My 2c regarding Sierra's remoteness from an ousider's point of view (Boston).

Last year we didn't look at the map in time (stupid me) and instead of crossing the Snowtongue Pass we went over the col to the NW (loose and steep) and found ourself at the beautiful and frozen Payne lake. It wasn't that far to walk to Piute trail via Saddleback lake and Golden Trout lakes but it felt that people rarely go there - we did not see anybody.

Another time (maybe 6 years ago?) we did a chunk of Roper's route from Merriam lake north via Bear lakes and exiting at Mammoth. We saw exactly 1 guy during our 4 days off trail.

Both times it was a bit early in the season (late June/early July). Anyway, my impression of Sierra that it's far from being crowded. Just need to stay away from those trails.

If the following were true: A place is far far away. Horses can't do it, so you gotta walk. There is cold, swift water that needs fording. Off trail route finding. Some scrambling with a pack on. Basically, some suffering and work needs to happen in order to reach your awesome spot.

My ? is: Does a place like that attract as one poster stated "fire making, trash leaving, shampoo-in-the-lake crowd"? Those kinds of places aren't off limits to those trashing the backcountry & wilderness, but you'd think there's far less of those types way out in the back of yonder.??

It's very true that all it takes it one person to mess it up. Sounds like people find evidence of impact in even some of the most remote spots. One of my first Sierra trips involved hiking into a small chain of lakes fairly near the road. The place obviously got a lot of use. I found the perfect sleeping spot (away from the water and out of site), putting my stuff down and stretching out I only then noticed the pile of human crap and toilet paper with a rock on top of it. Then I noticed lots of little and big piles of rocks in the area...what a wake up call.

I get a chuckle out of these folks who get on line and talk about how remote and beautiful places like TV and Blue Canyon are, then rag on anyone else who mentions these places online. Like they are some kind of closely guarded secret.

The difficulty and seriousness of visiting these places, especially alone, will keep the crowds away.

Way more backcountry fires are caused by lightning than people.

I am bummed to hear the Forest Circus opened Blue Canyon to packers. Bad idea there.

Here's a view up into Blue Canyon from the Gorge of Despair page on SP (Oh shoot, there's a page on SP?? I'll bet it's trashed now... )


Photo by Guy Keesee

ksolem wrote:I am bummed to hear the Forest Circus opened Blue Canyon to packers. Bad idea there.

I was in Blue Canyon on a weekend this past July. The trail is easier to follow than in the past, but it is still some effort to stay on it and not lose it. Looked more like the packers had opened up the trail themselves than any concerted trail-building effort by the FS.

And I think the idea of the crowded Sierra is far overblown. I didn't see a soul in Blue Canyon (no surprise), but didn't see anyone in Crown Valley or on the Rancheria Trail all the way from the start and back. There was only one other car in the lot when I got back - a weekend in July. And I could tell a similar story from hundreds of visits in the past ten years. The High Sierra crowds are in two dozen or so locations we could all name, like Whitney, Onion Valley, Rock Creek, Mammoth Lakes, Tuolumne Meadows, the Valley, Cedar Grove, etc, but there are far more places that one can go and find almost no one. If you leave the trail for more than a few hundred yards, your chances of seeing anyone diminish to close to zero even near the crowded trails.

Judging from the summit registers, I'd say there were more visitors in the remote places thirty years ago than there are today. Sport climbing, video games, and the Internet seem to have supplanted Sierra Club outings and the like as recreation for many.

For you, Kris - Gorge of Despair from Blue Canyon:

Get off the trail in almost any western mountainous area, and you will likely see few to no people.

Did a two week trip in the Sierra this summer (down from Oregon) and was pleasantly suprised but how few people we saw away from the trailheads and main trails. Maybe that's because we were mainly backpacking rather than going for the most popular peaks, like I usually end up doing. Golden trout were spectacular too.

Dougb wrote: before I am banned for perhaps offending powerful people here

You're good with this elf, no offense taken. I enjoy your discourse and appreciate your perspectives.

Hmmmm...

For such a rant on the opinions, misbehavior's and irresponsible deeds/actions of all other humans (except yourself of course) here on SP and in a summit register, my question is, what were you doing there?

I can only imagine all the centuries old micro-ecosystems and lichens that your feet trampled on and terminated on your many "off trail" excursion in the process of getting to those summits. But, I guess that's OK

Oh yeah, obviously you have ALWAYS in ALL your BC Trips, packed out ALL YOUR SHIT & TP etc, right?
.

You always lose when argueing with The Chief unless you are up against UberBabs. She is a professional.

Dougb wrote: Perhaps I'm the pot calling the kettle black, but then aren't we all at one time or another?

Ahhh, isn't that what is known as hypocrisy?

BTW... Bears are indigenous to them hills and their shit is part of that eco-system. You nor any other visiting human is not and neither is your/their shit, no matter how small it may be.

Your presence is neither better nor worse than any other visiting human in the Sierra. We are all just visiting and have the absolute right to do so.

Thus I say, enjoy your visits, clean up any unnatural debris that you may find and take only memories of your time in the Sierra.

Dougb wrote:Well Chief, you're a lucky fellow living so close to such a pretty place. How do you get to your climbs, magic carpet?

Drive to the established T/H just as you and everyone else does, then I walk. I pack out ALL MY SHIT btw.

From the NOAA Forecast Ctr in Monterey, yesterday:

DECEMBER 1ST UPDATE FROM THE SAN FRANSISCO FORECAST OFFICE IN MONTEREY TUESDAY AM:

EXTENDED FORECAST:



ITS GETTING HARD NOT TO START DRAWING ANALOGIES TO THE OCTOBER EVENT WITH ANOTHER RE-CURVING FORMER TYPHOON TAKING AIM AT THE CENTRAL COAST AND NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. TO GIVE AN IDEA ON RAINFALL POTENTIAL...AND THESE ARE VERY COARSE AND PRELIMINARY AT
THIS TIME, THE ECMWF GIVES 4 DAY STORM TOTALS OF 5-7 INCHES IN THE HILLS WITH WIDESPREAD 3 TO 5 INCH RAIN TOTALS FOR THE VALLEYS.

OVER IN THE SIERRA, THE LATEST RUNS GIVE STORM TOTAL QPF OF NEARLY 19 INCHES OF LIQUID PRECIP. STILL WAY TOO EARLY TO GET SPECIFIC BUT OBVIOUSLY THE SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS AND BIG SUR COAST COULD REALLY GET NAILED AGAIN. AS WITH THE OCTOBER STORM, WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO LOOK INTO WIND AND BIG SWELL POTENTIAL AS WELL.

ITS NOT TOO EARLY TO START YOUR STORM PREPARATIONS.

USE EM!

Dingus Milktoast wrote:I burn my terlit paper ...

Ah ha...

It is your flaming shit paper that is the culprit of all them burned down pine trees.

As long as WE ALL do what we can to leave only what we found before we entered, it is all good.

And please, everyone, stay on the trails. Them little plant critters and eco-systems that have been on this planet far longer than any of us, deserve every right to remain there....alive and thriving!

I was going to say this was a pissing contest, but I guess it is a crapping contest.