I overslept, and only Brady got through of the other people planning this hike on June 19. I've done it once, about 16 years ago, with Brady, and he's done it once since then, with Faith. It was really tough, as I was not in shape, but it was well worth it and I'll never forget it. Last year they instituted permits, and limit those to 400 per day. This is another cost we pay for refusing to somehow limit our population. See the story below from the San Francisco Chronicle.
In the fastest five minutes of the year, Yosemite sold all the permits to climb Half Dome for weekends in May and June. For weekdays, the new required permits sold out in 23 minutes.
"We knew they wouldn't last a day," said Kari Cobb at Yosemite National Park. "It's the most popular hike in the park."
The rush could make the April 1 event, when Half Dome permits for July go on sale at 7 a.m., the most intense two or three minutes of the vacation season. If you're lucky, for a service fee of $1.50, you can get four permits.
On the first day of sales last year, when Yosemite first required climbing permits for weekends at Half Dome, they sold out in 32 minutes.
The hike up Half Dome in Yosemite Valley rivals Mount Fuji in Japan and Mount St. Helens in Washington as the world's most popular trek. In past years, so many people in Yosemite Valley attempted the climb on impulse that traffic jams of humanity often formed on the climbing cables.
On one trip with brother Rambob, we were stuck in place on a ledge at mid-wall for 30 minutes, with nothing to do except to wait it out and gaze across Tenaya Canyon. There were just too many people in one place, going both up and down on the cable.
Many have been unprepared for the physical challenge. From Yosemite Valley, it's an 8.5-mile ascent one-way with a 4,800-foot elevation gain. You climb past Vernal Fall, Nevada Fall and Little Yosemite en route to Half Dome's backside. The ultimate is the 440-foot cable ascent, where hiking becomes an act of faith, and you emerge atop the 13-acre (mostly flat) summit.
From the perch of a rock cornice atop Half Dome, Yosemite Valley looks like a miracle. Below you is nearly a mile of empty air. The canyon walls are framed by El Capitan on one side, three-spired Cathedral Rocks on the other. Long silver-tasseled waterfalls slide down the massive granite exposures of the towering canyon walls.
The best strategy to get a permit is to go to recreation.gov, the park's website for reservations, and create a user profile in advance. When the race starts at 7 a.m. April 1 (and again on May 1 for August), all you have to do is punch in a date and hope you don't get locked out. You can be out of luck if your server is slow or you can't break through the logjam of users. To get a reservation by phone, (877) 444-6777, seems virtually impossible. Many Chronicle readers e-mailed their frustrations over their failed attempts to get permits Tuesday.
By requiring permits, Cobb said, park rangers achieved two goals: reducing the number of people on the cables and increasing the level of planning and expertise for climbers.
"The numbers of people on Half Dome are down a quarter to one-third per day of what it used to be," Cobb said, with 300 permits now available from the reservation service, recreation.gov, and an additional 100 through wilderness permits from the Yosemite Wilderness Center.
The new process requires climbers to read safety information about the trek. That includes bringing enough water and food, and not wearing the wrong footwear. One time, at the foot of the cables, we ran into a group of kids on their way up the big rock who were carrying empty plastic jugs, and they asked brother Rambob, "Where's the water?" Another time, we saw someone wearing flip-flops who stubbed a toe. There are many such tales.
"Our search and rescue calls have been dramatically reduced," Cobb said. "With fewer people, you get the wilderness experience and they love it, not a parking lot of people." Providing, that is, you get one of those permits.
The Half Dome cables are usually in place the weekend before Memorial Day. Updates and info are available at nps.gov/yose; reservations at recreation.gov.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Friday, March 4, 2011
Senior Health Issues
This is a public service announcement from the school of hard knocks, to protect those who may have made the same assumptions I did.
We were more than thrilled when my parents were accepted into a senior citizen village that looked more like a campus than an old folks home, and offered all three levels of care, Independent Living, Assisted Living, and Skilled Nursing. Naively, I thought our prayers had been answered: not only was there such a wonderful place for Mom and Dad, but they would never have to move again, at least not outside the village.
Well, my eyes are open now. Assisted Living and Skilled Nursing facilities are for seniors with physical challenges, while doing virtually nothing for mentally-challenged patients. Although the cost difference between Independent Living apartments and Assisted Living rooms is about double, there is virtually no help for mentally-challenged patients.
