Last month I had two goals for a 9-day backpacking trip in Yosemite National Park. First, to simply enjoy what is likely to be my only solo trip in 2018. This year I will spend about 55 nights out, but the bulk of them will be on guided and private group trips that come with responsibilities and compromises that solo trips do not.
And, second, to scout the Yosemite High Route. I went in open-minded, uncertain if it would even be merited by the topography and terrain. But I suspected that it was, and hoped that I would finish with a sense for exactly where it should go (and not go), and how it could be best completed as a thru-hike and in sections.
I hiked through Yosemite in 2006 and 2007 on the Pacific Crest Trail, in 2008 on the Sierra High Route, and in 2011 on the John Muir Trail. But I didn’t appreciate Yosemite’s true grandeur or size — or realize the potential for a standalone high route — until 2012, when I led three week-long trips into areas I’d never been, like the Clark Range and the upper canyons of the Tuolumne River.
Development of a high route takes time. It starts with research: in this case, pouring over topographic maps and Landsat imagery in CalTopo, filling in details with the help of Secor and High Sierra Topix, and consulting rangers and other avid Yosemite backcountry users. Personal familiarity with the area made this step much more efficient — I already knew where to start looking.
Then, the fun part: weeks or months (depending on your pace and the route length) in the field, hiking a preliminary route and alternates (some of which will prove superior and become the recommended route), forwards and backwards, in different seasons (and, eventually, in different years), with other people of different abilities, and at least once in its entirety.
Finally, there is the guidebook, which is a project of its own. I expect that a complete first edition — with preparatory information, a route description, datasheets and maps for a thru-hike and section-hikes, and a rudimentary GPX file — will require 100+ hours to produce. (It’ll be a good winter 2018-19 project.) As more user feedback comes in, a revised second edition becomes necessary.
Overall, it’s a lot of work, and time-wise it’d be more financially fruitful for me to focus on other projects, like guiding trips or writing product reviews. But I love every step of the process, and would do it full time if I could.
Overview: Yosemite High Route
Where the boundary of Yosemite National Park overlaps with the Sierra Crest, from Dorothy Lake Pass in the north to Rodgers Peak in the south, there exists a world-class high route around the upper headwaters of the Tuolumne and Merced Rivers that stays entirely within the park.
South of Rodgers Peak, the park boundary straddles the divide between the upper Merced and the North Fork of the San Joaquin, two major west-bound rivers. This topography remains conducive to a high route to Triple Divide Peak, beyond which the watershed divide and boundary fade into less interesting foothills.
Thankfully, here the seldom visited Clark Range t-bones the boundary, providing worthy terrain for another ten miles.
North and west of Dorothy Lake Pass, the park boundary roughly follows the watershed divide between the Tuolumne and Clavey Rivers, the latter of which drains Emigrant Wilderness. I spent one day in this area and found it to be wild and pretty, but not sufficiently dramatic. Perhaps it will be offered as an Extra Credit segment.
So “the good stuff” (understatement) on the Yosemite High Route runs for about 95 miles and lies between:
- Grace Meadow, in upper Falls Creek, a few miles downstream of where the Pacific Crest Trail exits the northern park boundary at Dorothy Lake Pass; and,
- Quartzite Peak, at the north tip of the Clark Range, which presents a commanding view of the Cathedral Range across the Merced and downstream into Yosemite Valley.
The route is majestic, remote, and largely off-trail, but still technically practical for a backpacker. It shares just one pass with the Sierra High Route and utilizes the Pacific Crest Trail/John Muir Trail for only a half-mile. The wilderness experience matches and sometimes exceeds that of other established high routes like Roper’s, the Kings Canyon High Basin Route, Wind River High Route, Glacier Divide Route, and Pfiffner Traverse.
Tioga Road (CA-120), the east-west tourist highway that traverses the park, splits the Yosemite High Route in half. At Tuolumne Meadows, a broad plain at 8,500 feet through which the Lyell Fork of the Tuolumne River meanders, there is a wilderness permit station, post office, store and grill, and multiple trailheads.
The dilemma that I am currently pondering is where to start and end the route. Logistically, Tuolumne is the best option. From there, the route can be undertaken as a North Loop or South Loop, or in its entirety in a figure-8. In this latter case, Tuolumne can serve as a mid-trip resupply.
