The Monterey Herald is taking a survey about closing Monastery -- Vote!

[mikerault]

Print up T-shirts for the local divers saying "You Can Die at this Beach!" on the back list the diver and non-dive fatalities and dates, like a rock concert tour shirt. Require Everyone to have one to visit the beach.

 

[Guy Alcala]

I wish I could count the number of times I have watched a group of divers go down the trail at N. Monastery, walk around the BIG sign the lifeguards put right in the middle of the trail (you know, the one that tells divers to enter at the END of the beach), and continue straight up and over the dune to enter the water. The last time I saw this I was teaching an AOW class and had my group down at the end of the beach, giving them the usual dire warnings about Monastery. This group that went straight down the trail to enter in the middle of the beach promptly got trashed on their entry and rolled around in the surf zone for a few minutes. I think the other instructor with me suspected me of having staged the whole thing for the benefit of my students. We all know there's no need to stage stuff like this. It happens all the time.

The idiots get more accomplished all the time. But at least the signs have helped a few who don't work so hard at it!

The new Yosemite superintendent has already restricted weekend access to Half Dome and might be removing the cables altogether by the end next year.

Give them time, give them time...

Requiring permits and limiting their number is being done more for aesthetics than safety, although having 100 people jammed at the bottom of the cables waiting to go up, 30 on the cables and another 100 stuck on top waiting to come down, is a bad idea when there's lightning around.

First I've heard that there's any serious consideration being given to removing the cables altogether (as opposed to just unhooking them at the end of the season and re-connecting them at the start of the next one, which is the normal practice). But it'll never happen. The top of Half Dome is in part of what environmentalists call a sacrifice zone - the general public would raise holy hell if any attempt were made to restrict access to the top to climbers (much as the idea appeals to me). There are plenty of other summits in Yosemite and the Sierra which are only accessible to people with more technical skills, and the cables have been there so long that they're a traditional usage.

Barring something that is clearly out of step with the philosophy of the park (such as the old Firefall off Glacier Pt., or the bleachers and floodlights around the old garbage dump so that tourists could watch bears), it's unlikely that it will be removed/prohibited if it's heavily visited. In the case of the top of Half Dome, people still have to get there under their own power, which is the important thing.

Guy

P.S. If the superintendent wanted to pass an ordinance that would require that anyone who uses a cell phone for non-emergency purposes from the top of a peak be immediately pitched off, I'd be 100% behind that <vbg>

 

[Farty]

I shared this before, there are gzillion signs yet parents let their kids play there.

 

[Gombessa]

To be honest, I wouldn't be too heartbroken if Monastery were closed, for two principal reasons:

1) I've always felt that it's not at all obvious how dangerous Monastery is in reality, compared to the typical beach that people normally visit. I've seen scuba divers, family picnics, hikers, and swimmers out there on days I won't even come close to the berm, and I cannot honestly tell myself that these people are all morons, imbeciles, Darwin candidates or what not, and that they should by virtue of common sense know better. To many of us, the dangers seem obvious, but I think much of that is because we've had it beaten into our heads that this place is not to be trifled with. Not everybody has that benefit.

2. While I fully understand the "idiots getting themselves killed is getting my dive locations closed" sentiment, I don't think it tends to be applied here, and I'm always extremely saddened when I hear about yet another incident at Monastery, especially since so many tend to be people completely unaware becoming snared in the surf zone. Many have lost their lives here on account of a family picnic, not because they decided dive a cave without lights and training or taken some "damn the torpedoes I drove four hours to get here and I'm gonna dive" attitude. When taken in connection with the first point above, while I'd hate to lose Monastery as a dive site and I wouldn't vote for it to happen, I'd understand if it did.

I'm sure this will turn out to be an extremely unpopular view here, but hopefully to preempt the inevitable argument, I don't feel that having this happen would be a slippery slope to having the entire NorCal coastline closed to diving.

 

[mikemill]

To be honest, I wouldn't be too heartbroken if Monastery were closed, for two principal reasons:

1) I've always felt that it's not at all obvious how dangerous Monastery is in reality, compared to the typical beach that people normally visit. I've seen scuba divers, family picnics, hikers, and swimmers out there on days I won't even come close to the berm, and I cannot honestly tell myself that these people are all morons, imbeciles, Darwin candidates or what not, and that they should by virtue of common sense know better. To many of us, the dangers seem obvious, but I think much of that is because we've had it beaten into our heads that this place is not to be trifled with. Not everybody has that benefit.

2. While I fully understand the "idiots getting themselves killed is getting my dive locations closed" sentiment, I don't think it tends to be applied here, and I'm always extremely saddened when I hear about yet another incident at Monastery, especially since so many tend to be people completely unaware becoming snared in the surf zone. Many have lost their lives here on account of a family picnic, not because they decided dive a cave without lights and training or taken some "damn the torpedoes I drove four hours to get here and I'm gonna dive" attitude. When taken in connection with the first point above, while I'd hate to lose Monastery as a dive site and I wouldn't vote for it to happen, I'd understand if it did.

I'm sure this will turn out to be an extremely unpopular view here, but hopefully to preempt the inevitable argument, I don't feel that having this happen would be a slippery slope to having the entire NorCal coastline closed to diving.

So you want the government to protect people from themselves? I am sadden when I hear of of deaths there also but IMO it would be wrong to close that beach for that reason. Sometimes we just need to let Darwin do his thing.

 

[andrewy]

Come on people. isnt it clear, people simply don't trust signs any longer. 99.999% of signs there is simply for legal reasons, like "Coffee is Hot". I agree beach needs a life guard.
In west Oahu there is a beach right below the radar site., there are no tourists there only surfers, and that beach is 1:1 like Monastery, plus it has boulders in the sand. It has lot less people than Monastery on it, but there are 2 guards on duty. Question is who is going to pay for it? How about making that beach 10$ for entry like Lobos?

 

[Farty]

Fed up with dumb tourists, I approached one family on Wednesday morning - 4 teens daughters taking photos ankles in the water and of course facing shore. They were from Europe (my guess Germany), mom was very surprised when I told her few juicy details about the beach and still fresh tragedy, dad told me that he saw the signs and that's OK because they don't plan to swim there ...

that brings somewhat interesting point, unless you really go closer to the signs and read them and you are not from Cal coast, you are going to assume exactly what he did. I almost think there should be a bit more deadlier signs. If you go skiing to Kirkwood, you are not going to see anything like this - there is simple plain B/W skull with bones

 

[Thalassamania]

I agree, the same approach as at caves.