Backcountry Fishing in Cali to suck?

“Sorry, you'll have to cut n paste...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/01/21/MNL112611.DTL”

“Maybe, depends on which lakes you fish and the type of trout. Brookies can reproduce in lakes where rainbows and browns can't. Most of the lakes I fish don't get planted.”

“I have no problem with that. Seems like the continued existence of the frog population is a little more important than the quality of somebody's recreational experience.”

“It's just like the recent act that made it illegal to camp on top of Half Dome. Some lizard was becoming scarce there and they blamed it on the people. The environmentalists also went as far as to call that lizard endangered, only to find that it populated many medium to high altitude domes and that it was not endangered at all. Of course they never lifted the ban on camping there. The new trend in the government is all about locking up land and keeping people out. This frog is just anouther way to deter fisherman from frequenting these backcountry lakes, and force fisherman to use the lower elevation lakes along with the zoo of others. What a shame this is. Yosemite is a good example of an area the government wants us to stay out of.

I will get off my soap box now.

I'm really not bitter, I for one will keep on hikin.

^^^ThinAir^^^”

“The "recent" act to disallow camping on top of Half Dome is not recent.
This law/ rule, was inacted in 1992.
The reasons being:
The Yosemite Salamander was endangered from the hordes of people allowed 24 hour access to the top.
At one time, several trees grew on top of Half Dome, and by the time the law was inacted, all the trees had been cut down, and destroyed for firewood.
The Park Service had to remove FIVE ACRES OF HUMAN SH!T from the top of the dome once the law was put into place.
Reasons enough?

As for the fishing?
I couldn't connect with the website, but I can tell you this:

Before Roland Knapp began his fish counts in 1994, I fished more than 75 lakes in one summer along the length of the John Muir Trail.
Due to lack of government funding up until the official study began, I volunteered to do an unnoficial "anglers survey" for the DFG in Bishop.
In very few of the lakes we fished during that 53 day trip, did we see any of the yellow legged frogs. In fact, I can remember finding these frogs on only two occasions.
One small lake was in the Wrights' Lakes Basin, and the other was in a small tarn on the trail quite close to Lake South America.
If the lakes have a sustainable fish population, the fishing will remain fine.
In many of the lakes that were stocked,(and I think the majority of the fish stocked are golden trout) I doubt that the fish population will die out.
The larger, deeper lakes, far back in the backcountry, with light fishing presssure, should continue to have good fishing.
The lakes that are easier to get to, and experience heavy fishing pressure will die out.
It will help to make you more appreciative of the fishing you do when you have to REALLY work to do it.
And yes, the brook trout will eat everything else, including each other, and live on, and on, and on, and on.....”

“I hope not. My people are planning to catch lots of golden trout fishies and bring them home for me to eat when they hike with Auntie Mel this summer.”

“Hmmmmmm.... Recent as in the last 9 years. Sorry if thats not recent enough for ya. My first backpacking trip was to the top of Half Dome. I was only a 5th grader and my father got me hooked on the backing bug. That night up there was an awesome experience. And not all the trees were gone then. That was 1989, I followed the story of the poor endangered lizard and how it's habitat on Half Dome was being invaded. Maybe so "on Half Dome". A later study showed that it is a lizard that inhabits exposed granit all over the Park. And for the S word, that story is just anouther story of the infamous turd that was exagerated into a 5 acre story. A story that someone bought. The same one that is used to justify our Park Service in keeping you out.

Don't buy every story you read. It's often a political ploy.

Of course I'm an advocate of the philosophy "take pictures and leave only footprints" We all must do our part to be good stewards of the environment. But please "BIG BROTHER" don't keep me from exploring up in .....^^^ThinAir^^^”

“Thin, help me understand. You say, "force fisherman to use the lower elevation lakes along with the zoo of others"...well, don't you think that the top of Half Dome was also becoming a bit of a "zoo"?

Edward Abbey predicted in "Industrial Tourism and the National Parks" the whole mess -- how chamber of commerce types would "look into red canyons and see only green, stand among flowers snorting out the smell of money and hear, while thunderstorms rumble over mountains, the fall of the dollar on motel carpeting."

Given the choice between the two, I'll take the lizards.”

“Actually I don't think that a couple hundred people on top of a popular destination like half dome is at all a zoo. Thats probably one of the most popular destinations in Yosemite. We can do with a few places like those, what better than one that is made of exposed granit. People tend to stay near their cars. Not nearly as many actually hit the trail, nor could they. I actually enjoy meeting people in such popular places. If you want to be in solitude you don't have to go far. There are many places left lightly tread. Argueing to save an unendangered lizard to protect a rock is a "straw Man Falicy".

^^^ThinAir^^^”

“200 peeps? That's quite a crowd.

