The 395 and Owens Valley-Eastern Sierra Region

I had a long talk with a friend about the permits. He has far more experience in this area than I. I don't think it's fair to ask for $30-$40 for entrance fees and then require you to pay $6 for a permit. Even if I have an annual pass, paying to get in and then paying for the right to access features just isn't right. Further, you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to visit your national parks and lands.

Also, not everyone has the luxury of being able to choose their vacation time to coincide with permit systems (ie, you don't know before the date sells out) either which means in a park with hotels, your only chance of getting in may be by reserving accommodation--that sucks as well.

The parks need to figure out how to grow themselves.

 

fuck usage permits go for it

 

Not trying to pick on Ian, but there are a bunch of common objections to permits mentioned so it is a good framework to explore.

It is easy to dislike permits because it is easy to forget what happens to a place that is subject to increasing visitation without permits. Permits happen for a reason, because without them a place becomes unvisitable for other reasons.

A wise person once said, "Compare not to the Almighty, but to the alternative". So consider the alternate realities and often paid permits are the lesser evil.

Alternative 1 - No permits: Resource becomes destroyed or so over visited that there is no point in going to it. This is a classic case of the Tragedy of the Commons in which unregulated public resources are inevitably destroyed. Many such resources are "regulated" by informal community standards. Unfortunately for National Parks there really is no such "community" since no one lives there and all visitors are ephemeral. So you are left with regulation, in the form of permits, once visitation exceeds the sustainable capacity of the resource. One need look no further than what happened to various BLM sites during COVID. Visitation changed too fast for regulation to keep up and the result was awful.

Alternative 2 - Free permits: Well nothing is free, it is getting paid for somehow. The question is whether the actual user (i.e. the permit holder) pays for the infrastructure to support the permits or whether everyone else does through increased park fees or federal taxes. There isn't a "right" answer here, though usually the threshold is that if the permitting infrastructure is small enough there is little point to adding more infrastructure to collect fees to cover the small cost. That threshold is in fact almost always explored in NPS studies of permitting systems.

Yeah, and people shouldn't get cancer either - but they do... No one is adding hoops for fun. No one joins the Park Service to sit in an office managing permits. The hoops are self created by visitation, so either one creates functional hoops or suffers the consequences of ad hoc hoops:

Alternative - No reservations for busy parks/resources: Now the hoop is a 4 hours traffic jam at the park entrance. Or a trailhead parking lot/spur road that is closed once at capacity.

Yes, this is annoying and here there are plenty of functional alternatives. I've always thought the best balance is a mix of early reserved and walk up or close in permitting. Have a fraction of permits allocated by lottery well in advance (like six months or a year) which allows people that have to plan vacations well in advance the ability to do so. Have another fraction of permits allocated by lottery very shortly before the day so that people who can't plan vacations far in advance at least have a chance at it.

Historically they've done a good job of this actually, as in growing the capacity of the resources they have. The real issue now is that with increase visitation demand there needs to be an increase in resource supply. For formal National Parks (as opposed to Monuments) there is only one way to do that but that discussion is the third rail of forum rules so we won't go there.

 

So, in practice, there are only a few places that I know of that have gone to (or changed their) permits recently (although I admit to going through life mostly oblivious to the noise around me, I find myself happier that way).

• Driving through Yosemite on... 120 or whatever it is. (a year or two now, right?)
• Alabama Hills (sort of; I'm not sure there are permits yet but I know it's designated sites and a plan to move to permits soon-ish... I think)
• Echo and Hole in the Wall (brand new)

At least with Yosemite and Alabama Hills, I feel like they were becoming such a zoo prior to the permit system that the permits/move towards them were a good solution. AH especially. Has anyone been since the move to designated sites, and is it actually better? It was so packed and there was so much trash, etc. that I wasn't sure I'd ever go back (at least to spend the night). But if it has calmed down - which is the goal, as I understand it - perhaps it shows that the system can work.

