Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board Forest Service to release Environmental Assessment on Mt. Whitney toilets

The Inyo National Forest is preparing to release an Environmental Assessment in early January regarding the future of the toilet facilities on Mt. Whitney. The EA analyzes various alternatives to the existing toilets along the Mt. Whitney trail. The F.S. preferred alternative is to remove the toilets and institute a mandatory "Pack-it-out" program. The F.S. will be soliciting comments on the EA throughout the month of January.

Two public meetings will be held to explain the contents of the EA, including details of the prferred alternative. Public comments will also be taken at these meetings. The first meeting will be held in Lone Pine at Lone Pine High School on Thursday January 8, from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. The second meeting will be held in Mammoth Lakes at the Mammoth Lakes Ranger Station and Visitor Center on Monday January 12 from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m.

Starting January 5th, a copy of the document will be available on the Inyo National Forest website at www.fs.fed.us/r5/inyo. Hard copies are available by contacting Brian Spitek at the Mt. Whitney Ranger Station at (760) 876-6217 or by e-mail at bspitek@fs.fed.us.

Public comments on the Mt. Whitney toilet EA must be postmarked to later than February 4, 2004. They should be submitted to Gary Oye, District Ranger, White Mountain Ranger Station, 798 N. Main St., Bishop, CA 93514. They may also be submitted by FAX to (760) 873-2563 or e-mail at comments-pacificsouthwest-inyo@fs.fed.us.

For more information regarding the Environmental Assessment, or if you have specific questions, please contact Deputy District Ranger Mary DeAguero at (760) 876-6227.

This stupidity was first reported in the LA Times section on Mt. Whitney. The first thing Mr. Oye has to realize this trail isn't wilderness in the summer any longer, I wrote Mr. Oye at the time of the article but I'm still waiting for a response. I guess Mr. Oye is too busy lining up poop bag suppliers. If they go to a pack it out program how are they going to enforce it? With the one ranger you see during your 2 to 3 days on the mountain. If it wasn't so sad it would be comical. All this is going to do, if enacted, lower all quotas on the mountain to reduce the degradation this will eventually cause.

Bill

I like Bill pointing out that the trail really isn't wilderness any more. I suggested to some rangers, working on the Trail Camp toilet last spring, that non-wilderness designation should be "cherry stemmed" to at least Trail Crest. This sort of thing was done many times when the Desert Protection Act was initiated. They could bring in a drilling rig and bore a few one-foot diameter holes, each a thousand feet deep. A rough calculation suggests that each hole would hold about 50,000 "visits."

On a more positive note involving Inyo NF plans, this morning's LA Times reports that the design to replace the old Glacier Lodge at the end of the road west of Big Pine has been selected. Construction begins next summer, and $1.5M is budgeted. Inyo suggests that additional "huts" at the edges of Wilderness Areas might be welcome. I'm sure you can see the article on www.latimes.com if you go to the trouble to register.

Change of subject. This is Mendocino NF, not Inyo NF, but I just stumbled across a list of informational brochures on their website, http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/mendocino/maps/flyer . Wisely, they are not making any recommendations - just providing information.

To change the subject once again, also not quite on-topic but somewhat related - it is now snowing in Ridgecrest (elevation 2500', 80 miles south of Whitney). So road/trail conditions reported yesterday are likely outdated.

I agree that removing the toilets is a bad idea, but comparing humans to bears is a bad argument. I've seen two bears in many trips to Whitney, but dozens of humans. Also, I've never seen any bear scat on the switchbacks, but lots of human scat and toilet paper.

If everyone dealt with their waste in the proper manner, then this wouldn't be an issue. But, they don't. Some areas in Trail Camp smell bad enough as it is. I can only imagine what it would be like if everyone had to exercise the responsibility and self-discipline to pack out all of their waste. Not a pretty picture - I'd rather see and pay for the toilets.