I'm an Easterner that takes summertime roadtrips - well, three so far. I've yet to make it as far as the Sierras, but anticipate doing so in the next year or two.
Question:
Is there anywhere around those parts where a fellow and his dog can legally undertake a full-fledged wilderness experience?


*Illegally?*
;)”

“YO gojo! State and national parks don;t allow dogs on the trail (in campsites usually, tho). But there's plenty of national forest available for cruising. Also some wilderness areas (such as Desolation) allow dogs.”

“Gojo, there is one great place to go with a dog, its called Dinkey Lakes. You can hike in with your dog and the trail to the first lake is only about 5 to 6 miles. The fishing is usually good. Check out the Sierra Hikers web ring for trip reports.”

“Thanks, y'all.

It seems that all I hear about CA are the Natl Parks, and I am aware that they (generally) don't allow dogs in the backcountry. I assumed that there would be some NF land, but I also suspected that the NPS has scooped-up all the good stuff. As much as I would like to see Yosemite - dogs or not - I'm not so sure that I would wanna brave the crowds.

We'll find our hikes...”

“Gojo:

"I also suspected that the NPS has scooped-up all the good stuff."

Not even.”

“Not even indeed, Roseymonster. Gojo, John Muir Wilderness and Ansel Adams Wilderness make up an 800,000+ acre contiguous area covering a whole bunch of the High Sierra outside the national parks (between Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings). South of Sequoia, Golden Trout and South Sierra Wilderness areas make up another 400,000 acres. I don't know specifically about dog rules, but I think they're probably permitted.”

“So I gather that the Park Service posted signs at the junction of the JMT and Half Dome trail that were comprised entirely of lies?
Whether or not they were lies, and I DID read the sign there at the junction in 1994, it does seem to follow that the more ignorant the people allowed, and the larger their number, the faster and more obvious the degradation to the subject in question.
Excuse me if I pose a perfectly logical question.....
Where did all those overnight visitors to Half Dome sh!t for so many years?
Or perhaps everyone just threw it off into Mirror Lake, below.
Can you also tell me where they got the wood for their campfires?
I don't recall seeing any firewood vendors on top of that rock, or on the way, but I CAN recall some pretty HUMONGOUS bonfires on summer nights when I was camped on North Dome, right across the way.
You don't suppose they carried all that wood up the cables, do you?”

“Five acres of turds? Come on Mel, you don't seriously believe that $hit do you?”

“ThinAir, what makes you think the "story" of all the sh!t on top of Half Dome is exaggerated? Mel's right, where do you think it all went? Did you even consider the enormous volume of human waste that gets deposited in a place like that? Or consider the Whitney Trail -- the Forest Services spends a fortune taking out several TONS of human waste from the pit toilets at Trail Camp every year. This problem was real, and though I personally was never up there before '92 I've spoken to enough people who said if you wandered away from the crowd anywhere at the top of Half Dome, any crack you looked into contained human waste. The whole place was turning into a toilet.

The wood problem is equally real, and undeniable. Maybe now there is a fighting chance for some trees to reestablish themselves up there -- though I doubt it, since even without camping the human impact killed the tree on top of Sentinel Dome.

And finally, 200 people on top isn't a zoo? I guess that's entirely subjective, but I think most people here would disagree with you. This reminds me of something John Muir wrote in one of his books. It was early summer in the valley and he wrote that he had to get out and get to the high country because there were way too many people in the valley -- there must have, he thought, been at least 50 people there.”

“I also want to say that I can't believe the arrogance of the horse packer quoted in that article. He doesn't know anybody who goes to the backcountry to see a frog? And therefore it's OK to drive the frog to extinction? By fishing lakes that don't naturally have fish in them anyway? If you ask me, the FGS is already on pretty thin ground stocking lakes in wilderness areas. As pleasant as fishing and eating fish in the backcountry may be, the FGS is introducing non-native species into the wilderness -- if not non-native to the whole area, at least non-native to certain watersheds. And now we discover that God has a PLAN when he left some lakes barren, so some other species could thrive too. This was not an oversight of God's to be corrected by the FGS. As usual when we try to correct God's oversights, we realize he actually knew what he was doing.

But back to the whole arrogance of it. The prick acts like nobody cares if the frogs go extinct. I guess we should just wipe out all the non-cute animals because nobody cares about them. Hey, nobody goes hiking planning to have their food stolen by bears either, so why don't knock off all this bear cannister crap and just eradicate the bears? That would sure solve the problem.

Sorry to rant, but people like that make me angry. The fish populations will endure a few seasons without stocking while the problem is studied. And if, in the end, a few lakes need to be singled out as fish-free for the sake of the frogs, I hope the FGS has the guts to do it.”

