Day 5: Up and Out. To the South Rim. 5 miles + 3 to Plateau Point, total of 8 miles, ERM of 11.

Total = 49.5 miles, ERM of 79

     A buck deer huffing and chortling wakes me in the night. At first I wonder if a Cougar is stalking the deer, there are so many yearlings in the camp. Nope, it's an amorous buck. Again he's at it when the first sprinkle of rain kisses the tent just before dawn.

     Although the sprinkle is but a warning, it's lovely to have a camp with the refurbished ramadas at IG. So I wrap up the tent and lounge under the shelter, watching the poor lighting on rocks made by time and slurping a mocha grandé that also warms the hands. Deluxe.

     Link to refurbishing the ramadas here click here.

     I opt to allow the day to warm and hike out to Plateau Point. It's dark and cloudy, yet the trip is still worth it. I'm the only hiker on the Plateau Point Trail today and this is sheer loveliness. A ray of light appears just as a buck deer is shifting to the other side of the trail to chase a doe. That's about it for the light today, this and brief bursts of light on portions of the North Rim layers.
     After final packing, I start the climb through the layers of rocks made by time. In the Supai Formation, I scan the trailside boulders, looking for the oldest tracks in The Canyon. I find them and sit down briefly to imagine their origin. Communing with my ancient lizard-like ancestors is my kind of genealogy.
     More up, yet still in the Supai layer, I photograph the pictographs (rock art) enduring under a peaked boulder. Hand prints and figures - what does it mean? Was this some sort of guide to Canyon features? A guide to water or places to hunt or good camping? Perhaps ceremonial, spiritual? There's more rock art in the Kaibab Limestone, mostly to the top of this trail that takes advantage of a fault and was a Native American route.
     It's up and up, up into snow at the 1.5 mile rest house. Colder, temperatures dipping below 30°F as the snow-covered trail winds through the Coconino Sandstone. The population density increases as I approach the South Rim, many day trippers not practicing social distancing or wearing masks when they closely encounter others. This MAGAvirus pandemic is likely to continue for another year, perhaps more. Both of these issues are foremost, as noted by the sharp guy who updates the outside board at the Indian Hills Community Center "2 factors affect viral spread, population density and population density." Well put, yet still sad and deplorable.
     Gaining the rim, there is sun and visitor polished ice and a piercing wind, a fitting conclusion to ice capades in The Canyon.

Oldest tracks in the GC: Approximately 310 million years ago, a pre-amphibian or early reptile-like animal walked the sand that would become the Supai Formation with an unusual diagonal gait. It's a distinctive “lateral-sequence” walk, meaning their front and rear legs on one side moved before the front and rear legs on their other side moved. Was it walking on a dune? In a huge wind? Around a mound? Paleontologists have yet to determine what these tracks tell us, yet they are fascinating. If you look carefully, you'll see them in the Supai Formation. More about these tracks in the links section.

South Kaibab Trail: The NPS, National Park Service, obtained control of The Canyon in 1919 and, being frustrated with Cameron's toll road on the Bright Angel Trail, built their own trail, the South Kaibab. It's a ridge route rather than a canyon or fault route like most GC trails. Initially, the South Kaibab Trail was called the Yaki or Yaqui Trail because it started at Yaki Point. The name was later changed to the name of the nearby national forest, the North Kaibab. The name "Kaibab" reportedly is derived from Paiute for "Mountain Lying Down,” which is their name for the Grand Canyon. The Arizona Trail, a National Scenic Trail, uses the South and North Kaibab Trails as it rambles 800 miles from the Mexico to Utah border across Arizona and through The Canyon.

Bright Angel Tail: This major corridor trail takes advantage of the Bright Angel Fault, much as the native peoples did. A well-worn path existed before being "developed" by Cameron. The Havasupai used this route and farmed around the perennial waters of what is now called Garden Creek, at Indian Garden Campground and Ranger Station, about 5 trail miles below the South Rim.
     In the late 1880s, prospecting partners Pete Berry and Niles and Ralph Cameron improved the BA trail at a cost of $500 in order to better reach mining sites within the Canyon. In February of 1891, Berry registered it with Yavapai County as the “Bright Angel Toll Road,” though it was often known also as “Cameron’s Trail” because Berry transferred control of the trail to Ralph Cameron. Cameron quickly turned to mining tourists and charged a toll to use the BA Trail.
     After many attempts to buy out or administratively move Cameron out of Indian Garden and off the BA Trail, Santa Fe Railroad developed the Hermit Trail in 1910 to take visitors to their facilities in the interior of the Canyon at Hermit Camp, while the frustrated NPS constructed the South Kaibab Trail to provide free rim-to-river access and an alternative route to Phantom Ranch.
     Finally, in 1928, Coconino County agreed to cede control of the trail to the National Park Service in exchange for a new approach road to the park. The NPS subsequently rebuilt much of the BA trail so it has a more uniform grade. The work was done by members of the CCC, Civilian Conservation Corp, and Havasupai workers. More at:
     https://grcahistory.org/sites/rim-to-river-and-inner-canyon-trails/bright-angel-trail/

Scenic Toilets of the GC Ice Capades

Click thumbnail to see full size image

gc-corridor-2020-toilet1 BA w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet2 BA w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet3 Manzanita w.jpg
gc-corridor-2020-toilet4 Supai Tunnel w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet5 BA w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet6 BA w.jpg
gc-corridor-2020-toilet7 Pipe Creek w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet8 IG w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet9 IG w.jpg
gc-corridor-2020-toilet10 3-Mile w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet11 1.5 Mile w.jpg	gc-corridor-2020-toilet12 will 2021 be better.jpg

end note - a fond look back down the BA Trail. Come back soon! (Click the image to see the full image)

.

