Backups with a ReadyNAS Ultra 4 Plus and CrashPlan

After a long vacation full of photography, you load all of your photos up in Picasa.  You spend hours tweaking colors, cropping, tagging faces, and plopping down geo-tags onto a big map.  The very next day and your computer won't start.  The drive is dead.

Despite the fact that the value of those photos and all of your other digital memories are priceless to you, you have never spent the effort to set up a reasonable backup.  It was something you planned to do, but never got around to.  Three years of photos are now locked away in a lifeless hard drive.

You consult your friends.  You get 5 different recommendations for 5 different pieces of software that will attempt to recover the disk.  The platters won't spin though, so no software will help.  Next you try to find an exact duplicate of that disk and swap the platters.  This isn't remotely easy and has a very low chance of success.  Maybe you care about your photos enough that you even send the drive off to a professional drive recovery service.  Perhaps that works and 30% of your files are recovered, but the cost ends up sky high.

Most of my geek friends at least claim to have a backup system in place for the files that they care the most about.  These systems usually have one or more of the following flaws:

• Technically complex, ie: cron jobs, command lines, shell scripts.  (guilty)
• Cost fairly large sums of money (the cheapest online backups I see usually start at $5/mo)
• Require regular human action (swap out thumb drives, burn a CD).

These flaws generally aren't fatal for geeks, but they are for non-geeks (ie: family).  So, how do geeks approach the family tech support backup problem?  I'll share my solution with you, though I'm sure there are alternatives.

For software, we are going to install CrashPlan.  CrashPlan is a client/server backup system with a number of really handy features that we want:

1. Unless you want to back up to CrashPlan's servers, it's free to use.
2. It's a Java app that runs on multiple systems (windows, mac, linux).
3. It has a decent graphical UI that is non-technical.
4. You can offer to be a backup destination for a friend.  The process is very simple for both of you, Crashplan gives you a 6 character code.  If the friend enters that code in their client, they can backup to you.  Firewalls, dynamic ip addresses, etc are all negotiated for you keeping things simple.  Backups are encrypted before being sent, so there is no privacy risk.

This last feature is what I use for my family backups.  However, on my side things get a little more geeky/technical.

I don't like leaving my machines on when not in use, due to power consumption.  However, by default this would make backups challenging as there will only be transfer when both me and my family member's machines are up.

Instead, I use a Network Attached Storage device (NAS) to store my backups.  It's low-power-ish and always on, which saves me money over leaving a energy hungry computer on all the time.  For CrashPlan, you'll need a NAS with an x86 processor and which allows you to run software on it.  I use the ReadyNAS Ultra 4 Plus.

On my NAS, I install the Community Plugin that enables Root SSH Access and reboot.  Now, I have root access to my NAS with the admin password used to setup the NAS.  Simply ssh root@nas

Now I need to add to /etc/apt/sources.list a new source: deb http://archive.debian.org/debian-backports etch-backports main non-free by adding that source line to the end of the file.

Next update our package list: apt-get update

Next we need to install Java.  We first reconfigure our dialog so we can accept the terms and conditions:  dpkg-reconfigure debconf
Select [1] for dialog and [3] for medium

Install Java: apt-get install sun-java6-jre
Select 'yes' for everything

You can reconfigure again (optional):  dpkg-reconfigure debconf

Select [6] for noninteractive and [3] for medium.

Finally, we can install Crashplan on the ReadyNAS.

wget http://download.crashplan.com/installs/linux/install/CrashPlan/CrashPlan_3.2.1_Linux.tgz

tar -xvf CrashPlan_3.2.1_Linux.tgztar -xvf CrashPlan_3.2.1_Linux.tgz

cd CrashPlan-install

./install.sh

Defaults work for most questions except backup location.  I used /backup/crashplan.

Once installed, you can log out of your SSH connection.  Crashplan is running as a server.
Of course, you still need to do some configuration which can only be done from the Crashplan client UI.  From your computer, install Crashplan and follow these instructions for connecting to your server's headless client:
http://support.crashplan.com/doku.php/how_to/configure_a_headless_client

Once you have that set up, you'll be able to generate a Crashplan backup code, something like FJSW3X.  Send this to your family, ask them to install Crashplan and use your backup code.  The first backup may take awhile, but after that Crashplan should keep up to date incrementally with no intervention or hassle from your family.

Software Development Books

I'm often looking to improve the software that I write.  If you are in the same boat, here's a few books that I felt have helped me.  This is not exhaustive, but some of the ones I could think of off the top of my head that I'd recommend.  Please share others that have been good for you too, I'm always looking for more.

