Cancelling a permit

If you've been searching for the best source of information and stimulating discussion related to Spring/Summer/Fall backpacking, hiking and camping in the Sierra Nevada...look no further!
User avatar
wildhiker
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 4:44 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by wildhiker »

Wandering Daisy wrote:
I wonder what would happen if they simply did a test year or two with no quotas and no permits.
They did that. It was called the 70s. It wasn't pretty, at least not in Yosemite. I spent 6 weeks in the Yosemite backcountry in 1974 working on a UC Berkeley sociological research project that was part of the effort to decide how to handle this flood of backpackers. We were observing how folks picked campsites and then asking them after dinner to fill out a one-page questionnaire mostly about their experience of solitude, pristineness, trail conditions, etc. The popular spots really suffered under laissez-faire. Of course, since we needed lots of data, we spent a lot of time at those popular sites like the High Sierra Camp loop and the JMT. When I have revisited those places in the past couple of decades, they look and feel so much better! Not as trampled. Less crowded. It's all a direct result of the quota system, plus NPS restoration work like removing fire rings and re-routing trails out of meadows.

One interesting result from our research: people have a "natural spacing" that they like to maintain at campsites, even in crowded areas that attract newcomers. We would get up at the crack of dawn and hurry to the next spot on our sampling loop to be there by noon so we could watch folks come in and pick campsites (from high vantage points where we were not obvious). One good example is Fletcher Lake by the Vogelsang High Sierra Camp. Most backpackers came in from the west end. They would walk on the little trail along the north shore until they found a suitable spot and then stop. I was also surprised to see that very few would actually scout around the lake for the "best spot", as I always do. They stopped at the first one that met their minimum standards. Then the next group would come and space themselves at least 50 yards or so (more or less depending on natural screening) from the other groups. Eventually, by mid-afternoon, you had a string of campsites occupied along the north shore of the lake about 50 yards apart. Then more folks would come (this is pre-quota days, remember), and start filling in between the existing campers. When we interviewed campers, they felt more crowded and less solitude because their natural spacing had been violated. Now, with quotas, we rarely get those big crowds at any one spot anymore and both the physical and sociological impacts are greatly reduced.

The distribution of permits between reservable and walk-up and the reservation method are all questions that should be periodically re-evaluated, but one thing I really love about our Sierra trails is that you are only required to go in a specific direction the first day, and can then camp and travel wherever you please. Other crowded parks (like Grand Teton) have a strict system of designated campsites and rigid itineraries, which I find really annoying and the antithesis of the feeling of freedom I seek in the wilderness. At least in Yosemite in the mid-70s, a fairly sophisticated (for its time) optimization program was used to model how people would disperse in the backcountry given trail lengths, elevation gain, and conditions; historical patterns of use as a measure of site desireability; camping sites available; various combinations of trailhead quotas; and probably other data. Monte-carlo simulations were run to get some ideas of the "peak" possibilities. Then trailhead quotas were adjusted to prevent what the managers thought would be unacceptable crowding and physical impacts at specific sites. The goal was to preserve wilderness conditions but also keep this freedom of movement in the wilderness, at least according to Yosemite Park chief scientist Jan Van Wangendonk who was the architect of much of this quota system back in the 70s. We can quibble with their judgements, but I think they did a good job.

That said, I agree with Wandering Daisy that only about 50% of the quota should be reservable.

-Phil
User avatar
balzaccom
Topix Addict
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:22 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by balzaccom »

Great info Phil. And a wise perspective.

We love the fact that we can reserve in advance for areas that we REALLY want to see. And we're happy finding a way to get into the wilderness at the drop of a hat when we show up for a walk-up permit.