All that said, I do love the freedom of many of our public lands. Dispersed camping, freedom to roam at one's own pace. Staying away from the generators in a campground or the blasting of music from some loud group. Of course, that requires responsible use of our resources, and it's pretty clear to me that responsibility is not high on the list of many Americans these days. (and perhaps others, though I have fewer international interactions)

 

Shifting off land use and back to the regional discussion, how's Benton Crossing in the winter months?

 

I've been on it twice (in Jan/Feb 2021) when 120 was closed. Some snow on it each time, but it wasn't snowing at the time. Seemed like a great road to me, no issues. Dirt, obviously.

Edit: I was heading west, and OMG, it feels like a long way around Lake Crowley.

 

Perfect. I'm hoping to take it (heading west) in a week...weather permitting obviously.

 

I'm willing to be convinced but where I am hung up remains at when a permit puts a resource out of reach for whatever reason. Could be access to resources, money, whatever. Maybe in addition to a permit, your stay limit should be cut from 7 days to 2 or 3? I'm also hung up on the the effect permits have on other area resources.

 

Depends on the year. Some years you can drive it without getting your tires wet. Other years the only way in or out is snow mobile. You'll know within a 100 yards of leaving pavement.

 

Ed Abbey is rolling in his grave.

 

Yes, well Ed Abbey's perspective on permits was delightfully simple. There are no permits because nothing is permitted

 

Wasn’t Abbey the guy who said that the problem with beer cans by the side of a desert road wasn’t the beer cans, but the road?

 

...yes definitely the fault of the road. i got a kick out of the idea of emptying a crankcase

 

Excellent discussion, and I hope my hyperbolic ranting isn't coming across as actual opposition to permit systems. The intended point is that we should expect/demand permit systems that don't unnecessarily or unfairly impede folk's ability to eventually visit they places they desire. Each location probably needs its own carefully tuned system.

The Coyote Buttes program is broken, in my opinion, because of the terrible odds involved, and the way fees are collected. In addition to the typical demand from desert explorers and tourists, evidentially the entire population of continental Europe wants to visit this one specific place in Utah. Throw in having a job and wanting to visit during a pleasant time of the year, and your odds become near-zero. But the flaw, I'll argue, is that a $9 fee is charged each and every month you enter the lottery, whether you're successful or not. After losing over and over, it start to feels like a fuck-you tax. There is no benefit conferred to those who pay the fee and lose the drawing, they're just out $9. Hence my reference to hunting lottery systems, which I'm sure many here understand better than I do, but I'll try to explain my perception of them anyway, because I feel that these lotteries better address the concept of cumulative equity in distributing extremely scarce and highly coveted public opportunities. In those systems, each time one is unsuccessful in a draw, preference is gained for future ones, accumulating odds on one's favor until reset by eventual success. (And particularly exclusive opportunities can be won only once in one's lifetime.) It's still a lottery system, but manages to distribute scarce resources to a handful of people without sending an overt "fuck you" to everyone else. Plus there's a more general appreciation when one's lottery fees benefit not only present wildlife management, but also improves one's future odds of being able to enjoy that well-managed wildlife... you know, by murdering and eating it. Dang, now I'm hungry!

I'll also argue that the new system for recently restricted areas in DV (Echo Cyn, etc.) isn't well implemented, because it's walk-up only. I can jump through a lot of hoops, but getting to a visitor center before 5PM isn't one of them. No matter what time I plan to leave home, I will get there sometime between 5:15PM and 4AM the next day. But there are likely many other folks for which the system doesn't work, unrelated to deep-rooted personal incompetence. So, even if there's enough walk-up traffic to keep theses sites full every night (which I personally doubt but have no idea), it doesn't provide reasonable access for a lot of people. They should offer some permits for advanced booking, by lottery if necessary, so that folks can plan trips that won't end in frustration and disappointment. There should also be an online method (or even a geofenced app, like for Coyote Buttes) available alongside walk-up permits, especially for when the system is inevitably expanded to areas much further from the visitor center. The last thing the park needs is a flood of unnecessary vehicle traffic for an obtrusive permit system. Of course, the DV system is in its infancy, and in all likelihood will be improved in the near future.

