Are Permit dates ENFORCED?

[Dogwood]

It seems there are different groups here, one is trying to be "Politically Correct" and the other is trying to be "practical /realistic" and the third is the "Law-abiding idealist" group that will abandon his/her thru hike because he/she was a day late and does not want to break any law at any costs.

Which group do you think you belong to?

Even a pragmatist applying situational ethics can be law abiding, NO?

The situation is clearly stated from the PCTA who is the one issuing the permit. "The PCTA issues permits with the authorization of state and federal land management agencies to simplify your planning and improve service and trail information." http://www.pcta.org/discover-the-trail/permits/ The PCTer/PCT 500 mile + Permit should not be viewed as something negative to one willing to hike on the PCT for 500 miles or more legally as it vastly cuts down on the various permits needed for both day hiking and camping on the PCT into ONE FREE PERMIT applied for and issued once! If you don't you have to LEGALLY apply for Nat Forest/Wilderness Area, Sierra/Yosemite/Sequoia, Crater lake, Lassen, N. Cascade NP Permits, Desolation Wilderness day hiking permits, etc. The PCT 500 mile Permit is a logistical benefit to PCT Thru-hikers and 500+ mile PCTers. READ the PCTA comment! The PCT 500 mile+ Permit is also used TO IMPROVE SERVICE and TRAIL INFORMATION. Any conscientious outdoors person needs to see the bigger picture here rather than being so self absorbed.

Simply put, HYOH means being responsible for your hike's logistics. That includes scheduling and planning for legality and permits as necessary. It's part of LD hiking. Being responsible!

[Dogwood]

The idea that camping and hiking is just about one person doing what they want as their scenario varies is one of the problems with those in some hiking communities. Hiking is not about an absence of decorum including an immunity from legality from ignorance. The info is there. It's been communicated. Police yourself and the hiking community tends to follow which I'd say is better than an outside agency HAVING to step in to enforce. Be a part of the solution rather than part of a wild west atmosphere having untold negative consequences.

[Kookork]

Even a pragmatist applying situational ethics can be law abiding, NO?

The situation is clearly stated from the PCTA who is the one issuing the permit. "The PCTA issues permits with the authorization of state and federal land management agencies to simplify your planning and improve service and trail information." http://www.pcta.org/discover-the-trail/permits/ The PCTer/PCT 500 mile + Permit should not be viewed as something negative to one willing to hike on the PCT for 500 miles or more legally as it vastly cuts down on the various permits needed for both day hiking and camping on the PCT into ONE FREE PERMIT applied for and issued once! If you don't you have to LEGALLY apply for Nat Forest/Wilderness Area, Sierra/Yosemite/Sequoia, Crater lake, Lassen, N. Cascade NP Permits, Desolation Wilderness day hiking permits, etc. The PCT 500 mile Permit is a logistical benefit to PCT Thru-hikers and 500+ mile PCTers. READ the PCTA comment! The PCT 500 mile+ Permit is also used TO IMPROVE SERVICE and TRAIL INFORMATION. Any conscientious outdoors person needs to see the bigger picture here rather than being so self absorbed.

Simply put, HYOH means being responsible for your hike's logistics. That includes scheduling and planning for legality and permits as necessary. It's part of LD hiking. Being responsible!

Do you cancel your thru hike in this possible scenario?: You have a thru hike permit for May 2nd but you arrive at the Campo at 4th for some reasons?

[MuddyWaters]

Where is the source backing your assertion? This is contrary to what I was told both by PCTA and Cleveland NF, both of which stated that permits are required for camping, not traveling, and only in the Hauser wilderness.

The regs need to change. We probably need a Yosemite style enforcement system checkpoint similar to what they have for half dome permits where a dangerous pretty much stationed at the JMT/HD junction checking permits.

Go read the FB Class of 2016 page and tell me that voluntary compliance will work.

The PCTA says it, Cleveland Forest PCT page says it too.