Qualitatively, Tuolumne is probably the rightful southern terminus, too. An excellent low-use route via Echo Creek can be followed for 15 miles to the base of the Clark Range, avoiding the dusty stock highways over Cathedral, Tuolumne, and Vogelsang Passes. The alternative is Yosemite Valley, but I’m reluctant for many reasons.
The northern terminus is more up for debate. The two closest options are on Highway 108, Leavitt Meadow and Sonora Pass, at 17 miles and 21 miles. It’s a little bit further to Grace Meadows from Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, 23 miles, but it’d be an easier hitch or shuttle. Finally, from Tuolumne Meadows there are two possibilities, both 48 miles: the Pacific Crest Trail and the Grand Canyon of the Tuolumne.
I chose the Grand Canyon, because Tuolumne Meadows is the most logistically convenient option and because I — probably like most other prospective Yosemite High Route hikers — have already completed the PCT through the park. Even in late-August after a dry winter, the Grand Canyon is spectacular, with countless waterfalls, lovely riverside camps, and imposing granite walls.
Can’t wait! Love that part of the park.
Any chance we could see a gear list from your high route exploration? Just out of curiosity.
Yes, I’ll try to get it posted soon.
Speaking of gear, do I spy a Hanchor Marl?
The headwaters of the LFMR are absolutely sublime and one of my favorite areas in the Sierra.
This gear list has been posted since August, but I forgot to circle back on your inquiry. Here it is, https://andrewskurka.com/2018/gear-list-yosemite-high-route-national-park-august/.
This looks like it will be an exciting new option. You have mentioned that the wilderness experience of this high route will rival or exceed others you have developed, but I was wondering if you could say something about how it compares in terms of difficulty. I realize you don’t have concrete numbers on metrics (like avg. elevation change per mile) since the route is not finished, but subjectively does it feel harder/easier/same ballpark as the others? Is the amount of class 3 terrain about the same? Does the limited distance on trails make it feel more physically taxing than other high routes? Thanks again for all the work you put in to these routes. For many of us they are a stimulating, “next step” extension of our backpacking.
There are three hard passes:
Matterhorn (loose Class 2 or airy Class 3 with fall consequences)
Stanton (Class 3 scramble) or Twin Lakes (loose Class 2), and
Russell (a lot of talus if it’s not snow covered)
The others are not easy, but they’re not as technical or tedious.
The route down the Tuolumne and up to Grace Meadow is entirely on-trail, but there’s a lot of vert, and it can get very hot at the lower elevations.
From Grace Meadow to TM the route is like a sawtooth, up and down up and down up and down. Often the next pass is staring you in the face from the pass that you’re on, across the canyon.
The South Loop has three big ups: to Russell, to the Clark Range, and over the Cathedral Range.
Game on summer 2019!! Amazing Andrew, totally excited!
We’ll have to race each other to get there Sonja!
Oooo.. but i live in Cali… #closer
This sounds great! We did 3.5 sections of Roper’s SHR NOBO this summer (had to bail over Paiute Pass to Bishop for 2 days because partner got AMS at Mesa Lake, resumed at Devil’s Postpile). We are finishing it next summer, and can’t wait to try a new high route! Thanks Andrew (BTW your mapset was great, also customized your databook and used your Suunto watch system).
Looks like an interesting route and certainly sounds like you’ve had a good time out there. Unfortunately, I fear that wilderness becomes less and less wild with every one of these “guides” that comes out. The traffic these things generate isn’t trivial by any means. There are places in the Wind River Range where I never saw other people but now I see them all the time. They all say, “oh I’m doing the high route!” Which is good and bad. I’m glad they are able to experience many of the same places I also enjoy, but now there are fire rings, trash, poop and all sorts of things that go against basic leave no Trace principles. I am not arguing against the creation of these “routes” or with the sharing of certain details, but I do wonder how we can do so with the least unintended consequences and harmful impacts. One option is the “sierra high route” approach where a philosophy and a general route are given as inspiration and limited beta, without camp sites being specified, or exact tracks being provided. I don’t know what level of detail you intend to get into here, but that decision could be very consequential for the wilderness and the hiker’s experience of it.
I share these concerns, and think it’d be very worthwhile to have a conversation about how information can be shared without contributing unnecessarily to the effects of more use, which definitely does happen when guides like this are published.
Thanks, BTW, for seeing both sides of this issue. Some take the position that (to paraphrase), “The Winds and High Sierra were perfect when I first found them, and you all are ruining it.”