That said, we've only failed to get where we want to go once in the last ten years, and that was because there was a fire, not because of permit issues.
Check our our website: http://www.backpackthesierra.com/
Or just read a good mystery novel set in the Sierra; https://www.amazon.com/Danger-Falling-R ... 0984884963
User avatar
brandy
Topix Acquainted
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 2:00 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by brandy »

Phil...thank you for posting about your research. What an interesting summer that must have been! Human behavior is fascinating. :)
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6640
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by Wandering Daisy »

Similar research should be done now to update to current modes of backpacking. Big changes are the light-and-fast movement, GPS and PLB technology and if and how that changes backpackers plans, extreme sports use of trails (trail running) that means vastly expanded reach of day-use, social media and internet which puts so much more information on areas out there to the general public (vs. guidebooks as the main source of information in the 70's), and from what I have seen, much more use by large international groups on organized tours. I am not sure how or if these things have changed wilderness usage patterns and if the current system is achieving the permit/quota goals.

It is interesting to note that when we went to Peru this fall, the very popular mountain areas are highly managed and with significantly higher fees for vistors, vs native Peruvians. Tourisim is a big economic business. The fact that we have no extra fees or quota on foreign tourists in our wilderness is not common worldwide. For example, as a tourist you cannot even do the Inca Trail without a local guide. As international use increases, I hope that the averge local isn't shut out of the wilderness; saving 50% for first-come seems to be a good preventative measure. I have also encountered some foreign groups exceeding their 15 person limit by getting two different entry dates, then on the way, join into one very large group. I would like to see the maximum group size reduced to about 8. I think any one group should not be able to take all the reserved permits for a a given day. The JMT is a prime example. I think a lot of trail managing this is a matter of public education- cultural differences, and a bit more encouragement for any wilderness user to by into the classic view of "wilderness". That goes for Americans too. The wilderness is limited and special. It is a shame when quota spots are taken by those who really care less about a wilderness experience, and would fit better in other venues.

Just a note on reservation costs. $15 may not be much for some, but it is not negligible when on a tight budget. $15 buys half my gas to the trailhead!
User avatar
chulavista
Topix Acquainted
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:02 am
Experience: N/A

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by chulavista »

What we are experiencing now is some growing pains in technology and some philosophical pricing questions. The internet thing is still new for the government. Probably the best setup for most people is a mix of reservable and walk-in permits where you can apply online in winter for a lottery and then are able to reserve in advance where spots are available after the lottery is over.

My opinion is that there should be a charge for reserving in advance that a walk-in does not have to pay. Not necessarily no charge for a walk-in, but a higher charge for the ability to reserve. I'd pay a good bit of cash (knowing it is going to a hopefully good cause) to avoid waiting for the ranger station to open.

Now where it gets tricky is at what price-point can we set the permits to discourage hoarding permits and what refund can we set to give an incentive for people to cancel (online) while still discouraging hoarding permits. Some of these permits at national parks are getting reserved for 6 people for x days for $20. $20 is nothing compared to the cost of getting to these parks from across the country, so it is understandable that a lot of people are getting in the lottery without travel plans set in stone (especially when the dates of permit applications are sometimes variable). If there is a per person per night cost paid upfront (a can of worms I know), then there would be a lot less no-shows. It's easy to see why there is a lot of disagreement on how things should be run!

Hopefully none of us complaining about permit availability or crowding would ever think about complaining about the low cost of NPS entry or permits [-X

It also would be nice to have a window open within a few days of popular trailhead entries where people could get in a lottery for some of the advance permits already knowing what the weather will be like. Some people will cancel if they see any rain forecasted and some will go no matter what.
User avatar
balzaccom
Topix Addict
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:22 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by balzaccom »

Apropos of this topic. Tom Stienstra in the SF Chronicle wrote this today:

"For camping, a phenomenon developed this past winter when roughly 15,000 Californians gamed the reservation system and locked up the sites at a relative handful of marquee campgrounds for weekends and at the most popular areas. This includes Point Reyes National Seashore, Yosemite National Park, the coast at Monterey Bay and Big Sur, and the Steep Ravine Cabins on the Marin Coast."

