Talk:Brian Waddington Hut
VOC hut "reservations"
The Template:About huts in general template on this page and all hut pages does basically say that the VOC has "priority." I'm not really sure what this means or if it's really what we want to say. Scott Webster 17:46, 2 January 2007 (MST)
Yeah... It seems to me the VOC is constantly dancing around two major hut issues : fees and reservations. Do we charge a fee or do we accept donations? Let's decide once and for all. If they are donations, then they are by definition not required and things should not be worded to imply that they are. And does a VOC group that has made a "registration" get "reservation" of the hut, while a non-VOC group that makes a "registration" not get "reservation"?!?!
My opinion on the matters is that we should not have a fee and we should not have reservations (VOC groups included). But perhaps we need the exec to formulate an official statement on this so we can disseminate it consistently.
Either way, I found the tone of "Several non-VOC groups showed up without having made reservations during this reserved period." a bit untasteful so I would like to see its removal remain even if the powers that be decide that the VOC did/does have "priority". Chris Michalak 23:48, 2 January 2007 (MST)
Personally I think this photo of Champagne's is nicer than the current one in the article. Maybe we should use that one instead, or alternatively wait and see if someone has an even nicer one from this weekend? --Matthew 16:59, 8 August 2007 (PDT)
Yeah the photo on the hut page isn't very good. Let's wait for the rest of the photos from the weekend to roll in. Scott Nelson 18:33, 8 August 2007 (PDT)
Wow, that new photo is way better. I'm not even _in_ the old one! :) Scott Webster 20:00, 8 August 2007 (PDT)
As Scott pointed out the UTM waypoints are suspect. I initially thought maybe the datum was wrong, but I did some conversions and it looks like they're too far out even for that. The lat/lng waypoints seem better (bridge waypoints lie on or at least reasonably close to the creek). The current set of waypoints was originally added by Matt Breakey. I plan to record a new set of waypoints for both the road, and the new trail next time I'm up there. (I did record the lower section of the new trail last weekend, but not the upper section since it wasn't fully flagged yet.) For now I'm tempted to wipe the UTM coordinates entirely. --Matthew 22:49, 10 August 2007 (PDT)
- After reading a complaint in the logbook over the holidays I took a new waypoint for the hut. It only differed from the old one by 10m so that complaining folks must have entered it with the wrong Datum. To help avoid this problem in the future I've added a UTM with the WGS84 datum to the hutbox template. Scott Nelson 14:39, 11 January 2008 (PST)
- I never had a problem with the old hut waypoint, so I presume you are correct Scott, and they had the wrong datum. Also, as of the New Years 2008 trip, I now have a new set of waypoints for all major features (bridges, switchbacks, junctions etc) on the logging road, as well as a track and some waypoints for the new trail. I'll try to get those sorted and uploaded soon. --Matthew 13:03, 14 January 2008 (PST)
- New waypoints uploaded, with a bit more information than there was previously (elevations and actual distances as traveled). I'll try to put together a map of the road and the trail too. --Matthew 22:00, 23 January 2008 (PST)
I've added a Google Maps for the logging road & trail. However, the UTM coordinates doesn't match up with Google Maps. I basically mapped the path along the road and the trail to the best of my knowledge. The location of the trail could be improved... Champagne 14:41, 8 May 2008 (PDT)
- How did you create the track? It's mostly pretty good but the middle 1/3rd of the trail is shown too far west. I could fix it up if there was a way to edit it without manually changing all the Lat/Long coordinates. Scott Nelson 16:43, 8 May 2008 (PDT)
- Champagne, I think you got your datums in a twist. Presumably the UTM coordinates don't match up with the google map because you put them in as-is, whereas the UTM coordinates are in NAD27 datum, and google maps uses WGS84. I actually have fairly detailed track data for both the road and the trail, averaged over a few trips, which I've been keeping to send to LRMB for the official record of the location of the as-built trail. That would make for a far better map and I've been meaning to import it into imapbc and make a good topo for a while - I haven't done it yet because imapbc topos still suck. Using that data for the google map would be a start. If you want to do that let me know and I'll send you the track data - that's in WGS84 already and is basically ready to go in terms of plugging it into a kml file for google maps. --Matthew 13:18, 12 May 2008 (PDT)
- I replaced the track with a new one that I recorded last weekend with my new GPS unit. It's much more accurate than the previous one. Unfortunately, google maps doesn't seem to be picking up the new file. However, if you download it you can look at it in google earth. Scott Nelson 08:28, 3 July 2008 (PDT)
Is the hut actually closed from Aug15-Oct15 or is use just discouraged? The new note at the top of the page, and the detail below seems slightly inconsistent. Obviously we aren't going to be locking the hut or anything, but we need to decide our official stance. Scott Webster 13:28, 11 January 2008 (PST)
Not sure exactly - My understnading was that it's a "Voluntary Closure", whatever that means. Andre Zimmerman knows the most about it and he posted something on the message board recently. see here. However, my understanding is that there is no government legislated closure, and we can't actually stop people from using the hut during this time since we're not allowed to lock it up, even if it's for a good reason. Scott Nelson