I wonder if there’s more that can be done besides what you listed. My guides don’t list campsites, provide a recommended itinerary, or include a GPX file with an exact route. This is intentional, because of the overuse concerns and because I think guides should be helpful and instructive without robbing the user of flexibility and adventure.
I say, the more routes, the better. Anything to get people off the JMT/PCT. In the early 80’s, before the days of permits, I would go to Roads End in Kings Canyon, hike up the trails, then use the topo map to explore the high country. Even then you could come across cairns, fire rings, TP and garbage. It is what it is. Keep up the good work.
I’ve heard that too, from Brian Robinson and Alan Dixon, who started backpacking in the High Sierra in the 1970’s as kids. More of a free-for-all back then, and much better distributed use. Now, it seems that particular corridors get hammered, but it’s a giant wilderness everywhere else.
I 100% agree – I have seen the SHR change over the years. Use trails are developing and trash is being left behind. I love Roper’s approach, however, it is very easy to find GPX files and maps with the basic route.
I don’t fool myself thinking I should enjoy it alone and no one else, however, I usually do not publicly share information about x-country routes. I prefer to let others self-discover which is part of the fun and challenge.
Andrew – regardless of coordinates, the overview map you provided (as well as this write up) is enough info for most to figure it out. As you sell guides as well as services, there is definitely a profit motive for sharing this info.
…I am once again planning my next western trip and Cali is looking pretty high on the list.
At this point in time (since you havent created the guide yet..), how many options do you foresee there being for section hikers? People who want a taste of a high route but wanna take it easy and take photos, for instance
I think there are about six section-hikes: the full North and South Loop, plus two halves of each loop (so four total) = 6.
Thank you for the enormous amount of work in creating this route. I have longingly looked toward the Clarke Range from winter trips from the Glacier Point Road. Now that might become a reality. I am looking forward to hiking the route! Thank you again.
Been doing the Crown of Yosemite (HR) for years, nothing new, but a nice trip.
It’s too obvious of a route for people not to have done. But I have yet to find any good info about it. Any links?
I met an old couple out there, Buck and Judy I think their names were. They had hiked out of Twin Lakes and I crisscrossed them west of west of Kerrick Meadow. They were heading north towards Tilden on the same route. Said they’d done it about 20 years earlier, too.
What does airy class 3 (in your comments above) mean and in general do you have resource describing the class rating system? Thanks
Class 1 = maintained trails
Class 2 = uneven surfaces, rock-hopping, no hands
Class 3 = scrambling, with required use of hands
Airy = sense of exposure
Some passes are airy even if they are not technically difficult.
Curious if you have stumbled across the Weminuche High Route that was published some years ago in Backpacker. It appears very much in the veins of these routes you’re developing, but has flown under the radar compared to the Sierra or Wind River high route.
Steve Howe has been ticking off high route-type routes for a while, too.
I have looked extensively at the San Juan’s with an eye for this type of route, but haven’t gotten down there to field research anything. The huge vertical relief and sharp ridgelines make it difficult — very often, you need to fight against the grain in order to stay high, because there are few soft spots in the ridges or pass-and-valley routes parallel to the crests.
I don’t know of anyone who has tried this route. It goes to show that for it to be a “thing,” it really needs to have developed resources. Without a print-ready field guide, each person has to take on a huge amount of work (e.g. making the maps, researching the route, figuring out the logistics). Some will do it, but a lot of people don’t have the skills, patience, or free time for that.
Just my personal opinion, but one of the things I (and most people, I suspect) cherished most about the Sierra High Route was the isolation. Not seeing anyone made it feel so… adventurous and wild. My group and I voluntarily used only map and compass, along with Roper’s book, to navigate the terrain despite the fact that we could easily use phone GPS and downloaded maps to (almost) mindlessly stumble through the route. My fear is that continued development of online resources will popularize these areas to the point that they will all be blown out like the John Muir Trail, and that they will attract people who have no business being in the true backcountry (people who ought to be sticking to the JMT). I’m sure we have all had the experience of being thankful to get off the JMT after dealing with the hordes of hikers while doing the SHR. In Roper’s book he describes his uncertainty about even publishing his book for similar reasons, but was confident that those with the skills to navigate using map and compass would respect the remoteness and serenity of the adventure. When it comes to GPS maps, though, there is not that filter of skill/ability. Yes the hikes may still be physically demanding no matter what resources you use, but it is still opening up the floodgates to many more inexperienced and uneducated hikers with these sorts of guides, and THAT destroys one of the most beautiful aspects of these adventures. I’m not trying to be some elitest dickwad, but these are serious concerns I have and I just felt compelled to share my thoughts. I guess, in my eyes, I can get more behind a guide that is more akin to what Roper made for the SHR, because at least the people who don’t know how to respect these areas and navigate confidently will be scared off. I’m sure these are things you have contemplated, and I don’t want to rain on your parade. Just, please, don’t make these things too easy. You may be able to pull in some income doing what you love, but at what cost to the rest of us? No hard feelings, just expressing my concerns.