Anybody know what he is talking about? Here's a link to the full article:

http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/ ... 945965.php
Check our our website: http://www.backpackthesierra.com/
Or just read a good mystery novel set in the Sierra; https://www.amazon.com/Danger-Falling-R ... 0984884963
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6640
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by Wandering Daisy »

I disagree that "$20 is nothing" compared to the cost of a backpack trip. That may be so for people from afar who backpack a few times a year. For we retired locals on fixed incomes, who go out 10-20 trips a year, and only drive 50-150 miles to the trailhead, $20 is a large part of the total trip cost and multiply that by many times each summer and it prices out many. My only real cost is gas- I have to eat anyway and I usually drive and get on the trail the same day.

Responsible people should not have to pay more because some are irresponsible. Keep the relatively low reservation fee, but then add a per-person "no show" fee if not cancelled (or changed) within so many days of the trip. Chronic "no-shows" could be barred from obtaining reservations. That does not prevent these irresponsible people from going, just makes them get "walk-in" permits.

I am totally against raising fees just to make a penalties hurt enough to be effective. This just penalize the lower income people. The well off do not mind paying for the consequences, as it is just pennies to them.

Any reservation system can eventually be taken advantage of. And any system run on the internet can be hacked. Warm bodies, show up at the ranger station, get permit -- that is the most honest way to go for the solo or twosome. Larger groups are another thing - they need to plan in advance and reserve. It would help too if the quotas were a bit more flexible. Perhaps one or two over one day, to be compensated by one or two less the next day or so, and let it even out within each week.

I also heard about the locking up reservations at campgrounds. I understood (maybe not correctly) that it is similar to concert ticket scalping.
Ska-T
Topix Regular
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:59 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by Ska-T »

Hey buddy! Need a permit? I got some JMT permits with great dates! Only $100! :unibrow:

One thing I don't like about SEKI policy, and probably other national parks, is that they charge more per per person for a 1-person permit than they do for a multi-person permit, although it isn't as unbalanced as it used to be. Additionally, the cost of a 1-night trip is the same as 14-day trip so the cost does not reflect the impact.
User avatar
chulavista
Topix Acquainted
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:02 am
Experience: N/A

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by chulavista »

Probably should mention how thankful we should be that a very high percentage of Americans aren't into backpacking and also don't mind subsidizing those of us who are to keep the fees low. The low fees come with a price, low availability, but it's much preferable to the alternative for most of us.
User avatar
LMBSGV
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:42 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer
Location: San Geronimo, CA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling a permit

Post by LMBSGV »

I realize this thread has drifted from its initial premise, but I think it's sparked a good discussion.

Phil, thanks for your insightful post and historical background. I especially found it interesting you mentioned Fletcher Lake since that was where my wife and went on our first Sierra backpack in the 1970s. The people set up as you described. We walked past four or five different occupied campsites as we followed the trail on the north side. When we got to near the far end of the lake, we found a great site. No one camped near us. They all stayed relatively far away at the other end.

The way I see the permit fees for reservations is one pays by the permit since I consider the fee to cover the administrative processing costs for a reservation. Walk-in permits should be free since there are no processing costs. However, I'd love to see public disclosure of Recreation.gov's finances.

I agree with WD that they should do similar research as Phil describes once again. Things have really changed over the last few years. I also agree the group size should be smaller though I think ten or twelve would be okay. The worst damage I’ve seen as always been by large groups, whether they are pack-in or hike-in. A few years ago I did witness the two groups meeting up phenomena WD mentions. This was in SEKI so the backcountry ranger caught them and made them split up. I don’t know if he cited them or not or whether they simply met up again later since I was going the other direction.

Which brings me to my last point: we need more backcountry rangers. I’ve seen a lot of illegal behavior in Yosemite the past few years simply because there are no longer enough rangers patrolling the backcountry. In Inyo, they seem non-existent and the wilderness suffers accordingly. The regulations are meaningless to those who choose to ignore them unless someone is there to enforce them.
Last edited by LMBSGV on Thu May 26, 2016 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I don’t need a goal destination. I need a destination that meets my goals.

http://laurencebrauer.com
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BillyBobBurro, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Harlen, Snowtrout and 144 guests