My Mom has had several minor strokes and TMI's, and is not the person she was before the strokes. She can barely carry on a conversation, and has virtually no drive or initiative. Although she is now moving into an Assisted Living room, we have been told directly that they do not force anyone to do anything, but can only 'strongly suggest.' This includes eating, drinking, changing clothes, you get the picture. Now you are thinking, "What, you expected they would force her to eat and drink, might even give her an IV or put a tube down her throat?!"
So now what do we do? To be truthful, I hadn't thought this far ahead, until now. I'm all for prescribing anti-depressants, but so far they haven't really made a difference. It's really horrible to see the quality of life drain away from someone, especially one's parents.
My point is, naive or wishful thinking or whatever, everyone should know this ahead of time, and be prepared to deal with this issue, rather than assume, as I did.
We were more than thrilled when my parents were accepted into a senior citizen village that looked more like a campus than an old folks home, and offered all three levels of care, Independent Living, Assisted Living, and Skilled Nursing. Naively, I thought our prayers had been answered: not only was there such a wonderful place for Mom and Dad, but they would never have to move again, at least not outside the village.
Well, my eyes are open now. Assisted Living and Skilled Nursing facilities are for seniors with physical challenges, while doing virtually nothing for mentally-challenged patients. Although the cost difference between Independent Living apartments and Assisted Living rooms is about double, there is virtually no help for mentally-challenged patients.
My Mom has had several minor strokes and TMI's, and is not the person she was before the strokes. She can barely carry on a conversation, and has virtually no drive or initiative. Although she is now moving into an Assisted Living room, we have been told directly that they do not force anyone to do anything, but can only 'strongly suggest.' This includes eating, drinking, changing clothes, you get the picture. Now you are thinking, "What, you expected they would force her to eat and drink, might even give her an IV or put a tube down her throat?!"
So now what do we do? To be truthful, I hadn't thought this far ahead, until now. I'm all for prescribing anti-depressants, but so far they haven't really made a difference. It's really horrible to see the quality of life drain away from someone, especially one's parents.
My point is, naive or wishful thinking or whatever, everyone should know this ahead of time, and be prepared to deal with this issue, rather than assume, as I did.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Earmarks Are Out! Hallelujah!
Wow, great news, Congressional earmarks are off the list! Republicans and Democrats coming together to deal with very real budget problems, fantastic.
Berkshire Hathaway Beats Forecast, Has $20B in the Bank
Warren Buffett continues to light the way for investors, improving financial results in a tough year. In his annual letter to stockholders, he has an optimistic tone for the coming year.
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway reported a 43 percent jump in fourth-quarter earnings Saturday largely because of strong performance at its railroad business and a paper gain of $1.4 billion on the company's derivative contracts and investments.
Buffett said in his annual letter to shareholders that the purchase of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad was Berkshire's highlight of 2010.
Berkshire reported net income of $4.38 billion, or $2,656 per share of its primary, Class A stock. That's up from the $3.1 billion net income, or $1,969 per Class A share, a year ago. It's also higher than the $1,695 per Class A share expected by analysts surveyed by FactSet.
Revenue grew nearly 20 percent to $36.2 billion from $30.2 billion a year earlier.
Buffett said Berkshire's $26.7 billion acquisition of BNSF last February is working out better than he expected. The railroad added $2.2 billion to Berkshire's net income in 2010.
In his annual letter to investors, Buffett wrote: "Earlier I explained just how important railroads are to our country’s future. Rail moves 42% of America’s inter-city freight, measured by ton-miles, and BNSF moves more than any other railroad – about 28% of the industry total. A little math will tell you that more than 11% of all inter-city ton-miles of freight in the U.S. is transported by BNSF."
Revenue for the full year was $136.2 billion, up 21 percent from $112.5 billion a year earlier.
Buffett said he's looking for more big acquisitions to boost Berkshire's earnings power. Berkshire Hathaway continues to bank $20 billion dollars in cash.
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway reported a 43 percent jump in fourth-quarter earnings Saturday largely because of strong performance at its railroad business and a paper gain of $1.4 billion on the company's derivative contracts and investments.
Buffett said in his annual letter to shareholders that the purchase of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad was Berkshire's highlight of 2010.
Berkshire reported net income of $4.38 billion, or $2,656 per share of its primary, Class A stock. That's up from the $3.1 billion net income, or $1,969 per Class A share, a year ago. It's also higher than the $1,695 per Class A share expected by analysts surveyed by FactSet.
Revenue grew nearly 20 percent to $36.2 billion from $30.2 billion a year earlier.
