schmalz wrote:This thread has definitely brought up a number of ethical concerns regarding online trip reports.
"The only section of the route I have not done is Bubbs to Woods. Pre Edition explains such and alternate route given, though this appears to be a straightforward section -- Gardiner Pass and then King Col."
I find this comment to be particularly disturbing in light of the fact that you are charging money for the guide to this route.
Steve Roper set a pretty high bar with his process for the Sierra High Route. He had around 25 years of Sierra experience when he started putting the route together in the late 1970s. He hiked every segment at least once over the course of several summers so he got a sense of varying snow levels. Then, according to his introduction to the original edition, he "agonized" for more than a year about whether or not to go public. For the 1997 edition of the book he solicited input from seasoned hikers of the route and asked backcountry rangers — George Durkee, for one — to review sections of the manuscript.
When Ropers's guide to the SHR came out in the early 1980s I had already hiked quite a few of the segments he identified, and over the years I've gone over the rest of them, most more than once. I've always found his take on the terrain and his routefinding advice to be pretty solid, with the odd quibble here and there. (His description of how to get down to Twin Island Lakes from Glacier Lake Pass seemed overly complicated to me the first time I read it, but the next time I hiked that stretch I realized that putting the route into words was more challenging than the actual routefinding.)
On the one hand, I think that the deliberative approach Roper took to defining a mountain route is unlikely to be emulated by others now that we have the internet to share our experiences in close to real time. On the other, I think it's largely responsible for the SHR's longevity and credibility in the outdoor community.