How exciting – another high route has been discovered! Aside from the fact that anyone familiar with the history of these areas knows what the true novelty of “new” publicized routes is, internet-assisted commercialization of backcountry is concerning. Well-said, Tyler Meester.
I find it entertaining to be accused of claiming that I “discovered” a “new” high route, when I have stated the exact opposite in very public places. You’re welcome to criticize me and these routes, but your arguments should hold some water.
For the Yosemite High Route, try this page, https://andrewskurka.com/adventures/yosemite-high-route/history/
For the other routes for which I have created guides:
Kings Canyon, https://andrewskurka.com/adventures/kings-canyon-high-basin-route/history/
Wind River, https://andrewskurka.com/adventures/wind-river-high-route/history/
My arguments, as well as similar critiques of other folks, do hold water. Why did not you mention these two articles published in very public places? Their titles and content make a very different impression – here is the direct quote: “Andrew Skurka on the Gorgeous New Yosemite High Route He Charted”
Curiously, you were relatively quick to post lengthy responses to Tylers’ and my comments below, but it took you much longer to provide several URLs. Good luck with your adventures!
I’m uncertain what these links demonstrate. The Outside article is a word-for-word syndication of the article on my site, and in neither do I claim that these segments are new or that I discovered them. The AJ article is an interview, and in my responses to their questions I again made no such claim.
You seem to be blaming me for the headline that *they* wrote after the interview. If it bothers you so much, you can fact-check them. To keep it simple, you can just send them a link to the History page from this website, in which I state the exact opposite of their headline.
Wait a minute. Two magazines proceed to publish articles about the same trip based on your previous write up and interview. The titles and content of these articles are misleading, but you do not bother to correct them? I rest my case. Best of luck.
Do you see hypocrisy of your concerns?
One on hand, “We cherished the SHR because of its isolation and wilderness.”
On the other, “It’d be a shame if other people start doing the SHR, ruining it for everyone who had discovered it earlier.”
You might not be trying to come off as an elitist dickwad, but that’s exactly how you sound.
I might be more sympathetic if you’d searched out the isolation and wilderness on your own, but you were following a guidebook, the author and publisher of which have a financial interest in distributing on a grand scale.
Also, your concern about my guides “opening the floodgates to many more inexperienced and uneducated hikers” is invalid. It seems based on the assumption that I’ll make it “easy” by including GPX tracks, specific campsite locations, and recommended itineraries. But this guide does not, and none of my other guides do either, intentionally to weed out unqualified hikers.
Evidently, the sole purpose of publishing guides for so-called new routes is to profit, both from direct sales and by attracting clients for guided trips. I understand that you are trying to run a business, but I also think you should be more respectful of other seasoned backcountry enthusiasts who politely express concerns about long-term consequences of such activities on areas they know and love. I see no hypocrisy in Tyler’s comments. On the other hand, the hype about your recently mapped routes, including the SHR and KCHBR is annoying (and this is not just my opinion) since virtually every section of these routes has been traveled AND described before. You simply made them more public, thereby opening the door to those who don’t want to bother exploring maps and prior trip reports and/or need someone to hold their hand on their adventurous. Of course, there is nothing wrong with this philosophy. However, the concern that commercialization of backcountry will impact pristine sites similar to that happens on the JMT is legitimate. Speaking of the JMT, you like to describe this trail as the ugliest part of the Sierra but a quick search of YouTube suggests that you actually wouldn’t mind hopping on it … as long as the price is right? Quite hypocritical.
Funny, I thought my primary purposes in publishing guides is because it’s the most fun part of my work, specifically studying the maps and getting into the field, and then passing long winter days with a meaty project. But thanks for telling me what my motivations are. I won’t share specific numbers with you, but the online guides constitute about 5% of annual gross revenue. Financially, they’re a total waste of time.
