On 15/06/2012 Wendy wrote:
>"1/2 a dozen sites" seems actually quite a lot of camp 4 - there's maybe
>only 20-30 sites there all up?
A few more than that; There's actually 37:
..but you're right: it's proportionately quite a lot. The amount of camping space at that particular campground is reduced by about 16%. But what else could they do? Any perceived threat as detailed by a geologist employed specifically for the purpose of assessing potential danger would have to be acted upon. And the NPS would have been obliged to do a survey if they wanted to be sure of not being negligent given the history of rockfall, especially the 2008 event.
And, in terms of the camping area lost, Camp 4 represents only a smidgen of the camping that is available in Yosemite National Park, albeit the only place within the valley itself that is available on a non-reservation basis. Of course Camp 4 does has that significance as "the" campground where climbers congregate so it is a shame that sites had to be closed but really the NPS had no alternative.