Finally, on the topic of fees, there are arguments for and against, but in general I don't mind them, just like I don't mind paying for a camp site at a developed campground. Some might object to paying to camp in non-developed areas, but I don't, especially if it helps keeps those areas from getting trashed, and reduces the tendency for no-shows. In 2014, a legal case substantially curtailed the "adventure pass" program at Angeles National Forest, concluding that the agency could only charge fees for developed areas -- picnic areas, restrooms, etc. -- whereas previously, fees were required for any vehicle parked anywhere in the forest, regardless of activity or use of developed facilities. I was overjoyed by their defeat in the courts, but this was largely rooted in spite rather than in opposition to fees. But fuck them all the same, I'm hoping they go so broke they'll have to sell off their prized collection of locked gates. You know, the ones they erected across every fire road in the whole entire forest.

Unlike the USFS, NPS has broader authority to implement permits and fees, so it would likely be harder to mount legal challenges to new fees. Yet against all odds it's the BLM, usually the least iron-fisted of government land management agencies, that keeps fucking me out of $9 every month, because I want to see a fucking rock in Utah. Speaking of which... happy 1st of December to me:



I think Microsoft is in on the scam too, because here's the "randomly selected" lock-screen image I was served when I got home today... got me riled enough to start writing up this whole long-ass rant:



Seriously, what the fuck!

Guess I'll add @essjay's contact info to my will, all indications suggest that a helicopter may someday be needed.

Nawww, I could never beg for donations.

I would, however, support a change.org petition arguing that the fish should bite when I'm the one fishing. Awesome trip report, @clenkeit!

Thanks for the kind words @Stuck Sucks! Sorry this one isn't funny, but someone here keeps steering us back towards level-headed discourse.

 

Is it still rutted out? I went over Memorial Day weekend this year and it was terrible. I only just recently got my air compressor and skids so I turned around after .5 miles on the trail. Was very disappointed, but I did not want to get stuck with how the trail condition was. Many other people turned as well.

 

Indeed. As you say the Wave is just crazy and so it probably needs some more tuning along the lines of your recommendations. You could geofence spoof your phone for the probably easier to get daily permits and then after getting notification at 7:30 pm make the mad drive to Utah by 8 am for the mandatory in person safety briefing...

I believe they did this on purpose for now because they want to have a face to face briefing with dispersed campers in those areas so they are familiar with the regulations. Yeah, it is draconian and inconvenient. When they eventually open Cottonwood/Marble it is going to be stupid to have to drive to Furnace Creek as Stovepipe's hours are intermittent. Unlike the Wave there are a bunch of other dispersed camping opportunities not that much further away (Greenwater, Trail Canyon, BLM land just outside the park) that you could use for your first night before swinging by the VC. I expect they will tune this over time and somewhere I thought I saw mentioned they would like to eventually have an online reservation system but don't have the resources for that at the moment.

Enjoying the long-ass rants, and as I'm guessing your lock-screen changed today, I'll just have to provoke the next rant myself with some unhelpful advice:

I strongly recommend you visit places before they become too popular. Our walk-up in person Wave lottery 13 years ago was a real nail-biter with 12 people competing for 16 slots. Thankfully fate smiled upon us and we won!

So run, don't walk, to those soon to be popular locations! (Note the happy smiles of satisfied folks who have been to the Wave and even had the whole place to themselves for over an hour to do stupid photos like this one)

​

 

Pretty much spot on.

 

Dammit, Ken!



Seriously... You're the best!

 

Desert Magazine, August 1959

 

I was planning a quick one night visit to Saline Valley via North Pass on Tuesday. just one vehicle and I’d like to avoid sketchy snow/ice. Yeah, I’m cautious. Reading between the lines of the current and forecast weather it looks like it’s been much drier and warmer south of Bishop than what we’re getting pelted with here on the Coast and in the Sierra north of Mammoth. Does that seem true? I’ll have a passenger who wants to avoid adventure . I’ve done it in fresh snow before but not more than 6-8” and only along the top and in the shade on the grade. Thanks.