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.
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 20th, 2022, 8:14 am

When population visitation is high, the big impact is not trash, but our own wastes. Natural processes can only properly deal with so much at a time, and that assumes people dig proper holes in proper places, reasonably well distributed, which we know many do not. Unless we can convince people to blue-bag the stuff out - and practically we know that we can't - the only solution then is to limit populations - or put in wilderness toilets, which are very expensive to maintain. And if you can't maintain them well, people won't use them.

I would add that other impacts on wildlife are generally not visible to most of us.

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, 9:58 am

I think that the amount of human waste is small compared to the amount of animal waste. Fewer people than animals, and we only briefly visit.

I think that properly buried human waste decomposes quickly. Like within a year.

I don't think that you could get people to use blue bags any better than you could get people to properly bury waste

Some areas, like summiting South Sister, are exceptions. There isn't soil, just gravel. It takes a long time for human waste to decompose. Blue bags are reasonable.

Just one person's opinion. They could do more sciencey studying to determine if human waste is a problem.

I keep forgetting to remember precisely where I put my human waste, then come back a year later to see if it's still visible.

A couple times I've dug a cat hole and found remains from someone else, so I just backed out and moved over.

Occasionally I see a "toilet paper flower". I think maybe some people think they're doing others a favor to mark where their waste is, so it can be avoided by others. We need better education. Sort of like those blue bags of dog poop that people leave along trails - don't do that. If you're not going to carry your dog poop out, just kick it off trail, under bush, where no one else will step on it.

gallione11
Posts: 51
Joined: May 10th, 2019, 6:45 am

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by gallione11 » February 20th, 2022, 2:29 pm

The unsafe parking conditions excuse is one that really bugs me. Now, I know it would take time and money to revamp some of the busier TH parking areas, but it's like there was little to no planning or forethought on how many people would want to use areas. You're not going to limit people with sparse parking areas as has been made abundantly clear over the years.

Some extremely low parking capacities for how popular the trail is(not an exhaustive list by any means):
Hood - Mirror Lake before the recent renovations had like 8 spots
Green Lakes - 40 spots
Coyote Wall (on the brain since I was there today) - 16 spots

I do agree, more people need to abide by LNT -- dog owners seem to be the worst for this -- but poor parking facilities is just an artificial scarcity tactic that does not work at all

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 20th, 2022, 4:14 pm

Human waste is concentrated in a very small area - where everybody wants to camp, especially near lakes. The worst place. If we really distributed our wastes around like wildlife, it probably wouldn't be much of an issue.

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

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Charley » February 20th, 2022, 4:40 pm

Catdaddy wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 12:12 am
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.
Agreed! I don't have all the answers, either.

I'm happy to argue this blue in the face, because I have strong feelings about it. However, it's clear that every person on here wants the best for both the Wildernesses and the community of humans that interacts with those areas, and no one is arguing for either a complete closure or a complete free-for-all (my preferred policy would be more restrictive than the previous status quo).

I think we're arguing over degrees of Middle Path, and that's ok. "Where to draw the line" is a good question, and a thoughtful answer will require input of both technical, scientific information, as well as values, and all of that in the midst of changing local demographics, culture, economy, and even climate!

No surprise there are a diversity of preferences!

Also, I think you're right: ignoring the dictates of the current system would neither help to end it or amend it, nor help with the environmental impact that the system is meant to address.
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 20th, 2022, 4:57 pm

gallione11 wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 2:29 pm
The unsafe parking conditions excuse is one that really bugs me. Now, I know it would take time and money to revamp some of the busier TH parking areas, but it's like there was little to no planning or forethought on how many people would want to use areas. You're not going to limit people with sparse parking areas as has been made abundantly clear over the years.
Agreed! I'm so tired of governments and politicians attempting to solve a demand issue without trying to increase the supply. This pattern has come up with housing (the US needs more), trails (the US needs more sustainable trails and trail access), healthcare (why aren't we expanding medical schools and residency options???), and many other issues.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

User avatar
mountainkat
Posts: 110
Joined: March 4th, 2015, 6:12 pm

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by mountainkat » February 20th, 2022, 6:08 pm

I agree that the permit system is too restrictive and tends to cause additional inequality in access.

Im not a fan of quota systems,  but, I would have prefered to have seen this started small scale to address the few problems areas, instead of the expansive coverage with which they proceeded. I, too, have thought about how few (if any) hikes across the country are limited for day use by quota, even in heavily visited National Parks and National Forests.

As for this system actually preserving the wilderness,  or alleviating the perceived  issues, I'm doubtful.  I hiked through there last year on the PCT, and, while the place was practically empty,  I still managed to see folks camping in random spots in meadows.  They had the same problem with the Jefferson wilderness quotas that preceded this.  I'm paraphrasing, but, on their own web page, the FS admitted that the quotas didn't work because people failed to camp in designated spots and made new impacts.