“One more little thing about human impact on native species in California. Did you know that Clarence King's original name for Mount Langley was Sheep Mountain? When he first saw the mountain, there was such an enormous herd of bighorn sheep living on the slopes that he thought that was the obvious name.

When's the last time anyone saw a bighorn sheep (or a herd of them) in the vicinity of Mt. Langley?”

“CRY Me a River. You remind me of a woman. You talk too much”

“Typical. Sling insults when you lose an argument. You remind me a 5 year old child.

Funny thing is, I wasn't even trying to have an argument with you. And you managed to lose anyway. Nice going.”

“Now why did you have to go and say that, I was just trying to make a joke of it all.

I just don't agree with you.”

“Read what I wrote above, I really think that its ok to allow people to visit popular destinations. There are a lot of places that remain rarely touched, you have to work harder to get there, but it's worth it. Popular places like Half Dome and others shouldn't be so limited.

The poop will iodegrade in about a month. Studies have proven that. Really the bigest problem with poop is that it is unsightly to people.

Also there were never many trees on half dome, probably only about a dozen. The people who haked them off most likely are dead by now. The philosophies about not using fires are new.

I think the question I must ask is: Do you feel this way because you expect to be alone on half dome? Solitude in popular destinations is unrealistic. Everyone refers to other hikers as "The People" well you are a part of "the people" I think a lot of hikers just don't realize that they are a part of the masses that they so often complain about.

Learn to share.”

“iodegrade = biodegrade... sorry”

“Unbelievable. I assume you are once again joking, ThinAir. "the biggest problem with poop is it is unsightly"? I guess you won't mind then if I (and 200 others) drop a dookie in your water supply?

Can you site the reference for the study you mention on temporal fecal biodegradation? I'd like see which James Watt foundation wrote that.

I think 'sharing' really has nothing to do with this whole matter. Half Dome was overrun. The place just can't handle the throngs of people that flocked to it: it was literally being loved to death.”

“The poop biodegrades before it hits the water suply. Animals been pooping directly into streams for years. As long as you follow the rules and keep it at least 200ft from water, it will biodegrade. Duh

So are you one of those people who expect to be alone like I said before”

“Umm, granite tends not to absorb too much. It's solid rock. So therefore, biodegredation on top of Half Dome doesn't occurr much, if at all. Instead it runs down the side of the rock when it rains, or the snow melts, and into the Merced River below. Since there is no waste water treatment plant nearby, all that untreated effluent is dumped into the watershed, pretty much unfiltered. That's disgusting.

And there's a big difference between deer turds and some nasty crap left behind by a guy who just finished his hormone fed Big Mac along with a bag of Cheetos and then opted to relieve himself on top of Half Dome, especially when there are 200 people a day doing that.”

“The Chronicle's main outdoor columnist attacks the DF&G plan in yesterday's column. He also heaps scorn on the NPS plan to prohibit off-leash dogs in sensitive bird habit at Fort Funston (in the GGNRA). The author is an avid fisherman, and also happens to own a dog.

In other words: he's arguing for his own interests.

In the last 40 years, outdoor recreation has grown exponentially. We've learned two crucial lessons in that time: too many people doing anything (hiking, biking, fishing, horseback riding) in a given area damage the natural environment (i.e., the qualities that draw the people); and when a lot of people use the same area, conflicts develop between user groups. The broader conclusion here is that in any given area, no particular form of recreation should ever be considered an absolute. And yet this is exactly what ThinAir, the packer in the article, and Tom Stienstra all do: defend their own preferred form of recreation as if it were an absolute right.

There may be arguments both ways on the merits of stopping fish stocking. I haven't seen any. All I've seen is the selfish desire of some people to keep doing what they want wherever they want without regard to the broader consequences of their actions.”

“The big question is, if they stop the fish planting and the frog populations rebound, can we eat frog legs instead of trout?”

“Oh, you were joking. How was anybody supposed to know that? You sure you weren't being snide and childish and then backpedaled later when I called you on it?

Maybe you should throw in one of these ;-) so we'll know next time.

Do I expect to be alone on top of Half Dome? Of course not. I understand and expect that Half Dome and Glacier Point and Yosemite Falls (etc. etc) are going to be crowded with tourists. I know perfectly well how to find solitude in Yosemite, even in the Valley in the middle of summer. That's not the point. You talk about limitations on Half Dome like they're preventing people from going there. They're not. It's still a zoo. They're just stopping people from camping there so they don't burn all the wood and turn the place into one big toilet.