Hi To poop or not to poop, who will carry it out who will not? Why should the Rangers male/female be expected to deal with the poop and not ask each person to accept their part in the portage system.
During the mid 90's public meeting were held on the Whitney Complex, Poop was at least 60 % of the meetings, Trailhead,campground and the trail toilets. The Portal toilets were replaced in 2002-2003 with a vault type system that requires little effort to maintain.
The trail toilets are reworked each year and new design modifications are tried, due to the elements, cold ,elevation ,wilderness regs.and the lack of care by the hikers by mid August some years the systems are overloaded and some years the toilets at trail camp are closed.
Liquid (urine) overloads the trailcamp system . Plastic bottles, trash ,Toilet Paper fruit, peels etc. are put in the toilets, which then overloads the system , The Volume of waste does not compost, it is collected in large plastic drums and flown out by helicopter and transported by truck to a landfill . Before the drums, burlap sacks were used, hung on a wheel and when full and wet removed by the Rangers then drug to a storage area and hauled down by packtrains , Think about that process a while would YOU DO THAT JOB?
Day hikes can be done without pooping in the wilderness ,Go before you Go ,use Imodium or other meds to control the process, I talked with several doctors about this and found this can work and is used for some operations . Go when you get back. Know what types of food that maybe a problem and avoid before the trip or on the hike. Several poop bags are on the market and work very well .Some have a crystal that will reduce the odor and turn liquid into a solid We talk to hikers that use kitty litter for a homemade system, I can see a need for a box to carry the poopbags in for the people that worry about bag leakage this is one area that we hear some questions on.
We see a large number of climbers that carry out their poop now and each year we see more main trail hikers asking for poopbags and where to put used ones , Earlene has stories of people handing them to her at the counter.
Please consider going to the meetings and voice your concerns, The poop problem is one of the major problems at all the outdoor areas. Check other areas ie. Grand Canyon rafting trips
etc. for compliance and requirements.
Thank You Doug

Last I did anything there, the poop packing was apparently well taken, on Mt. Shasta's tourist route. I heard of a huge mound of bags at their drop-off facility at the parking lot. But Shasta appeals more to the pristine seeing mind, with its snow and prominence. Whitney might attract a different mind set, mostly coming from Southern CA. The runoff presumably goes into the Owens Valley, not the drinking source for all in the northern CA Central Valley. While I wouldn't know how much run-off gets to the L.A. Aqueduct, probably many hikers don't really care.

For most, Whitney is a one time thing. I know the psychology that since one may never be back, it doesn't matter what they leave behind. "Leave it to the rangers" is a common sentiment and belief.

I favored a simple engineering solution, with a concrete lined pit at several points along the trail, to take the poop bags and all to be burned at the end of the season. Maybe some kind of sealed cover to limit the odor.

This should be fairly vandalism proof, and cheap and easy. Dump diesel fuel or other suitable accelerant, and all will be gone in a few hours. Poop burns to nothing, and thin plastic bags would reduce to a minimal residue, scrapped out when it accumulates after a time.

Cherry-stemming the wilderness boundary wouldn't be a great idea. What facilities would spring up, then? Do we want a large hut for say, 200 hikers, at Trail Camp? Or to have motorized bikes running up the trail?

My suggestion to have clean drinking water, to spare so many backs, at Trail Camp seems to have come to nought. And cherry-stemming leads to a mentality to get rid of all wilderness, or to bar all people from entering wilderness. Up here, people complain heavily about being made to hike. No facilities is a common complaint I hear often. Why not, then, have a tramway and restaurant at the top, like elsewhere?

The USFS creates its own mess, and the Whitney Trail is one of them. They quote budget to have such poor planning. Managers that get their trucks stuck, with rangers trying to race helicopters up to 13,000 feet. Write your Congressional Representative, as many will do. Skip all the red tape, and pour in the money!

This topic fits nicely with an article in this months Backpacker magazine about hiking in Europe and specifically the Haute Route. The government of Switzerland has a very strict quota system in place, much more stringent than the one on Whitney. They basically only allow a certain (few) amount of people on the trail at one time, hikers do not carry tents and they have to sleep, and poop, at the system of huts that dot the Route. The Haute Route is about 125 miles long, almost half the distance as our JMT, but is kept in it's pristine condition because hikers are not allowed to camp on the ground or poop on the ground. Now of course, people do have to go when they aren't at a hut, but the amount of waste is kept in check because of the stringent quota system.

Now, the FS won't allow a stringent quota system that is in place on the Haute because Mt. Whitney is their cash cow.And, obviously the main trial isn't long enough to warrant a hut system. Bob R's idea of drilling holes in the ground is a good one, but what about seepage, unless the holes are in solid rock the problem would soon become much worse. Doug Sr. pointed out a good example of the toilets being over-loaded with non-biodegradable waste like fruit peels and bottles. This, of course, is pure human laziness. Maybe the answer is a baby-sitter who sits at the door to the bathrooms and asks what the hiker plans to deposit. What about hikers to the Whitney area being made to sit through a lecture/presentation on the proper way to care for the mountain.This may make the crowds go WAY down.

