Re: New plan to preserve the views in Yosemite begins with 'timber!'

Quote
szalkowski

It seems that the people most adament in attempting to arrest time are those that either can't adapt or have an economic interest.

Quote
dqniel
Unless they're invasive species, and these are not, then keep them. I take a billion pictures when I go to any park, but my photo seeking behavior shouldn't come before natural evolution of the forests and meadows.

Quote
Dave

Quote
dqniel
Unless they're invasive species, and these are not, then keep them. I take a billion pictures when I go to any park, but my photo seeking behavior shouldn't come before natural evolution of the forests and meadows.

That's my point; much of this is not a natural progression but a human caused one.

Quote
dqniel

Quote
Dave

Quote
dqniel
Unless they're invasive species, and these are not, then keep them. I take a billion pictures when I go to any park, but my photo seeking behavior shouldn't come before natural evolution of the forests and meadows.

That's my point; much of this is not a natural progression but a human caused one.

If that's the case, then sure- get rid of them. They just have to be very careful in knowing that it's truly the case.

Quote
y_p_w
Natural evolution? There's human impacts on the evolution of forests, meadows, beaches, lakes, etc. all the time as handled and eventually maintained by the National Park Service. You think the Ahwhanee Hotel got there all by itself? Did the Upper Yosemite Fall Trail get formed by wild animals? Does trail maintenance affect what happens with the natural vegetation that normally grows? There's a dam that's raised the height of Jackson Lake about 15 ft, and that dam has been maintained and upgraded over the years. I've seen areas in Yellowstone and Sequoia NP where a building has been torn down, and the NPS tried to guide how the area "repaired" itself.

Quote

The Yosemite area has hardly been purely natural for centuries. It bears the mark of human impacts.

Quote

We've got roads going right through what used to be forest. Many trails were a result of felled trees. I'm sure that trees were cleared to build most of the campgrounds in Yosemite. We have to understand ecosystems and not individuals. I don't see cutting down a few trees here or there to be a violation of what Yosemite is supposed to be. It does however have to be judicious.

Quote
Dave

Quote
y_p_w
We've got roads going right through what used to be forest. Many trails were a result of felled trees. I'm sure that trees were cleared to build most of the campgrounds in Yosemite. We have to understand ecosystems and not individuals. I don't see cutting down a few trees here or there to be a violation of what Yosemite is supposed to be. It does however have to be judicious.

Going back in time a bit is not a bad thing. Maybe the pizza/beer parlor can go next?

Quote
y_p_w

Quote
dqniel

Quote
Dave

Quote
dqniel
Unless they're invasive species, and these are not, then keep them. I take a billion pictures when I go to any park, but my photo seeking behavior shouldn't come before natural evolution of the forests and meadows.

That's my point; much of this is not a natural progression but a human caused one.

If that's the case, then sure- get rid of them. They just have to be very careful in knowing that it's truly the case.

Natural evolution? There's human impacts on the evolution of forests, meadows, beaches, lakes, etc. all the time as handled and eventually maintained by the National Park Service. You think the Ahwhanee Hotel got there all by itself? Did the Upper Yosemite Fall Trail get formed by wild animals? Does trail maintenance affect what happens with the natural vegetation that normally grows? There's a dam that's raised the height of Jackson Lake about 15 ft, and that dam has been maintained and upgraded over the years. I've seen areas in Yellowstone and Sequoia NP where a building has been torn down, and the NPS tried to guide how the area "repaired" itself.

The Yosemite area has hardly been purely natural for centuries. It bears the mark of human impacts. We've got roads going right through what used to be forest. Many trails were a result of felled trees. I'm sure that trees were cleared to build most of the campgrounds in Yosemite. We have to understand ecosystems and not individuals. I don't see cutting down a few trees here or there to be a violation of what Yosemite is supposed to be. It does however have to be judicious.

Here's an interesting discussion:

http://www.nps.gov/yose/photosmultimedia/yv3-scenicvistas-transcript.htm

Quote
dqniel
I'm not debating any of the things you've said, but I don't think I understand your point. It seems like you're trying to argue something I've said, but at the same time I don't disagree with anything you've said. I think that if steps can be taken to restore/protect natural evolution of our protected sites that they should be taken. It seems you think the same thing. We also both acknowledge that many aspects of Yosemite, and other parks, already show the telltale signs of human involvement. Finding the balance between preserving/ restoring and photographing/experiencing is difficult. I guess it's just fortunate that in this situation, it seems the destruction of carefully selected trees serves both restoration and photographing/experiencing.