Note, there are affiliate codes in these links, though feel free to not use them, I don't really care.  If you are in the Bay Area, I would plug my favorite bookstore which frequently has some of this kind of stuff in stock (BookBuyers)

• Algorithms on Strings, Trees, and Sequences:  Very likely the best book on string algorithms (and trees/sequences).  It's references computational biology, but you need not know a tree from a frog to get a ton of value out of this book.  Invariably, one of my Google coworkers is always borrowing this book.  If you are interested in more about the wonderful world of strings, this book will get you pretty far.
• Refactoring: This was a very useful read when I read it a few years ago.  It came at the right time in my programming development.  This almost has less to do with the mechanics how to refactor and more with how to structure code in the first place.  The examples are easy enough, but seeing them and the reasons why they reduce complexity helped a ton.
• Design Patterns: I don't get as much value out of this as most people.  I don't find myself implementing the "X pattern" so much as perusing patterns has occasionally tipped off a light bulb in my head on how to structure things.  I feel like there is more I can learn from this still and intend to revisit.
• Coders at Work: A collection of interviews with some of the big software developers in the field. Full of lots of nuts and bolts insights and opinions on software development.  This isn't so much about software engineering, but about everything that goes on around it.  Unlike the above three books whose hardbacks are high-quality productions with diagrams, this one is a cheap paperback book with only text - there is no reason not to just grab the kindle version.  Note I also read Founders at Work, but found it to concentrate more on things like fundraising / making deals - Coders was more relevant. 
• Javascript the good parts(O Reilly):  More than a few people have mentioned that they never could wrap their brain around Javascript until Crockford's book.  I found myself in the same position.  I've forgotten too much from this book as I don't use Javascript frequently enough, but this is a great place to start if you want to understand it.  There is also an @Google Tech Talk from Crockford on the same subject that might give you a flavor.
• Wireless Nation: The Frenzied Launch of the Cellular Revolution: A little off-topic, but this is a fascinating book that takes a look into how the cellular industry got started in the US.  It helps you to understand clearly how we got to where we are now, such as why the standards are so fragmented.  It's also a delightfully fun read.

2012, Looking back

2012 was an abysmal year for the Gregable blog.  Only 4 posts!  They were decent, but not great.  Google Plus has taken some of my steam for short form postings, but really the blame lies on my shoulders.

Anyway, 2013 should be better.  With this post, I'll already be caught up to March of 2012's volume.  Dear Gregable readers, what would you like to know more about?  Help me break out of my writer's block.

And... Happy New Year to you and yours!

rel=canonical as a browser feature

I informally propose that rel=canonical become a tag that not only search engines respect, but also browsers.

For a little while now HTML5 browsers seem to have a feature where javascript can modify the displayed URL of the page using window.history.pushState.  The changes are of course subject to same origin policy rules (ie: the protocol, hostname, and port cannot be modified, only the path and parameters).

Originally javascript folks hacked this in with older browsers by shoving text after the "#" symbol in the URL.  Even though there are a number of problems with this, it was useful enough that it became somewhat widely used.  With modern browsers this is no longer required.

To see what I mean, click on this little demo: http://kurtly.tumblr.com/sticky-history and look at the URL bar.  If you aren't running an outdated browser, you should see the URL changing every few hundred msec.  The page is not being re-fetched from the server.

The rel=canonical link tag has been telling search engines basically "I know you are fetching the URL http://gregable.com/foo, but I'd suggest you should pretend this URL is http://gregable.com/bar in your search index".  Basically the same idea as the window.history.pushState functionality, only for search engines.

I propose that a rel=canonical link tag on any HTML page which satisfies the same origin policy should visibly change the URL in the browser.  All the same motivations exist for this as they do in the browser.  If a user copy/pastes the displayed URL, they'll get a more satisfying experience.  If the user mis-types an URL (ie: .html vs .htm), sending them to the correct one generally requires a 301 redirect which adds latency.  The javascript solution is less reliable as users sometimes surf with javascript off, and the javascript may not execute until the page has finished loading either.

Are there any obvious reasons I'm missing why this is a horrible idea?

Are there any regular Gregable readers who work on browser standards and might want to propose this more formally?

LED Bulbs

I've just been trying out some LED light bulbs and they seem to have progressed a great deal since the last time I played with them.  For recessed fixtures that have a narrow angle of lighting, they seem to be a pretty good deal.

Previous generations of LED light bulbs had problems:

• Blueish color of light
• Delay after turning on the wall switch
• Wouldn't work with dimmer controls
• Not as many lumens (brightness) as desired.

I've bought a couple different bulbs off of Amazon and tried them out.  I ended up really liking these ecoBrites: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003THZHOU.  No affiliation / kickbacks for me at all, I'm sure there are other great options out there too.

They seem to solve all of the above problems, though they do look a little bit different than regular bulbs if you look at the bulb when it's turned off.  

The key is to look for bulbs of a certain "color temperature".  The blue or "cool" colors are a higher temperature (around 4000-5000k) whereas the yellowish incandescents tend to be a warmer color around 2500-3000k.  CFLs are usually a higher temperature too though not usually blue, so they look very white.

My PG&E rates are tiered - 12.8c/kWh for the baseline, then it goes up to 14.6c/kWh for the next chunk and I'm actually bumping a small amount in to 30c/kWh rate lately.  So, my incremental cost of shaving off power usage is 30c/kWh initially and if I can get it down enough, probably 14.6c/kWh.