I personally feel that there isn't one true answer to the problem. People are going to be people, you can't change that. Maybe what the Whitney hiking community needs to see is what I saw on Mt.Ranier a number of years ago; a helicopter lose the 55 gallon poop bucket it was lifting off with from Muir Camp and splatter all over the glacier from an altitude of 400 feet. Maybe this would open people's eyes and let them see first hand what their waste does to the environment. Of course, the FS won't do this on purpose, but not a bad idea.The JMT & PCT could benefit from a system that the AT has in place; designated lean-to type shelters that dot the trail every ten miles or so. This would cut way down on the damage to the environment from people sleeping where they shouldn't and pooping where they shouldn't.( Ray Jardine might not like this too much)

Does anyone know how the poop bag system on the North Fork is working out.It's been about six years since I was up that way and I was wondering if hikers are actually following this rule or are they still pooping wherever they please?

I gotta vote for the pack-it-out system. I thought it sounded heinous and gross when they told me I had to do it on Shasta, but being a community minded sort, I gave it the old college try. You know what? It's not that bad. They give you the bags for free and all you have to do is aim right.

Ever since I discovered packing it out is the least of my worries while in the back country, I have adopted the practice wherever reasonable. By reasonable, I mean I don't want to have to lug the bags around with me, so I cache them and pick them up on my way out. They drop right in my empty bear can and a good shot of bleach when I get home cleans the can right up. Sure, sometimes I don't exit the same way I go in and in those cases I dig a cat hole waaaay away from camp/trail (and pack out or burn my paper). But I figure if everyone packed out 80% of their waste like I do there would be no need for million dollar outhouses or endless discussion.

I think a sign at trailhead saying 'Try it, it's not so bad,' with a big supply of bags, would work pretty well.

Or, maybe a sign that says '$500 fine for leaving human waste' would work even better. A couple of those a day, and the rangers could even earn themselves a raise to a decent pay rate.

As of early October, the poop bags weren't required on the NF. We were offered the bags, but declined.

Poop bags are required in Denali NP, and the system works reasonably well. True, it's a different story when you're base camping for days on end in the Ruth Gorge--not too much to carry around with you. But the Park Service makes it clear to everyone heading into the park that the bags are required, and there's some educational stuff they provide as well. The same could be done for everyone picking up a permit for Whitney.

We can always say that since some people will ignore the rules, it's all a waste of time, but that seems awfully fatalistic. If that's the case why bother trying to preserve the area at all? I think that a stiff fine for failure to comply would be enough incentive for most people. As for the rest, it's their bad karma.

For the last couple of years I have packed it out. Initially it was pretty bad, no matter how many hand puppets I used, the odor still permeated the system. In the spring I can remember caring an extra bag or two out that someone else chose to distance themselves from.
Earlier this year I came up with a small lightweight "pooptube". It is made from 3" drainpipe and a couple of caps, one with a thumbscrew to relieve air pressure when I need to open it. It works great, no more nasty cloud folowing me out the trail. It straps to the outside of my bag and will hold 3 bags full.
All this talk of feces can be a little nauseating. Even though as parents we spend a good deal of time teaching our toddlers not to be to facinated with it, I'm for picking it up and packing it out.

It's a temptation to out-of-hand discard the proposal as absurd, but, on the other hand, I haven't read it, and how reasonable is that?

We have the system, and it doesn't seem to be working very well. Whitney is NOT the forests' cash cow, it is the major DRAIN of resources.

The "cherry stem" notion is not a bad idea, it truly accepts the reality. Note that the solar toilets, or any toilets, or any bag collection system, violate the wilderness designation.
I don't see rescinding the wilderness neccessarily requiring ANY developement.

The pits seem reasonable, but one wonders about the water table.

What can we learn from other situations, elsewhere? At Acongacua, the problem was horrendous. What the locals did, was require a large deposit, which must be claimed by presenting garbage bags (which they supply), filled, upon leaving the mountain.

I loo forward to seeing the report, and the options, the reasoning, and the conclusions.

It's very easy to get people to poop in a outhouse as long as they are appropriately spaced. It's harder to get people to not pee when pooping in the outhouse. It's very hard to get hiker Average Joe to put poop in a bag which ends up in a bear can still overstuffed with food and toiletries which could be soiled by a bag leak. Average Joe is going to do a bit of cross country, check to see if Ranger Oye is watching, and then start pooping like a guilty pup on carpet.

I think the pro poop bag proponents are asking way too much from the average Whitney hiker at the risk of soiling the environment further for an unattainable "leave no trace" ethos that no animal, John Muir, or most hikers obey when it comes to poop. A better outhouse system is going to cost $$$ and either the fee to hike/camp needs to go up to pay for a system better suited for the current quota or the quota needs to go down. In the increased fee scenario, the overnighters need to pay a substantial premium over the day hikers since they have more opportunity to poop. I would rather see the quota go down rather than trust Average Joe not to poop like a guilty puppy.