Buffett said Berkshire's $26.7 billion acquisition of BNSF last February is working out better than he expected. The railroad added $2.2 billion to Berkshire's net income in 2010.
In his annual letter to investors, Buffett wrote: "Earlier I explained just how important railroads are to our country’s future. Rail moves 42% of America’s inter-city freight, measured by ton-miles, and BNSF moves more than any other railroad – about 28% of the industry total. A little math will tell you that more than 11% of all inter-city ton-miles of freight in the U.S. is transported by BNSF."
Revenue for the full year was $136.2 billion, up 21 percent from $112.5 billion a year earlier.
Buffett said he's looking for more big acquisitions to boost Berkshire's earnings power. Berkshire Hathaway continues to bank $20 billion dollars in cash.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Paul Krugman Praises the President
Paul Krugman's recent column blows the smoke of complexity and distraction away from the huge federal budget crisis, and praises President Obama for his actions. It's about time the President gets some credit, and it's good to see. As usual, this is a good read.
Paul Krugman's column
Paul Krugman's column
David Brooks and the Great Stagnation
David Brooks of the New York Times writes about the book The Great Stagnation by Tyler Cowen. In the book, the author maintains that the world became a different place in 1974. He points out the auto industry employes millions of workers, but today, the new economy is eBay, Facebook, etc., where we spend our time but not our money, and these companies employe just a few thousand workers. Where will the jobs come from in the future? It's a very interesting read, and I'm going to get a copy of Cowen's book.
David Brooks column
David Brooks column
Friday, February 4, 2011
American Public Shows How it Would Cut the Budget Deficit
I found a new organization and website, one which I agree with wholeheartedly on their view of how citizens have been disenfranchised from their government. See their website at:
Program for Public Consultation
They completed a study recently on how the public would deal with the federal budget deficit. Through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, on average, respondents cut the discretionary budget deficit projected for 2015 by seventy percent. I'll bet you will be surprised at some of the actions those in this study opted to take. You can also take your shot at how you would reduce the deficit, at their website.
An equally interesting result came from a recent poll of Americans, in which only two in ten said their country is "is run for the benefit of all the people" while eight in ten said the country is "pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves." Other democracies have similar views.
This problem seems to be getting worse. When this question was first asked to Americans in 1964 two thirds said that the country was run for the benefit of all the people, but this number has been descending ever since.
People are also frustrated with the level of partisanship in government decisionmaking. 64% chose the position "The parties fight for their narrow interests, the will of the people is ignored, and the results do not serve the people."
Low trust in government is highly correlated with the perception that government is not responding to the will of the people. Presented the argument that "Government tends to get bogged down in partisan conflict and distorted by the influence of moneyed interests. Thus, it is necessary for the public to have a stronger voice in shaping government decisions," 78% found it convincing.
This does not mean that people think that government should follow public opinion in a lock-step fashion. Asked how much influence the will of the people should have on government decisionmaking on a scale of 0 to 10, the mean response was 7.9--a high level, though well below 10. But asked how much influence the people are having, the mean response just 4.0. More than 8 in 10 said the public should have greater influence.
Program for Public Consultation
They completed a study recently on how the public would deal with the federal budget deficit. Through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, on average, respondents cut the discretionary budget deficit projected for 2015 by seventy percent. I'll bet you will be surprised at some of the actions those in this study opted to take. You can also take your shot at how you would reduce the deficit, at their website.
An equally interesting result came from a recent poll of Americans, in which only two in ten said their country is "is run for the benefit of all the people" while eight in ten said the country is "pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves." Other democracies have similar views.
This problem seems to be getting worse. When this question was first asked to Americans in 1964 two thirds said that the country was run for the benefit of all the people, but this number has been descending ever since.
People are also frustrated with the level of partisanship in government decisionmaking. 64% chose the position "The parties fight for their narrow interests, the will of the people is ignored, and the results do not serve the people."
Low trust in government is highly correlated with the perception that government is not responding to the will of the people. Presented the argument that "Government tends to get bogged down in partisan conflict and distorted by the influence of moneyed interests. Thus, it is necessary for the public to have a stronger voice in shaping government decisions," 78% found it convincing.
This does not mean that people think that government should follow public opinion in a lock-step fashion. Asked how much influence the will of the people should have on government decisionmaking on a scale of 0 to 10, the mean response was 7.9--a high level, though well below 10. But asked how much influence the people are having, the mean response just 4.0. More than 8 in 10 said the public should have greater influence.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)