Inyo Wilderness Permit Gripe

[michaelzim]

As many of us know, this whole permit debate got a lot of posting print in numerous threads last year and before that even. The issues of "ghost permits" (permits bought on rec.gov with intent not to use all of them but have backups), and non cancellation of any permit that is ultimately not used, is a problem that is not going away unless all permits have to be picked up in person at a ranger station. And I suspect that is history.

I got heavily involved in giving feedback to Sierra NF and Inyo NF during the "changes" and I can assure anyone that they are aware of the limitations with the system. Indeed, that is why Sierra insisted on having permits picked up in person as losing $15 on a reservation was not a big enough hit.
With Inyo, as I understand it, once you print the permit the system acknowledges "confirmation" and that is that. If the permit holder is a no show there is no way anyone but them knows it. And yes, the slot is then lost to anyone else to use (as I'm not sure if one can cancel and get it open again after that - even if the holder had the social consciousness to do it).

So here's the upside. And once again, known by the powers that be...No shows mean that the overall trailhead quotas actually have less people going in than there would be if every single permit holder used their permit. Yes, it means another person gets to lose out on that slot, but overall, there is less congestion and people impact on the wilderness and trails. To some, that is a good thing and at least it is not the other way around. However, inability to get permits can mean more people just deciding to go without one...with a fine risk.
As Daisy mentioned, my sense is that the TH quotas are quietly taking into account the fact that there will be a certain percentage of no shows.

And so on....From what I can tell the basic issue is that there are just too many of us humans tawdling around...and it ain't going to get better any time soon.

M.

[Wandering Daisy]

The public deserves fair access to public lands. It is short-sighted to say that blocking full utilization of permits enhances your wilderness experience. It then becomes a slippery slope to even more restrictions and YOU could end up excluded; cannot say that that will enhance your wilderness experience.

I see the problem more of a distribution of use, not total number of people per se. Inyo also needs to have "pass-through" permits. I am annoyed that I often cannot get an Inyo trailhead permit when all I do is walk through Inyo to get to SEKI. Inyo's system in effect cuts off numerous access points to SEKI. The "crowd" problem is largely too many people on the same trail(s). Desolation Wilderness, which is much more crowded, does its permitting by zone quotas. This seems to be more effective as it allows maximum access and also spreads the use.

[wildhiker]

... Inyo also needs to have "pass-through" permits. I am annoyed that I often cannot get an Inyo trailhead permit when all I do is walk through Inyo to get to SEKI. Inyo's system in effect cuts off numerous access points to SEKI.

I suspect that Inyo NF sets their trailhead quotas in consultation with Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park, knowing full well that most of the people on those eastside trailheads are going over the passes into the parks. If you had a separate "pass-through" quota, I suspect it would simply be carved out of the overall quota, leaving less for folks staying in the east side basins.

Anyone in the agencies who can comment on this hypothesis?

-Phil

[c9h13no3]

One way to compensate is to set the quota with the assumption that a certain percentage will not show up. Perhaps they already do this. I am sure they have records that could determine the number.

Yeah, I'd be okay with a certain percentage of no shows being accounted for in the total number of permits released. Anyone know if the quota has changed before & after the permits were moved to the current system? Seems like something that should be pretty easy to look up.

[alpinemike]

Happy to see lots of great replies on this thread and idea. I personally like the Pass Through idea quite a bit. As I understand it then, Sierra NF can account for people that reserve their permit and are no shows? Since rangers are actually issuing their permits in person, so that seems straightforward and more fair. Of course It's going to be a risk to show up and expect a no show at a popular trailhead but if you have backup options it's certainly better than the alternative of there being no chance.

I don't really understand the reason why Inyo has completely decided to abandon at least this simple idea. The National Parks are also doing this, but for some reason Inyo isn't. It sounds like it could be a funding issue as alluded to by others in this thread. If truly we are at the point where Inyo will no longer make us pick up our permits, then we are in a different age of permits on the Inyo Side. It will be up to us as the permit reservers to be honest and put unused permits back into the pool. But we all know how that's just not going to happen all the time...

Sounds like either Inyo needs more funding (which I'm sure it does) or we need to have a way to penalize those that aren't using their permit and not cancelling it.

[michaelzim]

I had another long talk with the Inyo Bishop permits supervisor this morning.
As before when have asked questions and voiced “our complaints” on the current system, there were no easy answers. It really is pretty much – make some people happy / make some people not, whatever system is in place.
As someone who is indeed getting affected by the inability to get permits at Inyo (Piute, Bishop Pass and Kearsarge have eluded me completely) I have skin in the game too. However, I can see both sides of the coin mostly…Main points are below in point form and paraphrased for expediency.