Quote
Dave

Many of these trees have grown in historically treeless areas BECAUSE of human activities. Drive along Southside Drive, all those trees on the left shouldn't be there. The building of that road disturbed the water flow and allowed trees to grow in an area that was otherwise too wet. Just past Bridalveil Straight, the last pullout on the left, you can see a glacial moraine. In the spring, before being blasted the 1930's, caused a restriction in the flow of the Merced and that caused spring flooding for much of the Valley. THAT flooding is what kept the meadows tree free.

Quote
plawrence
Question: did the blasting of the mini-moraine at Mirror lake helped speed up the sedimentation of Mirror Lake?

Quote
Dave
Many of these trees have grown in historically treeless areas BECAUSE of human activities. Drive along Southside Drive, all those trees on the left shouldn't be there. The building of that road disturbed the water flow and allowed trees to grow in an area that was otherwise too wet. Just past Bridalveil Straight, the last pullout on the left, you can see a glacial moraine. In the spring, before being blasted the 1930's, caused a restriction in the flow of the Merced and that caused spring flooding for much of the Valley. THAT flooding is what kept the meadows tree free.

Quote
Frank Furter
Interesting. I have always been a little suspicious of the "prevention of episodic fires in the valley" explanation.

Quote
Dave

Quote
Frank Furter
Interesting. I have always been a little suspicious of the "prevention of episodic fires in the valley" explanation.

The natives living in the Valley did burn the meadows, but that was not what kept the trees out of the meadows. It was the seasonal flooding.

Quote
hotrod4x5
Conifers don't grow in meadows because it is too wet.

Quote
Dave

Quote
hotrod4x5
Conifers don't grow in meadows because it is too wet.

Uh..... isn't that what I have been saying?

Quote
hotrod4x5

Quote
Dave

Quote
hotrod4x5
Conifers don't grow in meadows because it is too wet.

Uh..... isn't that what I have been saying?

Ya I guess. You said it was the seasonal flooding, and it's my understanding that it's the year round moisture content in the soil in the meadows. But I suppose you can assume that moisture is caused by the flooding, I dunno.

Quote
hotrod4x5

Quote
Dave

Quote
Frank Furter
Interesting. I have always been a little suspicious of the "prevention of episodic fires in the valley" explanation.

The natives living in the Valley did burn the meadows, but that was not what kept the trees out of the meadows. It was the seasonal flooding.

Conifers don't grow in meadows because it is too wet.

Quote
Dave
Many of these trees have grown in historically treeless areas BECAUSE of human activities. Drive along Southside Drive, all those trees on the left shouldn't be there. The building of that road disturbed the water flow and allowed trees to grow in an area that was otherwise too wet. Just past Bridalveil Straight, the last pullout on the left, you can see a glacial moraine. In the spring, before being blasted the 1930's, caused a restriction in the flow of the Merced and that caused spring flooding for much of the Valley. THAT flooding is what kept the meadows tree free.

Quote
Dave
Many of these trees have grown in historically treeless areas BECAUSE of human activities. Drive along Southside Drive, all those trees on the left shouldn't be there. The building of that road disturbed the water flow and allowed trees to grow in an area that was otherwise too wet. Just past Bridalveil Straight, the last pullout on the left, you can see a glacial moraine. In the spring, before being blasted the 1930's, caused a restriction in the flow of the Merced and that caused spring flooding for much of the Valley. THAT flooding is what kept the meadows tree free.

Quote
Frank Furter
No comments about Mirror Lake? Why not resume dredging and perimeter vegetation removal to restore its prior glory?

Quote
Dave

Quote
Frank Furter
No comments about Mirror Lake? Why not resume dredging and perimeter vegetation removal to restore its prior glory?

What's happening in Mirror Lake is a natural progression. What's happening in the meadows, and other places, are the result of human interference.

Quote
USGS: POSTGLACIAL HISTORY OF THE YOSEMITE VALLEY

FILLING OF LAKES IN TENAYA CANYON

Although the steps in the floor of Tenaya Canyon are not especially clean-cut, their configuration nevertheless indicates or at least suggests the former existence of a glacially scooped lake basin on each tread. There were apparently four such lake basins in the stretch extending from the mouth of the canyon to the great step from which the Tenaya Cascade descends. The upper three were little more than ponds that must have been quickly filled, but the lowermost, near the mouth of the canyon, measured over a mile in length and probably was not filled until a long time after the glacier had withdrawn from the canyon.

Mirror Lake (pl. 47, A) might readily be supposed to be a remnant of this ancient lake—in fact, it is generally assumed to be of glacial origin, like most lakes in the High Sierra—but a scrutinizing study of it reveals that it is of relatively recent making and has had no connection whatever with the ice age. It is impounded wholly by masses of rock débris that fell in avalanches from both walls of the canyon, principally from a place on the west wall, just back of the Washington Column. West of the outlet of the lake, it is true, there is a small quantity of morainal débris, readily distinguishable from the angular avalanche material by the water—rounded and glacier—polished cobbles and pebbles which it contains; but there is no dam composed of such glacial material across the canyon.