Perhaps it was changed due to abuses last season. Perhaps you were told wrong at the time. I expect the former.
Yosemite was infamous in the past several yrs for different workers giving different answers regarding trailheads, halfdome, and JMT access. They finally had to get it straight due to overwhelming demand and people circumventing the system.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/clevel...d=FSEPRD488307

Permit Information

All travelers on the PCT are required to have a valid permit. Those looking to travel 500 miles or more in totality can apply for a long-distance permit through the PCTA.org website. For those looking to cover areas only on the Cleveland or San Bernardino, permits can be obtained locally from the Descanso Ranger District on the Cleveland or the San Jacinto Ranger District on the San Bernardino for those traveling through the San Jacinto or San Gregonio Wilderness. More information on obtaining a local permit through the San Bernardino National Forest can be found here

[Dogwood]

Do you cancel your thru hike in this possible scenario?: You have a thru hike permit for May 2nd but you arrive at the Campo at 4th for some reasons?

Why stop there? Let's say I have a JMT Thru-hike permit leaving SOBO starting at Happy Isles TH on May 2. I arrive at Happy Isles at a time other than May 2. Do I go on my JMT thru-hike anyway ignoring the start date or for the starting trail head I'm required to start as listed on the permit I already have and have agreed on while in a self absorbed state making no attempt to explain my situation to the permitting agencies that MIGHT make some exception for my situation or explain my options? Or, do I say, "screw it, why get a permit at all? Just do what I want. Don't need no stinkin required bear canister, heed fire restrictions, or hunting or fishing laws either. I'll do what I want. I'll get away with it." Do people actually expect it is A OK to do as they will? If so better not come into my camp!


Instead of asking "are permits enforced?" how about asking, "what are my options?" or "who can I contact to provide an exact intelligent answer to my situation once I've explained my situation?", or "what can I do?" From the get go of this thread I question motives. The motive from the get go seems to be what can I I I I I get away with. That crap sucks! I don't recognize any willingness to cooperate or communicate within those selfish motives. WHY inquire on an open Forum about starting at a different date rather than going directly to the permitting agency asking the same question? COULD it be someone wants justification for excusing shady behavior?

In short, a LD hiker needs to be flexible and needs to adapt but that does not mean behaving in a slim shady manner is A OK. Work out your hike realizing YOUR HIKE is NOT acted out within a bubble. Each individual's behavior is reflective of a larger community and a larger environment than simply where one's own toes and fingers end.

[Coffee]

The PCTA says it, Cleveland Forest PCT page says it too.

I'm pretty sure the page has not changed since last year. In fact, it references the same basic information as what I read last year and followed up with my phone calls to PCTA and Cleveland inquiring about the permit situation. The permit requirement for Cleveland does not appear to have changed: It references the need for a permit to camp in the Hauser Wilderness. Earlier in this (long) thread, I posted verbatim the guidance I received from PCTA where I was explicitly told that I could camp outside the Hauser Wilderness on my first night if I wanted to, although I opted to camp at developed Lake Morena with established tent sites and restrooms making for a zero impact first night.

Here's the ironic part of this entire discussion: I think we all want the same thing, including the OP. I think that if we were sitting around a trail town talking about it, we wouldn't be arguing. For some reason, contentiousness seems to exist in online forums that wouldn't exist elsewhere. Why impugn the motives, honesty, and integrity of strangers when the benefit of the doubt should be the default is unclear to me.

It is also pretty clear to me what needs to happen: Through regulatory or legal changes, there needs to be some mechanism to ensure that anyone on the PCT from Campo to Mt Laguna from, say March 15 to May 15 must have a permit issued either by PCTA or the national forest if overnight backpacking gear is being carried. This is a higher standard than what exists now which is restricted to camping, and then only in a tiny percentage of the first 40 miles (Hauser Wilderness). It is not unprecedented. In Yosemite, one cannot be in the backcountry with overnight gear even during the day without a wilderness permit (this was confirmed to me by the Yosemite wilderness permit office).

