getting mad, good. Now start writing letters to USFS.

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 12079
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: In other news...

Post by retired jerry » December 3rd, 2017, 6:22 pm

After I quit working I've been doing probably 5X as many days hiking. Fewer miles per day though.

Green Lakes is maybe one of the busiest areas. They could easily double the number of campsites without ruining the experience. Widen the trail a bit maybe. It would be less of a Wilderness experience, but if they restrict, then people will go to other places and make them over crowded.

User avatar
Guy
Posts: 3191
Joined: May 10th, 2009, 4:42 pm
Location: The Foothills of Mt Hood
Contact:

Re: In other news...

Post by Guy » December 3rd, 2017, 6:34 pm

retired jerry wrote:After I quit working I've been doing probably 5X as many days hiking. Fewer miles per day though.

Green Lakes is maybe one of the busiest areas. They could easily double the number of campsites without ruining the experience. Widen the trail a bit maybe. It would be less of a Wilderness experience, but if they restrict, then people will go to other places and make them over crowded.
EXACTLY!
hiking log, photos & maps.
Ad monte summa aut mors

User avatar
justpeachy
Posts: 2625
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Re: In other news...

Post by justpeachy » December 4th, 2017, 7:09 am

There was a long discussion about this back in early summer. It's pretty controversial.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=25643
Cheryl

"Nature is not a place to visit. It is home." -- Gary Snyder

My adventure blog
Hiking videos
justpeachy on Instagram

User avatar
Chip Down
Posts: 1265
Joined: November 8th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: In other news...

Post by Chip Down » December 5th, 2017, 6:14 pm

If I were to posit that schemes like this are actually motivated by a love of bureaucracy and a need to display authority, rather than a desire to serve the public good, would I be accused of being a member of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade? And if I cited the sweeping gorge closure as another example? What if I mentioned the wanton senseless ravaging of alpine zones by the ski industry, under the auspices of the NFS?

It should be noted that one could agree with closures and restrictions, while also recognizing the less-than-noble latent reasons for them.

User avatar
drm
Posts: 4883
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: The Dalles, OR
Contact:

Re: In other news...

Post by drm » January 18th, 2018, 8:09 pm

As somebody who knows some of these people, I do believe that they think they are doing what's best. Please keep in mind that these people:
  • Only get to visit the most over-used places
  • Almost never get to go the the cleanest place
  • Have to deal with the most obnoxious visitors
  • Have to clean up the most disgusting garbage
  • Pretty much have to go to the same places again and again and again (see above)
  • Are often understaffed
  • Are capable of going to remote and pristine place but don't get to do so (see above)
So put yourself in that place and think how you might respond. I don't always agree with them, but I do try and cut them some slack as to their motivations. Or maybe you can try joining one of them for an exotic plant survey that involves crawling around in a marsh in Indian Heaven in August.

Post Reply