To be clear, I’m not dismissive about the concern of increased use along these route corridors. Based on having hiked many sections of these routes season after season, at this point I think the concern is more hypothetical than real — some use trails have definitely taken root, but I’ve not seen a worrisome increase in trash or campsites, I rarely encounter other parties, and I’m unaware of NPS having expressed any concern in recent wilderness studies or backcountry management plans about high route use.
The route difficulty (in terms of physical fitness and backcountry skill) will always keep these projects to a competent crowd that is more attentive to their impact than less experienced hikers. I think route guides have a role to play, too. Roper set a good model by not specifying a track, listing campsites, or recommending itineraries. I don’t know how he would distribute the information in today’s environment, but I think it’s good practice to not provide a GPS track, to say hell no to any smartphone app package, and to charge for the product so that it’s not widely accessible.
Re JMT, it’s changed a lot since 2011 when I last thru-hiked it (probably a five-fold increase in use), and my description of the JMT corridor through the Whitney zone as being the ugliest part of the High Sierra was due precisely to that experience. It really changed my perspective. When I ran trips in SEKI I intentionally kept my groups off the JMT as much as possible, and I never took groups to Whitney — even though JMT or Whitney trips would sell out faster than any high route itinerary. This summer in Yosemite I’m again avoiding the JMT; the PCT north of Tioga is a little harder to avoid, but we won’t spend more time on it than necessary.
Well, some folks, including myself, have a different perspective: you use a typical marketing strategy to attract new clients, which includes rebranding (two backcountry routes of the High Sierra and Yosemite are now known to the general public as Andrew Skurka’s routes despite the fact that they haven been traveled on and described before, albeit unofficially … not to mention the SHR), advertising (as evidenced by the appearance of virtually identical trip reports on your site and in multiple magazines) and, eventually, publishing the guides. I am not surprised that sells of the guides alone do not generate much revenue, but it is indeed quite hypocritical to claim that you make them for fun and only charge a fee to protect the environment. Why cannot you be honest? You are not doing anything wrong from a legal standpoint and the ethical standards are still highly debatable.
The previously expressed concerns about long-term consequences of commercialization of backcountry are real, not hypothetical (this statement sounds like an oxymoron). Having explored many of these areas myself in all four seasons as a climber, a through hiker and a section hiker, I would agree that they are still largely intact. That said, I am not sure what will happen in the next 10 to 20 years. For example, take Everest. You probably know that popularization of guided Everest expeditions resulted in continuously increasing traffic and non-trivial problems with pollution and human waste. While hiking or climbing a peak in the High Sierra is not nearly as glorious in the eyes of an averaged person as summiting the highest mountain in the world, we are talking about areas that are easily accessible. Even the most “remote” parts of your so-called “new” routes can be reached by a fit person from a parking lot within a day, two days max. Moreover, traveling on these routes does not require any technical skills aside from navigation, and their only difference form the JMT is the lack of maintained trails. I can easily imagine how these areas can be affected similar to the JMT within a couple of decades. It is also important to keep in mind that the rangers have a limited capacity to monitor and clean up the parks due to restricted funding and shortage of staff. As far as I know, they and other volunteer folks only routinely remove trash from the Whitney zone (with is technically not the part of the JMT), the Valley, and Tuolumne Meadows.
I’m going to push back again, since the facts do not support your narrative about my business. The high routes have a small direct and indirect effect. I enjoy putting them together and I appreciate the marginal sales, but as an income-generation endeavor they are a waste of time.
The Pfiffner Traverse, Kings Canyon High Basin Route, and Yosemite High Route are a piece of my guided trip marketing plan. But you’d have to dig for this detail. It’s not mentioned on the main Guided Trips page, and it’s not included in the trip names. If you look in the “Trip Types” and “Locations & Route Info” pages, you’ll find one reference to each route on each page.
I don’t feature the high routes more prominently because they’re not why people join my trips. They join us for the knowledge and adventure, and the kick-ass guide roster. I’ve been running trips successfully since 2011, and the program thrives with or without high routes. Consider:
1. Interest in locations for which I have no guidebooks is equal to those for which I do. For example, my 2019 Alaska trips were sold out in January, and my West Virginia trips are 85 percent full.
2. I have filled about the same percentage of spots each year since 2011: 95%, 98%, 92%, 96%, 98%, no trips in 2016, 98%, 94%, and 94% (so far for 2019). My first guide was released in spring 2015, several months after registration had already opened. And my 2019 operation is only 14 percent bigger than it was in 2014.