I have always liked reading Dogwood's posts and his idealism is great but IS NOT GOING TO BE FOLLOWED BY A MAJORITY OF HIKERS. I think most of the folks on the trail are great and I think most of the people on Facebook are perfectly nice people but a large number (perhaps not a majority but a sizable number) seem to believe that the permit situation is not to be taken seriously. Please go and read the group and see for yourself. If we want to see the southernmost portion of the PCT protected, then we need legal or regulatory provisions that are enforceable or they simply won't have any teeth. That's just plain reality. So put in place a system that will work and can be enforced and is unambiguous and clear for everyone to read and follow, or face the consequences (fines, etc) if not followed.

[Coffee]

BTW, since Dogwood mentioned the JMT, I think it is worth noting what took place on the JMT over the past several years. As the JMT gained popularity and the number of thru hikers grew exponentially, permits available from the traditional Yosemite starting point of Happy Isles and Lyell Canyon started to be in short supply. What happened? All sorts of alternative entry points were documented and used by many hikers who could not start at HI. They all funneled onto the JMT within Yosemite causing issues at Cathedral Lakes and Lyell Canyon - impacts that were inconsistent with Yosemite's responsibility to protect the resource under the wilderness act.

What fixed this problem? Not appealing to people to self police or voluntarily limit their use. After all, the alternates were perfectly legal to use. No, what corrected the issue within Yosemite was the introduction of the Donohue Exit Quota. This exit quota effectively closed the alternate trailheads as Yosemite only issues the exit permit in conjunction with either HI or Lyell Canyon entry points. From what I understand, this has corrected the situation within Yosemite. It took a regulatory change that apparently was within the power of Yosemite's Superintendent.

The situation at the southern terminus of the PCT is more complex because it is a multi-agency environment but it seems to me that something needs to be done there along the same lines, somehow.

As an aside, I don't think that the hikers using the alternates prior to 2015 were doing something wrong - they were legally using the system set up by Yosemite and individually they were acting as they should have, but collectively the impact was too large to tolerate. Good public policy cannot rely on self policing but on putting in place policies that regulate for the general good in cases where a scarce public resource is overtaxed. The tragedy of the commons is a well known problem dating back to antiquity - we aren't dealing with any issue that is remotely new.

[Kookork]

Why stop there? Let's say I have a JMT Thru-hike permit leaving SOBO starting at Happy Isles TH on May 2. I arrive at Happy Isles at a time other than May 2. Do I go on my JMT thru-hike anyway ignoring the start date or for the starting trail head I'm required to start as listed on the permit I already have and have agreed on while in a self absorbed state making no attempt to explain my situation to the permitting agencies that MIGHT make some exception for my situation or explain my options? Or, do I say, "screw it, why get a permit at all? Just do what I want. Don't need no stinkin required bear canister, heed fire restrictions, or hunting or fishing laws either. I'll do what I want. I'll get away with it." Do people actually expect it is A OK to do as they will? If so better not come into my camp!


Instead of asking "are permits enforced?" how about asking, "what are my options?" or "who can I contact to provide an exact intelligent answer to my situation once I've explained my situation?", or "what can I do?" From the get go of this thread I question motives. The motive from the get go seems to be what can I I I I I get away with. That crap sucks! I don't recognize any willingness to cooperate or communicate within those selfish motives. WHY inquire on an open Forum about starting at a different date rather than going directly to the permitting agency asking the same question? COULD it be someone wants justification for excusing shady behavior?

In short, a LD hiker needs to be flexible and needs to adapt but that does not mean behaving in a slim shady manner is A OK. Work out your hike realizing YOUR HIKE is NOT acted out within a bubble. Each individual's behavior is reflective of a larger community and a larger environment than simply where one's own toes and fingers end.

I have a tremendous respect for you Dogwood and this discussion won't diminish it a bit.

I asked a simple question and you did not answer it . It is either yes, or no. The other possible answers like: Well, I will try to contact authorities to see how they can help me to circumnavigate my problem is just "Politically correct "and not realistically a viable answer.

