Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board Wilderness is....

"Wilderness" -- often discussed, but seldom specifically defined.

What do *you* envision when someone talks about "wilderness"?

What specific characteristics qualify an area as "wilderness" to you? Is it only the qualities of the land itself, its wildlife and/or terrain, or perhaps its remoteness from "civilization", the number of people in the area at any one time, the kind of activities [if any] allowed in the area, ease of access into the area, all [or none] of the above, or something else not mentioned above? You get the idea.

Where possible, err on the side of specifics rather than overbroad generalities. Better yet, if there is any area you have visited that you personally consider to be "wilderness", share it with us, and tell us exactly why you view it that way.

CaT

I take issue with your premise: I think the only definition that matters, is the legal definition.
I must admit that I don't know what that is, and what qualifies an area under the wilderness act.

We can all start calling it "Fisherman's Peak", but even if we all do that, I doubt the maps will change. (although, I wonder what happened to Day Needle!)

A simple google search finds me this site:

http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=whatIsWilderness

While on a rant in the "what happens if you get caught" thread, I wrote:
>>The Whitney Zone is not wilderness...<<

I have been a number of places in the Sierra, and the two places I would exclude from wilderness are the Whitney Zone, and the Half Dome trail. Both are mountains that lots of people like to climb -- multiple times, ...repeatedly.

It is the numbers of people that like to go there that effectively makes it NOT wilderness, in my point of view. These are two trails that people should avoid if they want to hike into the mountains and find wilderness. There are so many alternate places that people can go and be swallowed up by solitude that trying to keep people out of the Whitney area is just silly.

So I guess the number of people one could expect to encounter has something to do with my personal view of wilderness. But... I am strongly against limiting the numbers of people entering the wilderness. If people want to go, there should be fees charged and rangers hired to minimize the impact. But limiting numbers? NO way.

So someone might say that policy following my view would lead to the reduction of the amount of wilderness, and I guess it would. But I really don't think it would affect even one percent of the Sierra wilderness areas.

For me, wilderness is just one step past how far you can hike in from the road in a day. It is where you do not have to worry about your belongings being stolen by a day hiker because everyone out there has their own gear, and his own bag to haul.It is a place where toilets are not required to handle all the traffic. It is a place where quotas are not so rigidly enforced that if you happen to stay over one day extra, you are not fined for enjoying yourself. It is a place where rangers are the exception, and not the rule. It is a place where common sense dictates behavior, and not some arbitrary set of laws. It is a place of freedom and individual rights. It is a hard place to define, difficult to put one's finger on, but I know it when I see it.

As posted <a href=http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=define>ABOVE</a>, here is a concise explanation of wilderness.

Glad I started this. I am enjoying reading each of your posts. Mark, I particularly like the way you expressed it. Audiograce - great article.

One of the last lines of that article said: "If asked, we all have a different and unique definition for what wilderness means to us." This is exactly what I had in mind by beginning this thread.

And so, to clarify my premise (which I didn't express very well in my original post): not to debate issues or to discuss legalities, but merely to ask each of you what you *picture* in your "mind's eye" when you ponder whatever it is you consider to be true wilderness. "Paint" that mental picture in words (as best you can) so the rest of us can see what you see.

If you ever saw the movie "Mr. Holland's Opus", you may remember Mr. Holland trying to get his very first clarinet student (with the sunset red hair) to bring her music to life. He told her to "paint the sunset" with her music. That's like what I'm after here.

I'll share my "picture" of wilderness a little later after hearing from the rest of you some more. I enjoy reading all of these -- thanks for sharing.

CaT

As I read the question on the start of this thread; "What specific characteristics qualify an area as wilderness to you?", I did not need to look in a book to find someone else's concise definition. I have my own thoughts on the matter. What wilderness means to me maybe different from what it means to you, or to anyone else, but at least I have my own opinion. I may be wrong here, but the question seems to beg a philosophical response, and not a cut-and-dried recital from a text. The answer you gave reflects the attitude of someone who doesn't, or refuses to, think for themself. Trailwalker asks a great question, requesting personal reflection, and capable of producing a lively and heated debate. It is a subjective query, asking for an individual response. Was this not the question, or did I miss something? Many others have stated that The Whitney Zone, specifically the main trail, is not wilderness in their eyes. I agree with them; I feel it is not wilderness because of the reasons that I stated above. Indeed, the main trail is beautiful, challanging, and adventurous, but it is not wilderness. This is my opinion Audio, your answer seems to miss the point.

The way it ought to be: Wilderness is where a person must be self-sufficient in getting there and existing there. Additionally the land is left in its natural condition by limiting impacts of visitors. My opinion is that relatively minor intrusions of manmade constructions whose purpose is to prevent damage to the land are legitimate (such as the toilets on Whitney). I believe that all persons who are willing to get there following the rules of self sufficiency and minimum inpact should be accommodated to the extent practical. The Whitney quota system is a good attempt to balance these interests. Whitney still qualifies as wilderness, though not the "traditional" wilderness that most people think of.