Trickle down does not work, no leadership on the MAGAvirus, and other republican damage that is killing Americans:
     Meanwhile, trump and his enablers continue to inflict awful damage on the American people, refusing to protect them (remember that oath of office?) and acting only in their self-interest.

Here's what Heather Cox Richardson said about this on December 17th, 2020:

"The reality that Joe Biden is about to become president and Kamala Harris is about to become vice president is sinking in across Washington, and today gave us some indications of what that’s going to mean.
     Stories about what exactly happened in the Trump administration are coming out, and they are not pretty. Politics trumped everything for members of the administration, even our lives.
     Today Representative James Clyburn (D-SC), who chairs the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, revealed documents from senior appointees in the Trump administration overriding the work of the career officials in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those documents show that the political appointees at the Department of Health and Human Services called for dealing with the coronavirus crisis by pursuing a strategy of “herd immunity,” deliberately spreading the coronavirus to try to infect as many people as possible, with the theory that this approach would minimize the dangers of the pandemic. While doing so, they downplayed what they were doing, tried to hide the dangers of the virus, and blamed the career scientists who objected to this strategy for the rising death rates.
     Although the White House has tried to distance itself from senior Health and Human Services Adviser Paul Alexander, last summer he was widely perceived to speak for his boss Michael Caputo, the Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs whom Trump had appointed, and for the White House itself. Alexander, a part-time university professor from Canada, defended Trump against scientists, accusing CDC Principal Deputy Director Dr. Anne Schuchat of lying when she provided accurate public information about the worsening pandemic. When she suggested everyone should wear a mask, he claimed: “her aim is to embarrass the President.” Alexander attacked Anthony Fauci for his attempts to protect Americans. “He just won’t stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” wrote Alexander on July 3, 2020 (yes, I counted the exclamation points); “does he think he is the President???”
     Alexander advocated spreading the infection to younger Americans: “So the bottom line is if it is more infectiouness [sic] now, the issue is who cares? If it is causing more cases in young, my word is who cares…as long as we make sensible decisions, and protect the elderely [sic] and nursing homes, we must go on with life….who cares if we test more and get more positive tests.”
     Alexander wrote to Caputo: “There is no other way, we need to establish herd, and it only comes about allowing the non-high risk groups expose themselves to the virus. PERIOD.” On the same day, he wrote: “Infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle aged with no conditions etc. have zero to little risk….so we use them to develop herd…we want them infected…”
     On July 24, he wrote to FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn and Caputo: “it may be that it will be best if we open up and flood the zone and let the kids and young folk get infected” as a strategy to get “natural immunity…natural exposure,” an argument that illuminates Trump’s insistence this summer that schools and colleges must open.
     But the idea that young people are safe from the virus is wrong. Today, an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that while Americans older than 65 have borne the brunt of the coronavirus, young adults are suffering terribly. From March through July, there were almost 12,000 more deaths than expected among adults from 25 to 44. Young Black and Hispanic Americans make up not just a disproportionate number of that group of victims; they are a majority. Those extraordinary death rates have continued. Younger adults are indeed endangered by the coronavirus; the idea it is harmless to them “has simply not been borne out by emerging data,” doctors Jeremy Samuel Faust, Harlan M. Krumholz, and Rochelle P. Walensky—Biden’s pick to run the CDC-- wrote in the New York Times today.
     Another report today showcases two former CDC political appointees who are now speaking out to call attention to the silencing of career scientists at the agency. Kyle McGowan, a former chief of staff at the CDC, and his deputy Amanda Campbell watched as political appointees in Washington ignored scientists, censored doctors’ messages to the public, and cut the agency’s budget. “It was… like a hand grasping something, and it slowly closes, closes, closes, closes until you realize that, middle of the summer, it has a complete grasp on everything at the CDC,” McGowan told New York Times reporter Noah Weiland. “Every time that the science clashed with the messaging, messaging won.”
     Politifact, the Pulitzer Prize winning fact-checking website from the Poynter Institute, named the downplaying and denial of the seriousness of coronavirus its “Lie of the Year.”
     Today it became clear the administration dropped the ball in other important ways. We have more information now about the extensive computer hack that appears to have been conducted by operatives from the Russian government. It’s bad. Hackers placed malware on commercial network management software upgrades to gain access to government computers, along with those of major U.S. companies, as far back as last March. They have been able to root around in our secrets for months. Hackers accessed the Treasury and Commerce Departments, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and parts of the Pentagon, among other targets. The intrusion was discovered on December 8, when the cybersecurity company FireEye realized it had been hacked and alerted the FBI.
     Today the FBI, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), issued a joint statement acknowledging “a significant and ongoing cybersecurity campaign” and indicated they are not sure yet what has been hit. “This is a developing situation, and while we continue to work to understand the full extent of this campaign, we know this compromise has affected networks within the federal government.” It is clear the U.S. has been hit hard: Trump’s National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien has cut short an overseas trip to come home and deal with the crisis.
     In the New York Times, Thomas P. Bossert, Trump’s former Homeland Security Adviser said, “the magnitude of this national security breach is hard to overstate.” He insisted the U.S. must call out Russia for this attack (assuming it is confirmed that that country is, indeed, behind the attack). “Trump must make it clear to Vladimir Putin that these actions are unacceptable. The U.S. military and intelligence community must be placed on increased alert; all elements of national power must be placed on the table.”
     “President Trump is on the verge of leaving behind a federal government, and perhaps a large number of major industries, compromised by the Russian government. He must use whatever leverage he can muster to protect the United States and severely punish the Russians.”
     The New York Times called this breach “among the greatest intelligence failures of modern times.” Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) called it “stunning.” “Today’s classified briefing on Russia’s cyberattack left me deeply alarmed, in fact downright scared. Americans deserve to know what’s going on,” he tweeted. Blumenthal also recognized the severity of the coronavirus early: he tweeted on February 25: “This morning’s classified coronavirus briefing should have been made fully open to the American people—they would be as appalled & astonished as I am by the inadequacy of preparedness & prevention.”
     And yet, there are signs that the country is reorienting itself away from Trump and modern-day Republicanism.
     Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, previously a staunch Trump supporter, has released an advertisement urging people to wear masks and admitting he was wrong not to wear one at the White House. It seems likely he is eyeing a future presidential run, and clearly is calculating that it is wise these days to distance himself from Trump’s anti-mask politics.
     Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who has refused to advance a coronavirus relief bill since the House passed one last May, seven months ago, is now trying to make a deal that includes direct payments to Americans hurt by the pandemic. He explained to Republicans today that Republican senate candidates Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, who are running against Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Georgia, are “getting hammered” because the people want the bill and the Senate is holding it up.
     Finally, Bloomberg last night ran a story by journalist Craig Stirling highlighting the work of economists David Hope of the London School of Economics and Julian Limberg of King’s College London, who examined the concept of “supply side economics,” or the “trickle down theory.” This is the economic theory popularized in the 1980s saying it’s best for the economy not to support wages at the bottom of the economy—the demand side—but rather to free up capital at the top—the supply side—because wealthy entrepreneurs will create new jobs and the resulting economic growth will help everyone. This idea has been behind the Republicans’ forty-year commitment to tax cuts for the wealthy.
     In their study of 18 countries over 50 years, Hope and Limberg concluded that this theory was wrong. Tax cuts do not, they prove, trickle down. They do little to promote growth or create jobs. Instead, they mostly just help the people who get the tax cuts."