So is the part of comments that I made them Bold. It is just like calling a short person "vertically challenged" or a lazy person "Motivationally deficient". Ask it anyway you like , the simple honest question of OP could have been asked in so many different ways but it does not change the real gist of the question nor makes the OP a self absorbed irresponsible hiker.

A hiker in a crowded trail like PCT is not a separate entity but he has his own challenges that he needs to address mostly by himself. If PCTA can help to ease the pain of a " Naturally challenging " trail why not. The current system of obtaining a Permit has some flaws that can be addressed via discussions like this thread . If it turns to a heated discussion so be it.

People have different ways of asking questions, or answering them or addressing their concerns. That is what makes life interesting. Let them ask their question the way they want. You can also answer their questions anyway you want.

Talking about a "potential breach of a law" is not equal to breaking a law and to my knowledge people will not be prosecuted or condemned for talking about it or brainstorming about it.

I walk my dog unleashed every day in the conservation area near my house and every day I pass two obvious sign that says dogs must be on leash. Am I breaking the law on a daily basis? hell yes. How do I look at my behavior? I call it bending the law.
Have I done everything in my power to train my dog before letting him be free ? I sure did. I can't tell you how many times conservation authorities have passed me and my unleashed dog without any incident. They see a well trained dog that does not chase wild animals and behaves like a well trained dog and they use their common sense not to question me for obvious so called" Breaking the law".

To me hiking PCT without a permit is Breaking the law and hiking it with a permit that has been for couple of days ago is bending the law( late for a viable reason).

I prefer a hiker that follows LNT but is couple of days late on his/her permit to a hiker that starts exactly on his/her permit but does not follow the LNT and trail etiquette.
Call me a law breaker, call me law bender, call me irresponsible or self absorbed , call me whatever you like but I can tell you that I have no regret about how I behave and every night that I put my head on pillow I have a clear conscious about myself.

[MuddyWaters]

I'm pretty sure the page has not changed since last year. In fact, it references the same basic information as what I read last year and followed up with my phone calls to PCTA and Cleveland inquiring about the permit situation. The permit requirement for Cleveland does not appear to have changed: It references the need for a permit to camp in the Hauser Wilderness. Earlier in this (long) thread, I posted verbatim the guidance I received from PCTA where I was explicitly told that I could camp outside the Hauser Wilderness on my first night if I wanted to, although I opted to camp at developed Lake Morena with established tent sites and restrooms making for a zero impact first night.

It references, need for a permit to travel on the PCT. No mention is made of camping.

The PCTA long distance permit FAQ page says the same thing:http://www.pcta.org/discover-the-tra...ce-permit-faq/


For those that need a little more incentive to “do the right thing”, the Cleveland National Forest, approximately 14 miles from the border, is the first place where travel permits are required. Crest Runners, who are Forest Service employees, will be out on trail making contact with PCT travelers and they will have access to law enforcement officers. Voluntary compliance is by far a better way to operate than a system of increasing regulations and enforcement. It frees up resources for making this experience better, rather than reacting to visitor use problems.

It is crystal clear, that the PCTA intends you to start on your start date, and the proximity to enforcement authorities in Cleveland is their tool .

[Coffee]

It is crystal clear, that the PCTA intends you to start on your start date, and the proximity to enforcement authorities in Cleveland is their tool .

If they have someone stationed at mile 14 checking permits that will be a new thing since they most certainly did not last year. I didn't encounter anyone there, nor did any of the hikers I met on the trail.

From what I have read of the permit system in the Cleveland National Forest, there are no day use limitations in the Hauser Wilderness. A subsequent link from the page you referenced states that only San Gorgonio, San Jacinto, Cucamonga, and Sheep Mountain Wildernesses have day-use permit requirements. It is possible that Hauser now has day use limitations that are not up to date on the forest service web pages. If so, the situation would in fact be different from last year and would, in practice, implement what I have suggested in my last several posts.