I agree with the other comments that there is so much space in the Sierras where you can find traditional wilderness, that we should not get too excited about a few areas where the destination is so desireable that lots of people go there. If you are willing to meet a greater challenge, you can make Whitney a really traditional wilderness experience by doing it in winter conditions. For people like me who aren't up to a winter attempt, an attempt just outside the regular season can still give the "real" wilderness ambience.

Enough legalistic thoughts. My happiest wilderness experiences are when I haven't been there before, the scenery knocks me out, there aren't too many people, and you have that ultimate freedom of timelessness: shall we eat here, or amble farther down the trail? Lots of potential for happy surprises like a fantastic swimming hole.

mark - No, you didn't miss anything. My purpose is a bit like in the movie "Dead Poet's Society" in which the teacher, Mr. Keaton, is encouraging his literature students to "find their own voice" -- all very subjective. It's like when he had each of his students compose their own original poem and then read it to the class.

Point Taken.
As far as "Thinking for one's self" goes, there's no shortage on this message board.

As for my thoughts on wilderness:
Wilderness implies 'wild', as stated above. To me, this means a place undisturbed, or left in it's natural (wild) state. By this definition, there are PLENTY of "wilderness" areas even in many of our own neighborhoods, though they may not ever be officially designated as such.

However, for many of us, peace is not found until we are deep into said wilderness. In this regard, I agree with Mark's definition, which would exclude the main Whitney Trail. But as Ken+5 stated,"If you are willing to meet a greater challenge, you can make Whitney a really traditional wilderness experience by doing it in winter conditions". So I guess, the Whitney Trail CAN be considered wilderness, even by the varied definitions found here.

As you can see, I may not be 'missing the point' as much as boiling the point down to a widely accepted definition.

This is a GREAT thread, and I really do enjoy reading each person's perspective.

I also feel that wilderness is relative to the number of people around. For instance, Yosemite Valley in the summer feels like a city park, not wilderness. I agree that wilderness begins where day hiking ends. Most places beyond that have great opportunities for solitude. Hmmm solitude is another good subject I'll start a new thread with that one.

thinair

Wilderness is land that is untamed – not untameable – because any area can be tamed (at least now, by modern man). If there is an unmaintained trail that you can still figure out, or you go completely off trail constructing your own cairns (or no markers), in both of those cases it is still wilderness because it hasn’t been tamed. But as soon as a trail is constructed, a technical aspect of what makes it wilderness is lost – though I think we can still call it wilderness. And I do appreciate maintained trails at times - I think that you can say that you are on a trail through the wilderness. Trail or no trail, whether no one has ever before seen it, or there is an endless line of people going through it, it is still wilderness. It is uncultivated – it is still in its original state, changed only by the natural changes that occur within it (like a tree falling, a bear dying, a fire, or a line made by the stomping of many feet taking the same route). The line made by countless humans putting one foot after the other does not tame it. Once the trail becomes paved and a double yellow line is down its middle, a major change has occurred and the true sense of wilderness has been lost. Even with the first construction of a human abode, as the builder (provided I’ve not used a tool other than what I have been able to make with what is at hand) I think I can claim I am living in the wilderness. But if I use a nail, or a store-bought hammer, then I am beginning to tame the land. I think I can claim that I still live in the wilderness in my constructed home (whether it be teepee, a notched and fitted log cabin, or the like). But as soon as I stop relying totally on the pine nuts, miner’s lettuce, elderberries, and deer meat, I can no longer call it wilderness. As soon as I plant a seed, or dig a planting hole, or try to channel off some water from a creek or pond, it begins to be tamed and so begins to lose some of its wildness or wilderness. I could go on – but I think you get my idea.

Mark, I love your definition from your first post.

On your second post, I think whatever comes out of your, mine, and others’ minds is a result of your whole life … everything you’ve read, seen, and experienced. So, even yours may be somewhat influenced by one or more texts, songs, poems, experiences. I think someone can read something from a text and make it their own, if it really expresses in words how they feel … like I could quote yours word-for-word and it could become mine as well; or yours, others, and even a recited text, might all contribute over time to modifying or somehow effecting my own view.

Also – to add to my definition or revise it some – if planting involves reforesting after a clear-cut, that would be okay – it was more farming that I meant can’t be harmonious with wilderness; in other words I think you can make a wilderness with planting what was there before and then leaving it alone.

As Audiograce said, wild and undisturbed are key elements.

Ken+5, Yes to timelessness, ambling, and ultimate freedom. I also agree and am thankful for the quota system. And some intrusions are important and can improve or sustain wilderness, but they are adding an element (like your example of the toilets) that is not wilderness. To strictly stick to my wilderness def and maintain good health, you’d have to either dig a hole – bury it well – and pack out the tp, or dig hole - use sand (ouch) or leaves and a squirt bottle, or something like that; if everyone just left their waste all over and packed out the tp, it would still be wilderness, but ICH!

A little off the subject, anyone ever have any Indiana Jones/Laura Croft type finds. Hmmm … I may need to start another topic.

Lovin’ this thread and your views- Talus