The creation of Mirror Lake by obstructing rock avalanches was of course favored by the fact that the lower part of Tenaya Canyon already had a nearly level floor due to the previous filing of a glacial lake basin. Had the floor not been so nearly level, the low, irregular avalanche dam would not have backed up the water for any great distance.

The postglacial history of lower Tenaya Canyon may be summed up as follows: (1) A glacially gouged lake basin about a mile in length was filled by the forward growth of a delta built by Tenaya Creek; (2) great rock avalanches fell from the walls near the canyon mouth and impounded the water anew, forming Mirror Lake; (3) Tenaya Creek built a new delta, which, growing forward, is now reducing the size of Mirror Lake.

The relative recency of its creation therefore explains why little Mirror Lake is still in existence, whereas the large lake basin in the Yosemite Valley is completely filled. Mirror Lake itself, however, appears to be not far removed from extinction. The rate at which the delta at its head is encroaching upon it from year to year is sufficiently rapid to be discernible to the eye without the aid of precise measurements. Indeed, unless steps are taken to check the further growth of the delta, Mirror Lake will soon be reduced to a small, unimpressive pond, and the Yosemite region will lose one of its most valued scenic treasures.

Quote
plawrence
So in other words, while the present day Mirror Lake is slowing dissolving into a meadow, a couple of more giant rockfalls at the right locations could easily create an even larger Mirror Lake in a not too distant future. So dredging might not be necessary after all

Quote
Dave

Quote
Frank Furter
No comments about Mirror Lake? Why not resume dredging and perimeter vegetation removal to restore its prior glory?

What's happening in Mirror Lake is a natural progression. What's happening in the meadows, and other places, are the result of human interference.

Quote
Frank Furter
I assume Mirror Lake was named for the original condition which deteriorated in the early 1900's. I believe it used to be periodically dredged to maintain the "original" Mirror quality.

Quote

The logic behind the tree removal at higher elevations is to restore historic views. Is there really any difference?

Quote
Frank Furter
Documents concerning the Scenic View Plan can be assessed at
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=347&projectID=23811&documentID=35583
The Environmental Assessment is the most detailed description.
The appendix which scored various sites for scenic impairment by a numerical score or VRA ( visual resource assessment lists the sites under consideration. Under plan #3, which apparently as been implemented, the first 93 will be rehabilitated.

What strikes me is the extent of consideration and detail that was applied to the problem of cutting down some trees.

There is also a useful list of non-native plants in the park.

Quote
losthillsguy
A little off topic but while they are at it I think they should remove the man made water diversion dam at the top of Nevada Falls.

Quote
qumqats

Quote
losthillsguy
A little off topic but while they are at it I think they should remove the man made water diversion dam at the top of Nevada Falls.

If they did that then the upper part of Mist trail would wash out every year you had high water.

That dam prevents water from going down the gully that Mist Trail goes up.

Quote
Roadrash
We can't get the campgrounds rebuilt, so we can actually visit the park with our families, but we can cut down trees to take photos. WTF

Quote
Dave

Quote
Roadrash
We can't get the campgrounds rebuilt, so we can actually visit the park with our families, but we can cut down trees to take photos. WTF

What needs to be rebuilt at any of the campgrounds?

Quote
hotrod4x5
He's talking about the upper and lower river CG's that were washed away in 1997 flood.

Quote
Roadrash
We can't get the campgrounds rebuilt, so we can actually visit the park with our families, but we can cut down trees to take photos. WTF

Quote
parklover
The restoration of the views is not just for photographers but for everyone that comes to the park to see the views. Personally, my husband and I were upset that one of the trees at Tunnel View was cut down because we used it to add interest to some of our pictures.quote]



Discovery View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,61.9,,0,0

Tunnel View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,286.11,,0,0

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
parklover

The restoration of the views is not just for photographers but for everyone that comes to the park to see the views. Personally, my husband and I were upset that one of the trees at Tunnel View was cut down because we used it to add interest to some of our pictures.

Discovery View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,61.9,,0,0

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
parklover

The restoration of the views is not just for photographers but for everyone that comes to the park to see the views. Personally, my husband and I were upset that one of the trees at Tunnel View was cut down because we used it to add interest to some of our pictures.

Discovery View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,61.9,,0,0

Discovery View would be a misnomer since that wasn't the view that anyone (both white man or indian) would have seen when they first laid they eyes on Yosemite Valley.

Tunnel View is a more appropriate name since it is the view of Yosemite Valley when one emerges from the Wawona Tunnel.

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
parklover

The restoration of the views is not just for photographers but for everyone that comes to the park to see the views. Personally, my husband and I were upset that one of the trees at Tunnel View was cut down because we used it to add interest to some of our pictures.