I think we'd all like to see this study you're talking about. Everything I've ever read says it takes much longer for poop to biodegrade even when it's buried in good soil six inches deep at the exact level where all the right bacteria are. It takes even longer when disposed of improperly, like in a crack in the granite. Maybe it takes about a month for the rain to wash it away into the river? Or maybe the study was referring to horse poop and not human poop? Inquiring minds want to know.”

“here ya go ;-)”

“I do agree that some places are overused. I just think that the over use is Over Exagerated. For example, "5 acres of Human Sh!t" maybe if you spread it all out as thin as paper, but come on I really doubt it. Keeping people from camping on top will not bring back the trees.

Im just sick of seeing people believing everything they read. There are a lot of people who, if given the power, would keep everyone from visiting natural places like the one above. They think that people belong in the cities and well away from nature. I disagree! And always will.”

“ThinAir, nobody here is believing everything they read. It's just that we're not willing to discount information from agencies with lots of research and experience to fall back on, in favor of your unsubstantiated assertions. If you can back up what you say, go ahead.

And I'm sick of the straw man argument that some people 'would keep everyone from visiting natural places'. Who the heck is trying to do that? Possibly a few people in EarthFirst!, but nobody here--and certainly nobody in the DF&G.

What we are advocating is respect for the natural ecosystem, and a willingness to make minor sacrifices to protect it.”

“Well you can't deny that people are exagerating their findings.”

“It is not a Straw Man arguement either. The angenceys incharge of our National Parks would like to see us out. This is easily seen in Yosemite.”

“Ohferchrissake ThinAir, reducing human impact in a natural area does not mean keeping everyone out of that area.

Why can't I deny that people are exaggerating their findings? You haven't shown an iota of evidence that they are.

All I've seen from you is the fundamentally selfish position that you want to do whatever you want to do wherever you want to do it. If that's your position, so be it--but don't expect anyone else to have any sympathy for it.”

“ThinAir, please read this short article which deals directly with the human waste problems at Yosemite and Mt. Rainier.

There were 6479 climbers on Mt. Rainier last year and they filled many 55 gallon drums with feces, which were then helicoptered off the mountain. This is feces ONLY, not garbage. My guess is that Half Dome gets a tad more use than that. Do the math.”

“This is a good discussion. We should move it to its own thread.”

“This is the best sh!tty topic we've had for a loooooong time!”

“I may not ever be found on top of Half Dome (got a little fear of heights here), but I can testify from personal experience, to the overuse of too many areas in the backcountry.
I can name at LEAST a half dozen popular camp spots located at busy JMT trail junctions where you can find piles of crap behind every tree and every rock.
The only way to help put a stop to this overabundance of organic human biproduct in the backcountry is to educate the ignorant, and reduce the numbers of people allowed into more sensitive areas.
If by cutting wilderness quotas I see less shi!t behind trees, and toilet paper peeking out from under rocks, I'm willing to go along with the program.
I've spent enough time downwind of the six-hole solar sh!tter, at Trail Camp on Mt. Whitney, that I can understand why daily quotas were reduced there.
Camp at on a warm summer day at 12,000 feet smells like a SEWER.

Ex...

Just to let you know.. the Mt. Langly Bighorn herd currently numbers about 14 animals.
But the sheep ARE endangered.
I've been working the last couple of years with a small documentary film crew who have been tracking the Bighorns between Lee Vining (the herd numbers there crashed in 93) and Mt. Langly.
We spent a week in November, '99 just below there filming the herd.
The only place the herd is REALLY thriving is Pine Creek Canyon and the area around Wheeler Ridge.
There are approximately 30+ individuals in that group.
For more information on the Sierra Bighorn sheep documentary, go to:
www.greentv.org”

“kleetn, excellent link, thank you.

ThinAir, tehipite said everything I would said, so I'll just add that the government sees the national parks as a revenue stream, both from entrance fees and their cut of the concessions. Nobody in power wants to reduce national park visitation. Nobody.

Unless you want to present some evidence to support your claims...”

“In high use areas, they should just have a pack it out standard, like on Mt. Shasta.”

“Rosey, so far the only area in the Sierras to require that is the Mt. Whitney Mountaineers Route.

Oh, and big wall climbers in the Valley, obviously.”

“Hey I'm not one of those guys that chops down trees for fire wood nor do I poop in lakes. I just don't agree with Half Dome being as bad as you guys make it out to be. Whitney, and other high altitude places like that, I agree with you on. Those areas have a longer period of frost or freezing, which prevents natural biodegridation.

Also, I have recently taken a trip into highly used Dinkey Lakes in the Sierras. I never saw a turd mound or paper flower. I did see about 50 people, a few dogs, and a boyscout troop. So many people follow the rules in that area and there is no problem. Thats the way I saw it on half dome. Sorry if you don't agree.

I think if people follow the ideas of low impact backpacking then these places stay natural, high use or not.”