Also, where I camped last summer, folks had gone to the bathroom practically right next to the campsites. There were quite a few shallow dug bathroom holes and toilet paper all over the place.  

To me, it is apparent that this permit system fails to address this problem behavior/ education issue. I think that the Forest Service should require in person pick up of the permits at one of their offices. My understanding is this is the standard in the Sierra, where they give the permit holders a briefing in LNT.  Why can't the Deschutes/Willamette Forest Service have the same requirement and stress the importance of walking away from the camp area to find a spot and pack out toilet paper, among many other LNT topics?  If they aren't going to help educate, then, at a minimum, they should install the backcountry toilets in high use areas.

As far as access goes, I think Charley has pointed out how it plays out.  Not only do folks need to have the tech tools to obtain a permit, the speed of connection probably matters, too, as well as, having the availability to be available when the permits go on sale. Some folks might not have jobs where they can just take a moment to be ready to battle it out for a permit on recgov at the moment that they go on sale and sell out.   Not everybody has a desk job in front of a computer where they can book their summer on recgov in that short window of time that they need to be available to do so.  Also, from what I understand, tech savvy folks can make computer programs that automate tracking of the recgov permit availability, and notify them each time a permit is canceled and becomes available.  How are folks supposed to compete with things like that?   Honestly,  if they want to give everyone a chance, maybe they also need to limit how many times a person can get a permit to a popular area.  Why not limit folks to once a year or every two years?

As far as impacts to wildlife, the FS had an Environmental Assessment completed on this proposal, and from what I recall, it was rather vague about existing impacts to flora and fauna, and didn't provide any actual specific examples of harm, or documentation, which was disappointing. 

We have a growing population, and the powers that be need to find more reasonable accommodation for all to be able to visit wilderness, or they will lose support for wilderness protection. I personally have reconsidered whether I'd support further protection in the future, due to this trend of creating access for less and less. Wilderness protection grew in a time when massive roadbuilding and resource extraction was occurring. I'm glad that the Act saved these lands from that course. But, I think this over broad quota system is taking wilderness protection too far.

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 20th, 2022, 7:47 pm

mountainkat wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 6:08 pm
To me, it is apparent that this permit system fails to address this problem behavior/ education issue. I think that the Forest Service should require in person pick up of the permits at one of their offices. My understanding is this is the standard in the Sierra, where they give the permit holders a briefing in LNT.
I've experienced this "briefing" type of thing twice — neither time in the PNW. Once was when I went to pick up my Mt. Whitney permit in pre-COVID days; they handed me the poop bag and gave me a stern talking-to about it.

The other time was at Arches National Park, when I wanted to hike in The Fiery Furnace (a weird little patch of ridges and slot canyons). You have to go to the visitor center the day before and buy a permit, and they actually made me go into a room and watch a video about things like toilet paper and cryptobiotic soil crust.

mountainkat wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 6:08 pm
Not everybody has a desk job in front of a computer where they can book their summer on recgov in that short window of time that they need to be available to do so.
One solution to this would be to do a daily lottery. This is how Zion is handling the Angel's Landing permits.

gallione11
Posts: 51
Joined: May 10th, 2019, 6:45 am

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by gallione11 » February 20th, 2022, 8:48 pm

adamschneider wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 7:47 pm
I've experienced this "briefing" type of thing twice — neither time in the PNW. Once was when I went to pick up my Mt. Whitney permit in pre-COVID days; they handed me the poop bag and gave me a stern talking-to about it.
Funnily enough, the only time I've gotten this was on the Green Lakes Trail a couple years ago. Unfortunately, it was on a Monday. I feel like the people that actually need to hear this would be the weekend bunch

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

Re: Central Cascades permit changes

Post by Charley » February 20th, 2022, 9:51 pm

mountainkat wrote:
February 20th, 2022, 6:08 pm
To me, it is apparent that this permit system fails to address this problem behavior/ education issue.
Yeah. There's a ton of impact out there, and it's more to do with poor practices, rather than, strictly speaking, the number of humans present over a period of time.

A lot of additional impact could be ameliorated with more active management (I don't know the expense of backcountry toilets, but if backcountry poo is apparently such a big problem, then wouldn't it be worth it??? ).

I think sometimes the FS seems to avoid some kinds of management because it doesn't fit in the "wilderness ethic," but then the effect is more deleterious environmental impact.

For instance, rather than using chainsaws to quickly log out a trail, we have to wait until a trained handsaw crew can do the job. . . meanwhile, hikers have denuded a new informal bootpath nearby to get around the downed trees.

Similarly, rather than formalize climber's paths in order to make them less erosion prone (not only are the denuded ruts unsightly, but the soil ends up in local streams), the FS simply leaves informal bootpaths in place, rather than go through the probably difficult process of permitting and then cutting a new trail in a Wilderness.

Ultimately, it doesn't seem optimal.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.

Post Reply