I just submitted feedback and mentioned weekend service and a Whitney Portal/Horseshoe Meadow shuttle. If they do something similar to the Bishop Creek shuttle in the Lone Pine area, that would be great for a large number of backpackers and day hikers.

Steve:? This is a highly valuable process you have initiated, and I intend to participate and support in any way I can.? Two priorities are on my screen: weekend Reno service and Tuolumne Meadows.

First Tuolumne: for the next two or three years, there is no backpacker camp planned for Tuolumne.? At the same time, the allocation of JMT/Donohue permits to Tuolumne has increased, to a full two-thirds of the total, 30 of the 45 Donohue permits.? Because of the campground closure, both early starts and transportation out of Tuolumne on exit are going to be very difficult.? In addition to the afternoon service, early morning service and increased shuttle service between TM? and the east side campgrounds between Bishop and Bridgeport could go a long way to getting us through the interim, and relieving pressure? on the new facility going forward. Effective coordination with YARTS could help here, as well.

I think the need for weekend Reno service has been apparent for years, so no need to dwell on that.

I encourage everyone to support this survey effort, and please consider particular emphasis on Tuolumne and the other? hot spots Steve has mentioned.? Squeaky wheel, y'all.

Here's what I think we can do: point this out to them in the last question:? I included a comment to the effect that they could take a look at increasig their ridership by looking closer at the summer patterns: weekend Reno Service, more trailheads, coordinating USFS on permit issuing times and YARTS on connections etc.

A side effect of having no accommodations for backpackers in Tuolumne during the campground renovation is that this will put more pressure on the backcountry in the Lyell Canyon and Cathedral Lakes area (and maybe Sunrise). I suspect most JMT thru hikers starting at Happy Isles will camp at one of the Cathedral Lakes and then camp at the first legal camping in Lyell Canyon four miles from Tuolumne. I hope Yosemite has considered this side effect of closing the backpacker campground.

Hopefully they'll be adding a bathroom near the backpackers sites. I was a little surprised at how far I had to walk last year.

That's kind of a funny complaint for a 200+ mile walk. The nearest bathroom is about 500 feet away. The next nearest it's maybe 100 feet further. I don't know if it's real or photoshopped but you can find an image on the web of a 24 hour fitness gym with an escalator.

开云体育

There is a very good one very near the new location at the end of A Loop.

Actually the need for a bathroom in a camping area makes perfect sense. Otherwise people will be polluting every open space. I sure wouldn't be going for a long walk at 3am. But I am also one of those people who believe that they should put in privies in the more popular camping areas along the JMT, to reduce the impact on those areas. It's a trail, and a popular one, and land managers need to plan for that instead of pretending it is some pristine wilderness. Hot topic, I know.

I guess I forgot the smiley. :)
My comment was mostly in jest... mostly.


BTW, there's some info on the rehabilitation:


Looks interesting. The backpacker's camp is closer to the trail, at least.

Huh? That's just a plan to replace the elevated plastic porta-potty that's open only in the winter with a permanent structure. It's got nothing to do with the backpacker's camp.

Its all part of the same project, like the access trails (now social trails) that will be formalized between the store and campground, expnaded picnic area near store, etc.? The BP camp is in turn just a part of the larger campground project, which for some of us serves the same purpose. For example,? The Original McClure JMT Route project base-camped in Tuolumne last year

Scroll to the bottom of the doc. There's a map with info.

The map shows three proposed locations for the new vault toilet. If you read the text you will discover what is obvious to anyone who has visited TM in the winter. That is, that locations 2 and 3 wouldn't be used much, if at all, by winter visitors. No toilet near the hut would be a ridiculous "improvement" as people would pee and poop in poorly dug holes near the hut. Imagine how that would be each spring. So it seems highly likely that they will build it in location 1.

There is a "new restroom" near the walk-in sites. But the backpacker's campground appears to be moved to the end of what has been the A loop. There is an existing toilet there. Are there really going to be two different walk-in camping areas or are they getting rid of the current one?

Where is the master document? I couldn't find it.

Looks to me like we need a new thread for the general redevelopment issues.? The feedback to ESTA on transportation piece of it I think deserves its own discussion.? I will go back and get the key docs from a post I have on the JMT FB pages and provide them here in a bit.