Um, count to ten or something, Lisa.

Not that snarkiness doesn't suit you, but WTF.

I'm going to be back at King's Canyon at the end of next month, pretty much where we were last year, and anybody who wants to come is more than welcome (this is an open invitation I've made pretty much everywhere).

I'll be there if I'm alone (I won't be, some people are staying at the inn and I know at least 2 other people will be camping with me). I'll be there if 45 people show up.

The caveat being that this is an event in my style:

I'm not planning (other than the weekend), I'm not entertaining (I'll be around and hike but I'm feeding myself and expect everybody else will fail to starve). Others can plan or not as they wish.

Very Alex Swank.

Too bad that wasn't snark.

I personally disagree. I would not be able to do both in the same year and would hate to have to choose between the two.

My vote is for a single excursion.

I think camping excludes quite a few people, so having a couple of options at different times of the year would theoretically include everyone.

Cabin in the snow would be wonderful.

Way better chances at hot-tubbing in actual snowfall. If we start planning now, maybe everyone can actually have tire chains by next winter.

Oh, and ice-skating at Curry Village. Just sayin'

I think whatever is planned should be planned around the Duck's schedule that has yet to be released in case I can go.









Seriously, I won't commit to anything this far out because I have no idea if I'll be employed and have vacation time, etc...

I still suggest Bryce Canyon. Real camping is available for those who like that sort of thing, and the lodge is available for those that don't. Plus, the hoodoos are nifty.

That is a beautiful area.

Bryce Canyon would be very nice but would be a very full day's drive for LA people and more like a day and a half driving for any Northern California people (about 14 hours straight of driving).

For me that would have to be more time camping than just 2-3 days.