Central Cascades permit changes

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.
Aimless
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: Lake Oswego

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Aimless » February 19th, 2022, 11:15 am

drm wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 10:38 am
We have history going back centuries that shows that the community needs to control the use of the commons to prevent it's degradation, at the cost of some inconvenience for the heaviest users. The alternative is to privatize it. Maybe it is the frequent visitors who are the privileged, regardless of their financial status.
You make good points. Control is necessary. Privatization is not a better alternative.

Creating a special class of public lands called "wilderness areas" falls under heading of 'controlling the use of the commons to prevent it's degradation' and I think the frequent visitors of wilderness are very happy with that level of control. The major question that keeps being raised here is whether the level of degradation, both extant and anticipated, is sufficient to merit the level of control being exerted.

After looking at its first year of operation the FS concluded that the permit system needed further optimization. This is good. It shows a willingness of the FS to see the flaws in its approach and make adjustments. I would hope that it continues to do more of this in the future, not simply changes to how the permits are issued, but regarding the necessity of particular trailheads to require permits. In my view, not every trailhead in the three Central Cascades wildernesses needs to be tightly controlled through overnight permits. Putting them all on an equal level of trouble and expense does nothing to encourage backpackers to increase their utilization of low-use trailheads and their adjacent areas.

The central argument here on OH.org seems to be not whether control is needed or should be abandoned, but if the current system of control provides an optimal balance between access and preservation. I think that argument will last a long time, as we all have different ideas about what is optimal.

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Charley » February 19th, 2022, 11:20 am

drm wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 10:38 am
Yeah, these systems benefit infrequent wilderness visitors who have to plan everything far in advance and will only go once or twice a year.
I couldn't disagree more that "infrequent visitors" are benefited- it sounds like you're referring to a busy professional person, who plans a yearly backpacking trip. That's certainly an important user group, but I think there are a lot of other kinds of Wilderness visitors who aren't as socioeconomically privileged, overall.

To give an example: in Bend, there are lots of immigrant service workers and agricultural workers, who don't speak English as a native language, and whose lives might be changed (for the better!) because of a spur-of-the-moment trip to a beautiful destination in these Wildernesses. I don't see how they'd get access at this point. I am guessing that you'd agree there's little chance they'd be able to effectively navigate the bureaucratic impediments that have been intentionally erected.

That's what I'm referring to.

We're not doing ourselves a favor, as environmentalists, when we reduce the pool of potential wilderness lovers (and environmentalist voters) to people with the privilege that I'm referring to.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Charley » February 19th, 2022, 11:33 am

Aimless wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 11:15 am
After looking at its first year of operation the FS concluded that the permit system needed further optimization. This is good. It shows a willingness of the FS to see the flaws in its approach and make adjustments. I would hope that it continues to do more of this in the future, not simply changes to how the permits are issued, but regarding the necessity of particular trailheads to require permits.

[...]

The central argument here on OH.org seems to be not whether control is needed or should be abandoned, but if the current system of control provides an optimal balance between access and preservation. I think that argument will last a long time, as we all have different ideas about what is optimal.
Agreed on all counts!

Just off the top of my head:
I think overnight camping permits for Green Lakes and No-Name Lake would make a lot of sense.
I think climbing permits for South Sister would make a lot of sense.
I had no problem with the existing Obsidian permit system.

Hopefully, the FS will continue to back down from it's maximally exclusionary approach, in favor of more targeted restrictions that reduce environmental impact, while maintaining public access.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
adamschneider
Posts: 3711
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: SE Portland
Contact:

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by adamschneider » February 19th, 2022, 11:38 am

Charley wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 11:04 am
Specifically, I can't think of a National Park that requires a day use permit to simply go for a dayhike!
These days, you need a reservation just to drive into Yosemite, let alone hike.

Zion is now requiring permits for Angel's Landing.

User avatar
drm
Posts: 6133
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: The Dalles, OR
Contact:

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by drm » February 19th, 2022, 11:45 am

Charley - A chunk of the permits are saved for two day advance reservation. That seems to be a reasonable attempt to provide an option for those who have irregular scheduling on their jobs and must make last minute decisions.

As to tech savvy, going online to make a reservation doesn't strike as requiring a lot of savvy, but it does require access.

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by retired jerry » February 19th, 2022, 12:24 pm

I disagree that the area is significantly degraded

I've been going up there for decades. More on Mt Hood though. It's always had a similar amount of degradation, although this is subjective. The places I went to decades ago look similar now.

There's more appreciation of LNT now. Fewer people dump garbage in the wilderness. Or cut up trees for whatever reason people have done that.

There have always been degraded places like when you first get to Green Lakes. Or the area at the bottom of Ramona Falls on Mt Hood. But this is just aesthetic. It bothers humans to see that it isn't pristine. I don't think the FS should try to make pristine experiences at all places in the Wilderness.