.

     *ERM: Energy Required Miles, are there data to support this mileage adjustment?
     Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education and Leadership
     Petzoldt first proposed his theory in his 1976 book “Teton Trails” to help backpackers plan trips and calculate their energy needs on mountain trails. “Petzoldt defined one energy mile as the energy required to walk one mile on the flat. He recommended adding two energy miles for every 1,000 feet of elevation gain, so a person hiking one mile and 1,000 feet upward would use the equivalent of three energy miles,” Phipps said.
     Petzoldt’s energy mile theory was just a reflection of the mountaineer’s “gut feeling,” Phipps said. The theory had never been tested in a laboratory before the study began in WCU’s Exercise Physiology Laboratory in the spring of 2010, Phipps said.
     To determine the validity of the theory, the study measured the energy cost and perceived exertion for walking on flat ground, with and without a 44.5-pound backpack, and up an elevation gain of 1,000 feet, with and without the backpack, through the collection of metabolic data, Phipps said.
     Twenty-four student, faculty and staff volunteers, including 12 males and 12 females, went through four testing sessions as the research continued into fall semester of 2010. The study results showed that the additional energy cost for ascending 1,000 feet ranged from 1.34 to 2.02 energy mile equivalents, for an average of about 1.6 miles, compared to Petzoldt’s use of two energy miles for each 1,000 feet. The range revealed by the study was due to the “hikers” personal weight differences, Phipps said. “It is remarkable that Petzoldt’s energy mile theory is so close to the actual energy cost measured during our study,” Phipps said. “In the field of outdoor education, it’s important for leaders to include an estimation of energy requirements during the planning of hiking trips.”
     Phipps said the energy required for hiking up steep mountain trails would vary for individuals and groups, and the variables of the trail would also factor in, but he recommends that backpackers stick with Petzoldt’s idea of adding two energy miles for every 1,000 feet of elevation gain when planning trips.
     The Validity of Petzoldt's Energy Mile Theory, 2010
Authors: Maridy McNeff Troy, Maurice L. Phipps
Publication: Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership

.