[Dogwood]

Do you cancel your thru hike in this possible scenario?: You have a thru hike permit for May 2nd but you arrive at the Campo at 4th for some reasons?

"I asked a simple question and you did not answer it . It is either yes, or no. The other possible answers like: Well, I will try to contact authorities to see how they can help me to circumnavigate my problem is just "Politically correct "and not realistically a viable answer."

All this political correctness talk is something I will not entertain especially in the Forum. I did however answer your question although perhaps not in a way you wish because in your mind there can be only two answers - Yes or No. This may seem contradictory of me as sometimes I may be perceived as a Lone Wolf or anti establishment. I approach every hike with humility, a contrite heart, and with a sense of gratitude for so much. I have a willingness to cooperate. Here, that makes much sense, at least to me in regards to a solid permit.

It's also a very viable answer because this exact thing has happened to me on several occasions - having a permit, where for unforeseen unexpected causes, I missed my starting date or not being near my starting TH.

Do you cancel your thru hike in this possible scenario?: You have a thru hike permit for May 2nd but you arrive at the Campo at 4th for some reasons?

I spoke from what I did. I related what I did and how it almost always worked out for me when I was placed in this situation. I've communicated. I've shown up with my missed permit date in hand and overwhelmingly were advised what to do, been given a new permit, or have my old one amended. Your hike doesn't have to be a shady stressed out I wonder if I'll be caught affair! That's no way to thru-hike. That's no way to represent yourself or your community!

I also gave the rec to consider a sort of mini flip flop starting from a different TH going SOBO for a short distance. Not one peep as if zero consideration was given to that scenario which smells too much of people's spoiled unwillingness to cooperate regarding possibly amending their hike, working out their hike LEGALLY with a solid permit in hand.


These permitting agencies especially the PCTA, NPS, Nat Forests, Nat Rec Areas, BLM's etc aren't A-holes out to get anyone. They aren't out to keep us from having our "fun." They overwhelmingly seek to cooperate when we communicate and up front have a willingness to demonstrate cooperation and respect for them. Does that mean they will always cater to every possible whim? NO. I say better to genuinely politely try than hike with a sense of always wondering if your permit is going to be examined and having to lie about something to see what you can get away with. Stop dancing. Work out your hike. Is it really being too much of an idealists to demonstrate some greater character we'll all be recognized for serving a larger good?

[Alligator]

I have a tremendous respect for you Dogwood and this discussion won't diminish it a bit.

I asked a simple question and you did not answer it . It is either yes, or no. The other possible answers like: Well, I will try to contact authorities to see how they can help me to circumnavigate my problem is just "Politically correct "and not realistically a viable answer.

So is the part of comments that I made them Bold. It is just like calling a short person "vertically challenged" or a lazy person "Motivationally deficient". Ask it anyway you like , the simple honest question of OP could have been asked in so many different ways but it does not change the real gist of the question nor makes the OP a self absorbed irresponsible hiker.

A hiker in a crowded trail like PCT is not a separate entity but he has his own challenges that he needs to address mostly by himself. If PCTA can help to ease the pain of a " Naturally challenging " trail why not. The current system of obtaining a Permit has some flaws that can be addressed via discussions like this thread . If it turns to a heated discussion so be it.

People have different ways of asking questions, or answering them or addressing their concerns. That is what makes life interesting. Let them ask their question the way they want. You can also answer their questions anyway you want.

Talking about a "potential breach of a law" is not equal to breaking a law and to my knowledge people will not be prosecuted or condemned for talking about it or brainstorming about it.
...

Here on WB, your last statement is contrary to our user agreement

4. Discussions involving how to commit illegal acts, or involving the use, production and/or distribution of illegal drugs are forbidden.

This isn't FB here, everyone needs to keep discussions about their activities legal. In particular Kookork, quit bringing up how you break the law while while walking your dog. I'm not familiar at the moment with the rules for the PCT permits in question, so I am waiting for the dust to settle to get a handle on the situation to see what's what here.