That is such a small area of the total wilderness that it shouldn't impact plants or animals. The deer don't care if someone hacked up a tree at the top of Obsidian Falls and the ground there is all compacted. Although they ought to study those and identify which we're threatening and what we could do to mitigate. I think habitat loss due to human development is a bigger problem. And how can we harvest trees in a way that doesn't impact animals...

Online permits for just Green Lakes wouldn't be as bad.

I've never understood the Obsidian Falls permits. It's never been very busy there. But I stick to the PCT and maybe the crowds are down below.

But, I respect other people's opinions

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1834
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Milwaukie

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Charley » February 19th, 2022, 10:16 pm

adamschneider wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 11:38 am
Charley wrote:
February 19th, 2022, 11:04 am
Specifically, I can't think of a National Park that requires a day use permit to simply go for a dayhike!
These days, you need a reservation just to drive into Yosemite, let alone hike.

Zion is now requiring permits for Angel's Landing.
Ah. I stand corrected. There are two exceptions*.

*Looks like the Angel's Landing permit program is going to be a trial program and it's new this year.

*The Yosemite program, also new this year, isn't permanent, and is intended to reduce congestion during infrastructure repair. As the Park Service says: "The temporary reservation system will help manage congestion and provide a quality visitor experience while numerous key visitor attractions are closed for critical infrastructure repairs." (Emphasis mine).

My point was this: "I believe this is new." That still stands.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

Catdaddy
Posts: 5
Joined: February 18th, 2022, 6:31 pm

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Catdaddy » February 20th, 2022, 12:12 am

Well, Charley, I'm going with what the USFS has said were the reasons for their implementation of the trailhead quota/permit system. In an article on pdxmontly.com in March 2019, this is said: "from 2011 to 2016, the number of groups entering the Three Sisters increased by 331 percent; Mt. Washington, 314 percent; Diamond Peak, 165 percent; and Mt. Jefferson, 68 percent. All those nature lovers, the agency says, have contributed to increased vandalism, overcrowding, unsafe parking conditions, wildlife displacement, de-vegetation, and eroded trails." Seems like some pretty good reasons to me for curtailing access to those wilderness areas.

As to arguments regarding certain wilderness users being unfairly impacted by the newer quota/permit system, I am skeptical. There are provisions in place to allow folks to plan trips without having to reserve a permit months in advance. Yes, it is true that in some wilderness areas, we can no longer legally just pack our gear and go where we please on a moment's notice. But that's life. We have a lot more people using wilderness areas now than ever before, apparently, and many of them are apparently uninformed about Leave No Trace practices. And even then, there is still the impact of many more hiking boots and camping on the environment. Yes, it is irritating at times. I have heard some people say that they will continue doing as they always have and will hike and camp where they please, when they please, irregardless of any new regulations. That attitude solves nothing and only makes things worse.

Like I said in my first post in this thread, I don't claim to have all the answers, but I certainly know that if folks aren't willing to cooperate for the greater good, nothing will be solved.

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by retired jerry » February 20th, 2022, 6:55 am

"All those nature lovers, the agency says, have contributed to increased vandalism, overcrowding, unsafe parking conditions, wildlife displacement, de-vegetation, and eroded trails."

That's a subjective assessment not based on data

Although unsafe parking is probably a reasonable assessment at a few places. Maybe they need to have limited entry at those few places. But, when I camped at Lava Camp there was only one car parked at the trailhead over night, unnecessarily restrictive. It has a capacity for at least 50 cars. Before the restrictions there were often 50 cars but I always found a spot. It's all well off the highway so not a hazard.

Green Lakes parking is right on the highway so maybe that's hazardous and worth doing something about. I never go there because it's too busy, also further away.

I read an article, that I can now not find, by some forest service people that argued in busy places, designated sites are better. than dispersed.

One observation was in flat areas, they often become over-run with multiple sites coalescing and compacting a large area, with no privacy between sites. By breaking it up into a few designated sites it limited the impacted area and gave each site some privacy. This takes some work by the forest service at each site

Or, put a designated site on a slope, and use trail building techniques to put a flat place for a tent. Then, it's difficult for the site to expand out of control with more tents because there are no other flat spots.

It's difficult for hikers to find good spots that are long term sustainable. You don't want people tramping all over and impacting a larger area. Better for the Forest Service to identify and mark specific designated sites.

Dispersed sites don't recover if even just a few people camp there each year.

This article was arguing to have designated rather than dispersed sites, but it also gave specific actions to manage areas with lots of visitors.

I'm all in favor of not "loving to death" the wilderness. Just disagree with the solution of extreme restrictions over entire Wilderness areas because of a few over-used spots.

In my opinion

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 14398
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by retired jerry » February 20th, 2022, 7:11 am

oh no, I'm arguing about the central cascades permits again :)

Post Reply