Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Recreation.gov

recreation.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 205 posts

Re: Recreation.gov

#141

Post by gk1 »

Jamwinner wrote: post #130
almog wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for people who follow the LNT protocol, and perhaps even carry other people trash, the next step I suggest is to destroy bushcrafters' "shelters". They disrupt soil, more often than not made out of live cut trees (and hinder wood decomposing when not) and 9 out of 10 times, will come with beer cans/tp scattered around and it's illegal to 'build' them on public land. If you happen to see one, destroy it, you'll be…

Hear hear. The number of 'survival cosplayers' vs actual campers has shifted is a bad way recently. It is illegl to build a structure, bury food, etc on public land. You wanna be a prepper, buy your own damn land. Stop destroying ours. P.s. kick over some carins too.

*Cairns

Be careful with that, though. Some times they’re used as trail markers.

Last year I was on a trail in the Southwest that had loads of cairns, like every 20-30 feet. Rather than feeling disgust at silly Instagram tourists that must’ve built them, I made a game of kicking over as many as I could.

When I returned to the trailhead I saw a sign asking to please not touch the rock stacks because they mark the trail.

Oops.

That felt awful. On the drive home I made a donation to the park so I could go on living.

Re: Recreation.gov

#142

Post by catacombs »

brailsafe wrote: post #93
ben174 wrote: post #16

I worked in the bot defense space for quite some time, and it’s insane how much of the bot efforts were dedicated to getting camping spots. I’m happy to see this being recognized because I had many summers ruined because I couldn’t just get my old favorite camp spot.

Hang on. Is this hyperbole or are you saying you've actually had not one, but multiple summers ruined just because you could get a particular spot? Seems like too rigid a definition of a summer to enjoy the very nature of summer.

> Hang on. Is this hyperbole or are you saying you've actually had not one, but multiple summers ruined just because you could get a particular spot? Seems like too rigid a definition of a summer to enjoy the very nature of summer.

My thoughts exactly.

Re: Recreation.gov

#143

Post by sealthedeal »

bitexploder wrote: post #73
ben174 wrote: post #16

I worked in the bot defense space for quite some time, and it’s insane how much of the bot efforts were dedicated to getting camping spots. I’m happy to see this being recognized because I had many summers ruined because I couldn’t just get my old favorite camp spot.

In my experience many of the best camp sites I have been to have been in federal forest land on forest roads. The tougher the road the better (limits traffic). I have found some amazing places in Colorado that you could never reserve and they don’t exist as official camp sites. You find a good spot and you camp. Camp grounds with packed in sites are... good for some things. I acknowledge this is a problem for some hi…

Ya, I agree, I don’t think I’ve ever actually camped in an official camping lot/spot. I’ve always trecked in and got away from the noise. Never knew this was a problem.

Re: Recreation.gov

#144

Post by sealthedeal »

So these camp spots, is this just like a general area where RVs can hook up to power? I don’t quite understand why camping spots are so desired that people are writing web scrapers and even selling on a secondary market? Sounds like a whole new world I’ve never heard of.

Re: Recreation.gov

#145

Post by almog »

majos wrote: post #112
almog wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for people who follow the LNT protocol, and perhaps even carry other people trash, the next step I suggest is to destroy bushcrafters' "shelters". They disrupt soil, more often than not made out of live cut trees (and hinder wood decomposing when not) and 9 out of 10 times, will come with beer cans/tp scattered around and it's illegal to 'build' them on public land. If you happen to see one, destroy it, you'll be…

Not knowing anything about this topic, I’m curious about why this comment is downvoted.

Since my original comment didn't include explanation for why it's a good thing to restore lands back to their pre-bushcrafted state and the fact this very task is done by NPS and USFS, I edited my comment to add that missing info.

Not sure if it was you asking about it that got it upvoted or the additional explanation. I'd guess both and I'd further estimate that most people that are not involved in the hiking/preservation community could pass near one of these 'shelters', without recognizing that it's bad for the environment. It's easier to recognize a call to destruct structure such as this as a vandalism.

Re: Recreation.gov

#146

Post by LesZedCB »

sealthedeal wrote: post #144

So these camp spots, is this just like a general area where RVs can hook up to power? I don’t quite understand why camping spots are so desired that people are writing web scrapers and even selling on a secondary market? Sounds like a whole new world I’ve never heard of.

in joshua tree, for example, there are only two small areas with reservation campsites. the rest are first come first serve. so if you show up for a weekend without a reservation which is extremely difficult to get because joshua tree is very very popular, then you might not find any camping at all, or have to drive around for a long time trawling for an open or soon-to-be-open site.

Re: Recreation.gov

#147

Post by almog »

gk1 wrote: post #141
Jamwinner wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hear hear. The number of 'survival cosplayers' vs actual campers has shifted is a bad way recently. It is illegl to build a structure, bury food, etc on public land. You wanna be a prepper, buy your own damn land. Stop destroying ours. P.s. kick over some carins too.

*Cairns Be careful with that, though. Some times they’re used as trail markers. Last year I was on a trail in the Southwest that had loads of cairns, like every 20-30 feet. Rather than feeling disgust at silly Instagram tourists that must’ve built them, I made a game of kicking over as many as I could. When I returned to the trailhead I saw a sign asking to please not touch the rock stacks because they mark the trail…

lol, as a general rule, I think that's a good call, below the treeline for sure.

The original Steve Roper's guide book for its brainchild — Sierra High Route, opens up by instructing hikers to do just that so it doesn't end up becoming a well worn path. It's probably not a good test case for whether or not it's good for the environment since very few people hike this route. Anyhow, the vast majority of (official) trails in the US are so well marked and maintained compared to any other country I've visited, that cairns are nearly always redundant.

Re: Recreation.gov

#148

Post by LocalPCGuy »

Kihashi wrote: post #138
ilikehurdles wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outside of southern states, a lot of us are well past the hiking/camping season this time of year, except for folks well experienced and equipped for winter recreation or just heading to local city parks.

If you're day hiking (and not camping or backpacking), this time of year is still great for hiking even in the northern states. Most people I know that go hiking in the local parks won't stop doing that until a few weeks from now. Further, it's the start of hunting season in a lot of places, which means lots of people are out hiking and camping to hunt.

Ironically, there are probably just as many regular hikers that stay in because of hunting season also. Or find trails on non-hunting lands during this time of year.

Re: Recreation.gov

#149

Post by driverdan »

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 wrote: post #6

They REALLY need recaptcha on park reservations, or some sort of other automation. I'm 90% sure that botting is the only realistic way to get campsites in some high demand areas (such as lower and upper pines of Yosemite). I'm convinced the only reason there's not MORE scripts around to do it is because their API/web framework is impossibly ugly and not intuitive.

Recaptcha is terrible and shouldn't be used for anything. They should still make efforts to block bots, just not recaptcha.

Re: Recreation.gov

#150

Post by collyw »

dankohn1 wrote: post #114

Recreation.gov was recently rebuilt and runs on Kubernetes. Details: https://www.wsj.com/articles/seeking-happy-campers-governmen...

Has that made any difference positive or negative? Or is it new tech for the sake of new tech?
Post reply on HN