Is JTree a free for all dumpster fire?

Is this Instagram post a norm or was this just around a thanksgiving weekend? Are all the destination spots looking like a vansion/2000.00 tent TV commercial?

I know who the messenger is but seriously, this is terrible for climbing if its normal.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CW-hR2ClVlAFmW-btzx2baaeA9bHj49tvGU_Cw0/

Private Instagram so can't see but the answer is probably yes

Edit: yes

Doh! Subarus with tents on top, vansions all parked in very obvious spots with people camping in them well after sunrise! People pitching tents in front of boulders! WTF?

There's a time and a place for the not-quite-legal stealth bivy. Such as the standard sleeping in the back of the car at the trailhead before an early start.

But an obvious pullout in a national park on a holiday weekend is neither the time nor the place. And a rooftop tent is not in any way stealth...

Where's the stealth?

If they aren't breaking the law, or park/local rules, what's the issue?  Everyone has an equal right to climb, it shouldn't matter what they pull up to the crag in as long as they're following the rules like everyone else.  The only way this is could be seen as "terrible for climbing" is in the sense that overcrowding/access is being threatened due to the heightened popularity of climbing but, that has little to nothing to do with how/what people sleep in.  Vans, RVs and roof tents are not new.  Was Chris Sharma contributing to climbing becoming "terrible" in his RV while they filmed Rampage?  I don't think so.

This post boils down to "people who have the means to afford nicer accommodations while camping are somehow entitled and contributing to making climbing terrible", which is just as bad as saying "people who do not have the means to afford nice accommodations while camping are entitled and contributing to making climbing terrible".  Neither statement is true nor helpful.  Everyone should have the same access and nobody should be given preferential treatment.  Everyone should be punished for breaking the rules/laws, whether they're in a tent or a van.  Camping illegally in an obvious pull out is bad practice regardless of the method, is what I'm getting at.  

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you're saying (and I apologize if I am) but, I'm struggling to see another way to view this post.

Fond memories in hidden valley of waking up to people trying to steal my campsite in the morning or middle of the night

W Kwrote:

Fond memories in hidden valley of waking up to people trying to steal my campsite in the morning or middle of the night

The last time I was in HV I woke up one morning to a car in my campsite that must have arrived late. Bro from LA said my tag was expired and the site was now officially his. 

Reese Stanleywrote:

If they aren't breaking the law, or park/local rules, what's the issue?  Everyone has an equal right to climb, it shouldn't matter what they pull up to the crag in as long as they're following the rules like everyone else.  The only way this is could be seen as "terrible for climbing" is in the sense that overcrowding/access is being threatened due to the heightened popularity of climbing but, that has little to nothing to do with how/what people sleep in.  Vans, RVs and roof tents are not new.  Was Chris Sharma contributing to climbing becoming "terrible" in his RV while they filmed Rampage?  I don't think so.

This post boils down to "people who have the means to afford nicer accommodations while camping are somehow entitled and contributing to making climbing terrible", which is just as bad as saying "people who do not have the means to afford nice accommodations while camping are entitled and contributing to making climbing terrible".  Neither statement is true nor helpful.  Everyone should have the same access and nobody should be given preferential treatment.  Everyone should be punished for breaking the rules/laws, whether they're in a tent or a van.  Camping illegally in an obvious pull out is bad practice regardless of the method, is what I'm getting at.  

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you're saying (and I apologize if I am) but, I'm struggling to see another way to view this post.

umm, what?  i think you managed to talk in 3 circles here. what's the issue? camping illegally in an obvious pullout is bad practice.  particularly if you are flaunting it.

JCMwrote:

And a rooftop tent is not in any way stealth...

Wait till you're over 60, maybe 55, even 50 perhaps. Rooftop tents become a non-issue...actually more like out of the question.

I say so what. It's not China throwing missiles our way. It's just people trying to get by in life. 

Happens all summer long in the Tetons. In the national park, I blame the park service in large part for failing to properly meet the needs of all Americans. They cater to those with disposable income and the ability to snag reservations months in advanced. They also do very little to address the real needs of last minute campers out for a one-day weekend climb or whatever.

Of course, many Americans are unable to pay $45+++ for a camping spot night after night. The ones living in $50,000 vans sometimes simply can't find camping availability. Some are simply too tired to find alternatives in the dark if they arrive later in the evening before a next-day climb, or finish up a climb too late to drive home. Hotel rates in Jackson run near $400 a night during the summer.

Crazy rules make it worse. Last year I was on the road and I pulled up to a half-empty federal campground and was unable to secure a camping spot because only advanced reservations were accepted - no same day. No cash either.

You would think that our elected reps would care but nope, they don't. Get form letters back that don't even address the issue. 

The forest service isn't seriously concerned about future needs of ordinary Americans either but they are better than NPS in the Tetons.

Teton Climberwrote:

Happens all summer long in the Tetons. In the national park, I blame the park service in large part for failing to properly meet the needs of all Americans. They cater to those with disposable income and the ability to snag reservations months in advanced. They also do very little to address the real needs of last minute campers out for a one-day weekend climb or whatever.

Of course, many Americans are unable to pay $45+++ for a camping spot night after night. The ones living in $50,000 vans sometimes simply can't find camping availability. Some are simply too tired to find alternatives in the dark if they arrive later in the evening before a next-day climb, or finish up a climb too late to drive home. Hotel rates in Jackson run near $400 a night during the summer.

Crazy rules make it worse. Last year I was on the road and I pulled up to a half-empty federal campground and was unable to secure a camping spot because only advanced reservations were accepted - no same day. No cash either.

Exactly right. Those pics are an embarrassment. But the party at fault is the NPS. They are hired as stewards to keep our lands available to us. Lots of people visiting JTree on a holiday weekend should be no surprise to anyone. That there was no plan in place to provide space for the campers, whatever way they were camping, is awful. I fully get it comes down to a lack of funding, and that's on the politicians again. This refugee-camp looking chaos is the shameful outcome of shitty distribution of our tax dollars. 

We could fix it too, if we stoped caring about political parties and started caring about results. Which is to say, it's only going to get much much worse.

A K wrote:

I can't even understand how so many young people, climbers even!, have that much money

Such a funny statement. WE WORK. It’s interesting because all the dirtbags I’ve traveled or climbed with work really hard when they’re not climbing to pay for that van, the endless need for gear, and gas. Gotta pay to play. 

Wait isn't there like a TON of free camping right around the park? I get the "need" for stealth camping in, say, Yosemite but at JTree? If I completely am missing the mark please let me know, but the BLM land is there for everyone and isn't prohibitively far away. 

How is this entitlement?

If anything it keeps people where the cars can park.  Meaning reduced ecological impacts.

A K wrote:

can't even understand how so many young people, climbers even!, have that much money

Generational wealth 

The Internet: TL;DR

Instagram is destroying the outdoors

Facebook is destroying democracy

That's a f*cked up version of "meta", if you ask me.

M Mwrote:

The tent ladder is not LNT and a contributor to erosion reduce impact by at least putting the ladder on the roadside

JonasMRwrote:

But the party at fault is the NPS. They are hired as stewards to keep our lands available to us.

Did somebody say entitlement?

JaredGwrote:

Did somebody say entitlement?

I guess it's entitlement by definition, but I'm not so sure all entitlement is necessarily bad.  If I pay for something, either directly or through taxes, I do feel a bit entitled to it...is that so wrong of me?