3. If the routes sold themselves, other outfitters would add them to their schedule and sell them out. I do little competitive research, but I know that SYMG has tried to offer a SHR trip. It can’t be very successful for them though, because they haven’t even specified dates for it this year. The masses want to hike the JMT, Rae Lakes, Half Dome, etc., not stumble across talus.
So this new trail, YHR, is nothing more than an experienced backpacker’s cross country routes. When you learn to read a topo, the world of the mountains becomes an oasis! However, now people find it necessary to publicize these routes to the masses and coin a new route and become infamous. Its a shame and a curse! for instance, when I heard about the SHR, i researched it and discovered I had done much of it in the normal course of my trips in the early 1980s
Interesting points. I see both sides of the equation but personally, I don’t think there is any real risk in publishing these routes. Quite the opposite in fact…
Have any of you guys actually looked at these full guides?
I can’t think of many people who would tackle these routes and not greatly respect the natural environment through which they were traveling. The demographic profile of this type of hiker you are all apparently worried about is difficult to imagine: One who would take the time to read all of this content, pay money for a guide, plan it, then venture out into the cross-country wilderness, leaving a trail of fire rings and candy wrappers behind them. Come on… That’s pretty unrealistic.
I’ve gone on a guided trip with Andrew in the past and I am planning on tackling the Yosemite high route twice this year. The northern loop in July and the southern loop in the fall.
I have also done parts of his other high routes solo and have never once felt like the trail was overused, or crowded. In fact, I never saw another person when I was out and off-trail. Anyone I discussed the routes with, a few rangers included, didn’t have any idea what the hell I was talking about either.
The key, as he says, is not providing too much information as well as charging for the data. Those two crucial bottlenecks weed out a TON of people. It’s the same reason he charges a refundable application fee for his guided trips. It’s not for financial gain per se, it’s to weed out people who are not serious and committed.
Who cares if he makes a living from it? It’s his business. Is he supposed to create all this incredible content for free? Come on.
I admit, I probably wouldn’t have taken on these routes I did in the past without the information he provided. I just don’t have the time to research all of this stuff but I’m very thankful he does.
That said, these guides are a perfect balance of giving just enough information so someone with the right skills and physical ability can explore parts of the wilderness they would not otherwise have ventured into, and not making it too easy for people who shouldn’t be out there at all.
From a bigger picture point of view though, nobody owns the wilderness or has exclusive rights to enjoy it alone. There will always be those who bemoan the democratization of information, and this is no different.
I don’t view these guides as an endpoint either. They are a gateway. I now look at topographical maps totally differently myself and will be dabbling in exploring parts of the High Sierra they don’t mention at all. Mathematically speaking, 10 or 20 years from now if more people were to take that approach, it would be a better backcountry environment for everyone.
Regarding the medium, consider this: If Roper were to publish his book today, what platform do you think it would come out on? Print? Think again. Even so, why did he publish it? Probably for the same duality of reasons Andrew does.
Don’t kid yourselves either guys, these guides are intimidating to anyone who’s not VERY comfortable with a map and compass, route finding/assessment, weather, proper gear and its use, etc.
Off-trail travel will never be the norm either. I don’t know of one novice backpacker who would actually buy this guide and undertake it. I don’t even know of anyone with considerable on-trail backpacking experience who is eyeing routes like this except for the people who regularly visit Andrew’s website, which is very small compared to the overall backpacking population.
I don’t want to speak for him but I think he probably does it mostly because he enjoys it and because he hopes it will encourage people to explore the backcountry and make the outdoors a larger part of their lives. Who cares if he makes a living at it? We all benefit from his work. We wouldn’t be having this discussion ON HIS WEBSITE if that weren’t the case. Clearly we all find some value in this content. 🙂
I think people who are overly concerned about the impact of these guides ignore the big picture metrics of the outdoor industry entirely.
The number of people who follow Skurka or actually express interest in guides like this is absolutely dwarfed on a cosmic scale by the number of people who just want to hike sections of popular high use trails like the JMT.
In reality, I don’t think there is any danger of places like Sphinx pass, or Disappearing Creek & Enchanted gorge becoming anything remotely like the Whitney zone, so we can all have a beer and relax a little. 🙂
Andrew Skurka has single-handedly has ruined the outdoors, for everyone! Sheesh, go on a hike.
What was your strategy for storing 9 days of food? Were you able to fit in in one bear can or did you have a re-supply?
I resupplied in Tuolumne Meadows on Day 5.