Remote area route descriptions

[rightstar76]

.

[balzaccom]

I agree. But I also think that we who value isolation and "untouched wilderness" will continue to have to adapt, to avoid those areas that get attention and thus become overrun. Tehipite Valley just had some trailwork done. It has long been on my list of places to visit. But will some magazine do a major story about "The last untouched canyon in the Sierra" and make it into an "epic adventure" that gets put on every newbie's life list? Maybe. That would be sad.

[rightstar76]

I doubt it will ever happen. Theodore Solomons wanted a highway built to Tehipite Valley. Didn't happen. There was a bill passed decades ago which was supposed to fund an alternative trail into the valley. Didn't happen. Over the years there have been trip reports on Supertopo with beautiful photographs. Also, a book and a tv episode about an injured hiker who fell off the trail. Still, very few people know about Tehipite Valley. Good! It's probably because of the remoteness, lack of nearby services, and the confusing network of trails as well as the heat, poison oak, and rattlesnakes. I don't expect it to change.

[c9h13no3]

This is ridiculous. Withholding information because you want to keep your special place all to yourself is selfish. There will always be remote places to go. I hear Antartica is really nice during the shoulder season.

I too enjoy the adventure of finding my way to places. So sometimes I spontaneously just pick a spot on the map and go for it. Other people may not be as experienced, and they want the security. Hike your own hike, and let people plan their own trips as they wish.

If my trip reports help people enjoy the outdoors, it's a win. We're saving the environment, fighting obesity, and getting people off their phones and out into the real world. If my favorite corner becomes crowded, I suppose I'll just have to do some more exploring. And exploring is fun.

[rlown]

That isn't what happens on social media. Most take it as a guarantee. It never is. Some even take their phones with them into the wilderness expecting them to work.

[AlmostThere]

This is ridiculous. Withholding information because you want to keep your special place all to yourself is selfish. There will always be remote places to go. I hear Antartica is really nice during the shoulder season.

So why don't you volunteer with some trail crews for a while if you think it's about being selfish? Come on out with us and carry out 20 lbs of trash. Dealing with illegal campsites - there's an eye opener.

You'll figure out what it's really about if you read the entire thread. Being selfish has nothing to do with it.

[mrphil]

Hike your own hike, and let people plan their own trips as they wish.

Aside from moving your own feet to make it happen, how does someone else telling you where to go and how to get there entail planning and executing "your own hike"?

Sometimes I'll go above and beyond, and other times I'll keep that info as mine alone. And if I share, it's my call, and you take whatever I choose to give. There is no entitlement to it or socialistic obligation to consider the greater good for all involved, at all. If it's abused in some way (as it is so often and increasingly), I reserve the right to reconsider and withdraw any portion I see fit, and being mine, that choice is as subjective and arbitrarily applied as I decide to make it. If that's not okay, figure out your own hikes and destinations, and keep going until you find what makes you happy. Then it's yours.

[creekfeet]

There's may reasons a person may choose not divulge the location of a beloved spot. For one, consider the environmental impact. The pristine condition of a place is one of the main factors that can make it special to a person, and if it gets a lot of traffic, this will inevitably be lost. Or for me personally, I don't like to give out info about my favorite spots because I would rather others find them like I did, by blindly stumbling into them. I feel that finding an incredible spot organically like this makes it much more meaningful.

Overall, I think this whole issue is a little overblown as it relates to "remote backcountry spots". Instagram and the like has certainly increased traffic to frontcountry hidden gems that at one point in time required local knowledge or word-of-mouth recommendations to find, but I don't think the typical instagram fiend is looking at pictures that drive them to go lighting out for the Gorge of Despair or anything. A forum such as this might mean fifteen or so more people a year visit Kaweah Basin, but that's a pretty negligible impact. It's easy to hate on the impact social media has had on the environment, but it's not like people wanting to brag about and share the cool places they've been to is a new thing. The likes of John Muir and Stephen Mather did more to drive visitation to the Sierra than anyone in history, and they're completely revered by the hiking community.

If anything the rise of all these acronymed off-trail routes has been the biggest factor in contributing to an increase of folks in remote areas, but perhaps even that's not such a bad thing. The way I look at it, these silly routes just kind of funnel a lot of people into the same places, and leave the majority of the map wild and uninhabited. If you can't find solitude in the Sierra, you're simply not looking hard enough.

[rightstar76]

Wisdom.

It's easy to hate on the impact social media has had on the environment, but it's not like people wanting to brag about and share the cool places they've been to is a new thing. The likes of John Muir and Stephen Mather did more to drive visitation to the Sierra than anyone in history, and they're completely revered by the hiking community.

[mrphil]

Wisdom.

It's easy to hate on the impact social media has had on the environment, but it's not like people wanting to brag about and share the cool places they've been to is a new thing. The likes of John Muir and Stephen Mather did more to drive visitation to the Sierra than anyone in history, and they're completely revered by the hiking community.

x2

That is a very good point. What they shared with the public not only brought people in droves, it led to the building of highways and railroads to get them there. In Muir's case though, while he might have initially wanted to simply expound upon his deep love of place as a tribute to it, hoping for nothing more than to preserve it, but eventually being forced to recognize that what he had and loved was in the process of becoming lost, he then spent a great deal of his life trying to save it, in no small way, as a result of what he himself created. He lost control, his reverence wasn't always shared, and he undoubtedly ended up with lots of regrets in a life that became one of being compelled into a constant fight for advocacy. I would imagine that he had many conversations and internal dialogues that weren't too far removed from the sentiments and concerns expressed here and now. But, those weren't invalid or misplaced. What came as a result of his best intentions was an onslaught of people and destruction that's still being unwound and driving policy today. Very much a mixed legacy. He got his National Park, and all that came with it. Much of which he couldn't even begin to imagine, and not all good.