Ken,
How is Mt. Whitney not a cash cow for the FS? $15 per person times ten or fifteen thousand seems like a large sum of money to me.Granted it's not $3000 a head like Denali, but there also isn't 10-15,000 people wanting to climb Denali every summer. Whitney certainly generates more revenue than any other attraction in the Sierra Nevada, with the exception of Yosemite of course.Maybe you see things differently, things that make Whitney not a cash cow?
IMO, the FS likes how much money Whitney generates, that's why there isn't a stricter quota system in place.The FS definately needs to change something to keep Whitney from being over-run with poop and trash,but I don't think it will be anything big enough to stop the flow of cash that comes in from all the people that want to climb it.

I like Trail-Boys example of how the people on Anconcogua have to deal with poop, this might be something the FS should take a look at.

Sorry to hear that bags are no longer required on the NF trail, seemed like a good thing to institute, what, with there being only one real water source on that side of Whitney.

Not to speak for him, but I figured he meant that even tho to use your figure, a quarter million dollars is a lot of dough, it's a drop in the bucket when you figure what the maintenance (helicopter flights, etc.) of the toilets likely costs. I.e. it's a money losing operation, despite permit income.

Problem with the threat of a fine is it's not much of a threat. Just go back and look at the posts on "Ethics of Hiking Without a Permit" and "Ursack Question".

What's a fairly common response? Ignore rules that one doesn't believe in or one finds inconvenient and do whatever the heck one wants.

And, enforcing the "bear can / no hanging of food" or permit rules are child's play compared to the odds of actually catching someone in the minute or two spent (in hiding) going #2.

My wife and I spent a couple nights at Outpost camp last June (inbound/outbound) and both nights people were hanging food. Clearly, obviously, plainly visible. No rangers. Nothing happened.

It's a meaningless threat. (Yeah, they could do random WAG bag checks, but just 'cause you have one doesn't mean your're going to use it.)

Here's an idea: When you pick up your permit, you are required to submit a DNA sample. Every time rangers find a human doodoo, they take a sample using a special, scientific sampling kit, a match is made via DNA, and your fine is sent to you by mail!

In case anyone doesn't get it, that last bit was a joke, okay?

I really oppose having to pack out raw sewage. Keep the toilets or something like them, and charge what it takes to offset the cost.

A shot in the dark:
Could the sewage be processed "in place" some way to a more benign state such as a pile of compost? I wouldn't mind scooping that into bags I carried up from the ranger station. I think people would cooperate with such a system, but it might take up a lot of space with sewage in various stages of processing.

ClamberAbout's very witty DNA suggestion notwithstanding, I do support the bag carry-out method. We did it on the MR last year; I've done it in the Palisades and on Rainier ... hardly the inconvenience some make it out ot be.

This is not to upset the pro bag folks but you have to consider the type of people who head up this mountain in the summer, how many of these folks are just started backpacking plus the day hikers who have no idea what the initials LNT mean. We are dealing with people who to a great degree are clueless, and we have all seen them. I'm not worried about the folks who are particpating in this thread because most of us will go with the flow. However, do you really think the folks that throw bottles, orange peels and trash down the toilets are going to carry out there waste products? I don't.

So, what is Mt. Whitney going to look like in 2 to 3 years after an initiation of a carry out program? My guess is the water system is going to be seriously degraded with bacteria contamination because there are no funds to have a ranger on every switchback to enforce this program. So, the FS is going to be left with two alternatives, reinstitute the toilets or stricter limits on the quotas with higher fees.

Bob R's suggestion of cherry stemming this area deals with the reality of a lot clueless hikers who don't give a rat's a$$ about anyone but themselves and how little they carry up and down the mountain. Where does a poop bag fit in a fanny pack?

How can a $15 permit fee make this area a cash cow? The time and the personell it takes to sort the lottery applications, additional staff at MWRS and the time they have to take with the uneducated and uninformed at the issuance of the permit add up to either a loss or break even at best for the Main Trail. Remember all the walk ins are free.

Bill

I don't know where I read the figure, but it was that INF expends something like 80% of it's resources on Whitney, to the detriment of the remainder of the forest. Can't find the cite, but it seems reasonable to me.

But it seems that no solution can be implemented along the trail, as long as it is wilderness-designated. I wonder how they have finagled the solar toilets, even.

another aside: Bob, when I went to the Mendicino site, I was astonished to see them reference your paper. I believe this is the first time I've seen it officially recognized by a gov't entity.