Discovery View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,61.9,,0,0

Discovery View would be a misnomer since that wasn't the view that anyone (both white man or indian) would have seen when they first laid they eyes on Yosemite Valley.

Tunnel View is a more appropriate name since it is the view of Yosemite Valley when one emerges from the Wawona Tunnel.

You might want to talk to the folks over at the USGS about that since Discovery View is the official name of the location on their maps.

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
plawrence
Discovery View would be a misnomer since that wasn't the view that anyone (both white man or indian) would have seen when they first laid they eyes on Yosemite Valley.

Tunnel View is a more appropriate name since it is the view of Yosemite Valley when one emerges from the Wawona Tunnel.

You might want to talk to the folks over at the USGS about that since Discovery View is the official name of the location on their maps.

Nevertheless, it's still a misnomer.

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

You might want to talk to the folks over at the USGS about that since Discovery View is the official name of the location on their maps.

Nevertheless, it's still a misnomer.

The attachment "View" to the name of a location is almost universally assigned to the object which one is viewing. Hence, my designations on the Google Maps links above. I seriously doubt, however, that most people stop at that location to look at the tunnel. Similar locations in the near vicinity are “Valley View” (hopefully self-explanatory to all) and “Rainbow View” (the rainbow produced by the mist from Bridalveil Fall).

This location is a reasonable (read “trivially accessible”) approximation to the first sighting of Yosemite Valley by the Mariposa Batallion, which is the likely reason that the USGS settled on the “Discovery View” name. The expedition's route was over 2k higher up the hillside and, of course, they were not the first white men to see the valley, but a general awareness of the valley's existence resulted from their reports.

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

You might want to talk to the folks over at the USGS about that since Discovery View is the official name of the location on their maps.

Nevertheless, it's still a misnomer.

The attachment "View" to the name of a location is almost universally assigned to the object which one is viewing. Hence, my designations on the Google Maps links above. I seriously doubt, however, that most people stop at that location to look at the tunnel. Similar locations in the near vicinity are “Valley View” (hopefully self-explanatory to all) and “Rainbow View” (the rainbow produced by the mist from Bridalveil Fall).

This location is a reasonable (read “trivially accessible”) approximation to the first sighting of Yosemite Valley by the Mariposa Batallion, which is the likely reason that the USGS settled on the “Discovery View” name. The expedition's route was over 2k higher up the hillside and, of course, they were not the first white men to see the valley, but a general awareness of the valley's existence resulted from their reports.

Last time I checked, 2,000 feet lower is quite a bit lower to be considered a reasonable approximation of what the Mariposa Battalion saw when they first laid their eyes on Yosemite Valley. So calling it Discovery View is still a misnomer. The Park Service shouldn't be miseducating park visitors by claiming something that wasn't the case.

If the Park Service (or the USGS) wants to name something "Discovery View" in Yosemite, it probably ought to be Old Inspiration Point.

So if Tunnel View isn't the best name for the overlook (for the reason you cited), they ought to assign a more appropriate name than Discovery View. Since it was Ansel Adams that made this view so famous with his photo from it soon after the Wawona Tunnel was built and the vista point constructed, maybe they should rename it Ansel's View. That would be a more appropriate name, IMHO, than Discovery View.

Quote
Frank Furter
What about the recent discovery view of Half Dome from Turlock?

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
Frank Furter

What about the recent discovery view of Half Dome from Turlock?

Reversing that, since you can see Turlock from HD, rename HD to Turlock View

Quote
plawrence

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
Frank Furter

What about the recent discovery view of Half Dome from Turlock?

Reversing that, since you can see Turlock from HD, rename HD to Turlock View

Talking about renaming Half Dome, what year was it that South Dome was renamed Half Dome?

Quote
hotrod4x5

Quote
plawrence

Talking about renaming Half Dome, what year was it that South Dome was renamed Half Dome?

According to this page http://www.yosemite.ca.us/library/yosemite_its_wonders_and_its_beauties/south_dome.html Mt Star King is also known as South Dome.

But John Muir called what we call Half Dome, South Dome. http://www.sierraclub.org/john_muir_exhibit/writings/the_yosemite/chapter_10.aspx

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
parklover
The restoration of the views is not just for photographers but for everyone that comes to the park to see the views. Personally, my husband and I were upset that one of the trees at Tunnel View was cut down because we used it to add interest to some of our pictures.quote]



Discovery View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,61.9,,0,0

Tunnel View:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=37.715376,-119.680783&spn=0,0.001692&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.715441,-119.677012&panoid=yoO8J1UvPwrMJAjpM2GJgA&cbp=12,286.11,,0,0

Wow, I had forgotten about those large trees! The view is certainly nicer now.