~ There are plenty of people who love the ability to get a “W” two weeks in advance so that they don’t have to drive 6 or 8 hours without knowing if they will get one waiting in line at a ranger station.

~ There are plenty of people who absolutely love the “self-print” permit option so that can avoid going to a ranger station period, or arriving outside office hours, or using some out of the way trailhead that would require a roundabout detour.

~ Yes, once you hit “print” for your confirmation permit or luckily grabbed “W” permit online, then the system acknowledges that the permit is a “go” and is going to be used. No way (except ALL permits picked up in person) to police that after the fact. Think of all the long line of trailheads at Inyo v. the compacted equivalents at say Kings Canyon and you will see the problem.

~ Yes, that means in the 1 week you have in which to “print your own permit” you can have some issue and be a no show, with the social responsibility being to cancel it by email or phone as soon as possible so someone else can have it. And yes, this is not going to happen much due to logistics of it all and “irresponsible people” etc., etc. However, it does happen! The supe said that they are regularly getting phone-calls from folks who have printed permits and had last minute changes. These then get immediately released or become 10:30 am “no shows” and available to the public again (be that at rec.gov or if actually at a ranger station waiting for them).

~ As per the system, if you do not print your own permit or confirm it and get it in person, etc. it will be classified as an automatic “no show” at 10:30 am on the day of the permit.

~ Trailhead quotas are wilderness IMPACT based and have stayed unchanged for decades (unless have a special review). The TH hinterland is the determining factor, not how many people want to use that trailhead. They are determined by law and there is a big legal document related to the numbers.

~ Pass though permits are not going to happen. There are too many issues involved and not enough rangers to police such a system FOR INYO. Again, too many trailheads along too much topographical terrain to enforce.
Yeah, you would have to have a ranger at each location and in the hinterland to see that the system was no being abused. As it is already people are getting permits for “obscure trailheads” then using them at more popular trailheads and hoping to get away with it – which no doubt they do a lot.

~ Making pass through permits on existing quota numbers would only work when you have huge total quota trailheads so that the smaller categories (pass through v. normal) make it even workable for say large family groups who may not be able to thus be a group at all. As it is it can already be really challenging to get permits for a big group, even if that group does not even want to go over the hump into SEKI say, but is going for a pure short in Inyo destination.

~ Looking at cars in a parking lot is not a scientific way of assessing how many people are actually filling the quota. Yeah, think that one through.

~ Yep, there are staffing issues of course but there is currently a new hire in training to add to just dealing with in-person services, so that should help.

~ My note here!...When you think about all the ‘normal job requirements’ that must take up a staff day at Inyo, then add in the huge influx of people using the wilderness since Covid came along, then ‘imperfections’ are likely. Oh, then add the load and additional ‘complications’ dealing with yet another emergency seek-and-find-and-notify situation c/o yet another huge fire…and yep, I bet it is no summer picnic!

For those who want more info. and to check in case I got something wrong, here are the two main links for this subject at Inyo:

https://www.fs.usda.gov/main/inyo/passe ... recreation

https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/inyo/pas ... rdb5356869

Hope this helps… Michaelzim

[Gazelle]

I think if you could get your permit fee returned or most of it closer than the 30 day refund more people would cancel absolutely no incentive to cancel close to the day as you dont get any money back. yes if people are nice they do cancel.

[Wahiker9]

Just checked and saw that the Inyo permit cancellation policy on Recretaion.gov is:
"Cancel your reservation online, the per person recreation fee will be refunded automatically if you complete the cancelation at least 12 days before entry date.
Refunds: No refund if you cancel your reservation less than 12 days before the entry date. No refund of reservation fee."
Maybe some incentive for folks to officially cancel their reservation.


(PS: Gazelle-I love your Einstein quote. Never seen it before!)

[Gazelle]

Well 12 days is better than the 30 days, still think if they did it up to maybe 5 or even 2 days alot more people would cancel, they recreation.gov still get their $6 bucks. then you could almost get a permit a couple days before.

[Wandering Daisy]

I got my Yosemite "walk-in" permit the last hour of the 3-day limit my last trip. I had to pick up the permit in person at the park entrance. It worked out very well. I still had to pick up the permit in person. I guess the 3 days is simply the time it takes to process the paperwork. You would think that with today's technology, it could be done quicker.

It does take time to write a permit from scratch when you walk into a wilderness station, so having same day or day before permits takes more staff time. But there are solutions to that too. Why not let the backpacker do their own "paperwork", have a kiosk where you could self-write your permit and then just have the ranger finalize the permit? All I am saying is that a little more creative thinking could be done, if Inyo were really intent on making no-show permits available.

A ranger actually checked my permit this last trip in Yosemite - rarely did this happen before. So maybe freeing up the staff from permit-writing puts more rangers out on the trail.