In this situation, think of your start date like a cruise or a concert, both are recreational activities. If you don't make it to the gate the boat sails and the band plays without you. A thruhike is a serious commitment build yourself a cushion to get there on time. There's a window of time for when you can get a permit? Plan for it so you can get there on time. Most people are planning months in advance.

[Kookork]

Here on WB, your last statement is contrary to our user agreementThis isn't FB here, everyone needs to keep discussions about their activities legal. In particular Kookork, quit bringing up how you break the law while while walking your dog. I'm not familiar at the moment with the rules for the PCT permits in question, so I am waiting for the dust to settle to get a handle on the situation to see what's what here.

In this situation, think of your start date like a cruise or a concert, both are recreational activities. If you don't make it to the gate the boat sails and the band plays without you. A thruhike is a serious commitment build yourself a cushion to get there on time. There's a window of time for when you can get a permit? Plan for it so you can get there on time. Most people are planning months in advance.

I have applied for my permit and got the exact start day I wanted and I have been planning my hike years in advance.

[Coffee]

These permitting agencies especially the PCTA, NPS, Nat Forests, Nat Rec Areas, BLM's etc aren't A-holes out to get anyone. They aren't out to keep us from having our "fun." They overwhelmingly seek to cooperate when we communicate and up front have a willingness to demonstrate cooperation and respect for them. Does that mean they will always cater to every possible whim? NO. I say better to genuinely politely try than hike with a sense of always wondering if your permit is going to be examined and having to lie about something to see what you can get away with. Stop dancing. Work out your hike. Is it really being too much of an idealists to demonstrate some greater character we'll all be recognized for serving a larger good?

Dogwood is entirely correct about the agencies being there to protect the wilderness AND to help us as hikers - I have always found that to be the case whether dealing with PCTA, Cleveland National Forest, Inyo National Forest, Yosemite National Park, SEKI National Park, Shenandoah National Park, Grand Canyon and many other places and that's just over the past few years. And the advice to politely approach the agencies responsible with issuing permits when issues arise is exactly right, and precisely what I suggested early on in the thread. I found that the PCTA in particular was friendly and helpful and the Cleveland National Forest was as well and they provided to me a legal and ethical solution that avoided adding any impacts to the wilderness and also met my request, including written documentation that I could carry with me in case of permit inspection. In 2013, when I thru hiked the JMT, I originally had a permit starting at Glacier Point rather than Yosemite Valley which I wanted to change to Happy Isles. Upon arrival in Yosemite, the permit office was able to accommodate my request but I had to accelerate my start date by a day, which I did. I did not accept an earlier start date and then start on my originally planned date, but rather worked with the park to stay within the system.

I do think that relying on good behavior and idealism, however, is insufficient when it comes to dealing with many thousands of people compressed into a small area during a short period of time especially when many of the individuals are new to long distance hiking and there is clearly a subset that doesn't care about following regulations - indeed embraces opportunities to disregard convention and challenge authority. Anyone honestly seeking input on permit issues is obviously someone who wants to do the right thing, who is seeking input from others who have had similar issues, etc. I suggest that past hikers have some responsibility to provide information as they understand it and encourage good behavior. When there are problems with the system, those problems shouldn't be swept under the rug with the hope that making a black & white statement that, in fact, is not black & white will somehow get people to comply when this is 2016 when all kinds of bad information circulates and problems will become quickly apparent. If people who care about the trail and the process do not discuss these problems then we are contributing to the problem, not helping the trail or the community. PCTA has already been receptive to feedback and has made changes this year to the permit application process that facilitated better planning. They announced the date permits would be open in advance and they held back 15 of the 50 total per day until mid February to give people who missed the first application date an opportunity to have a second shot. Right now, as of Feb 6, anyone who doesn't have the date they want can still probably get the date they want by being on top of the process and applying immediately when the additional 15/day become available.