The above bulbs are 7W and replace 60W incandescents.  So, I'm saving  53W/h while these run.  They cost $39/bulb though.  Very conservatively, let's go with the 14.6c/kWh rate.  That's .7c/hr savings.  Assume I run each bulb for only 2 hrs per day.  To save $39, it'll take 6.9 yrs to breakeven.  That's the conservative number.

If you assume only that:

• I'm replacing a bulb, so would have to pay $7 anyway, the breakeven is 5.6 years
• I need to buy a new incandescent bulb every ~750 hrs, the breakeven is 4.4 years
• the extra 53W of heat an incandescent bulb generates needs to be matched by at least 53W of air conditioning work (likely far more due to inefficiency), the breakeven is 3.4 years
• I'm actually reducing my bill by the 30c/kWh rate, the breakeven is 3.4 years
• If I'm using the bulb for 3 hrs / day, the breakeven is 4.6 years

If you assume all of the above, my breakeven becomes only 11 months.

In practice, the real story is probably somewhere in the middle.  I do need to buy incandescent replacements periodically, I sometimes need to use air conditioning, but certainly not always, and my savings is probably a mix between the 30c and 14.6c rates once all is said and done.  So maybe the breakeven is 2-3 years, so roughly a 26% return.  That still seems like a very good investment these days.

Cloud Storage Price Comparison

Google Drive launched today right on the heels of Microsoft's Skydrive earlier in the week.  It seems the cloud storage revolution is heating up, with other big competitors including Amazon's S3 and Dropbox.

Of course, each of these services has different sets of features.  Amazon S3 is more of a bare-bones backend for developers to build on top.  Dropbox has linux support, yay.  Google Drive has some amazing appstore integration and rich Google Docs interface.  Microsoft's Skydrive presumably has the deepest integration with Office software (although Drive does have an Office plugin called Cloud Connect).

While it's sometimes hard to compare long lists of features, it's pretty easy to compare a number.  Today, Gregable readers, that number is GB and monthly cost.  Here's what the 4 offerings above look like when stacked up against each other (please correct my math if I missed something):

Microsoft Skydrive and Dropbox don't publish rates beyond their 100GB additions and may not even offer them.  Google Drive keeps the same ratio past 1TB, and amazon actually gets a tiny bit cheaper.  The interesting stuff to most people is in the left part of that graph, so let me blow that part up for you:

That's a simple view, but I think it's roughly accurate.  Some other caveats just to the pricing to keep in mind:

• Amazon S3 charges separately for upload and download bandwidth where the other solutions include bandwidth in the price, so Amazon S3 really costs more than what's shown above in practice.
• Amazon S3 gives you 5GB free only for the first year.  The other services' freebie quotas are permanent.  Dropbox gives you 2GB free, Google gives you 5GB free and Skydrive gives you a nice round 7GB free.
• Microsoft Skydrive charges you annually rather than monthly, so I converted all of their prices to monthly prices.  Of course, this means less flexibility as well as the fact that you have to pay everything upfront.
• Sharing in dropbox counts against all of those users' quota, while sharing in Google Drive counts only against the person who shared.  It isn't clear about Microsoft Skydrive's policy on this.

Also, I imagine that it'll be very interesting to take a look back at this post in a couple years and see how this has all changed.

Mega Millions

I for one think the lottery is a tax on people who aren't very good at math.  If I wanted to gamble, I'd buy a casino.

Mega Millions is the big multi-state lottery that has in recent days grown it's jackpot to the point where the payout could be worth the risk.  The cash payout is currently at $255 million (the $356M number is an annuity) and growing.  To win, you buy a $1 ticket where you must pick 5 random numbers correctly out of a pool of 56 and 1 random number correctly out of a pool of 46.  The odds of a correct pick are 1 in ₅₆C₅ x 46 or 1 in 175,711,536. 

Is this a "good bet"?

For the sake of simplicity, let's ignore taxes as well as the possibility that there is more than one winner (thus splitting the payout).  Also, most people's utility for money is non-linear (ie: beyond a certain point, more money doesn't matter as much any more).  Those are important issues to consider in real life as they have a fairly large effect.

To estimate the expected net returns, P(win) x jackpot - cost =

=

=     $0.451.  

45% return on your dollar in just a few days sounds like a great investment.  Mortgage your house, max out your credit lines, sell your stocks, and invest in tickets!

The problem with bets is that even if you have the odds in your favor, you can still lose everything.  How do you choose what to bet then?  Bet too little on a good gamble and you'll leave money on the table.  Bet too much and the losses will keep wiping too much of your winnings out.  It turns out that there is formula that predicts the optimal size in a series of bets which will maximize your winnings in the long run.  This is called the Kelly criterion.  It determines a bet size based on your odds and your current bankroll available to wager.  As your bankroll grows, you bet more.

Let's say that you were only allowed to buy one mega-millions ticket per round with the 1 to 175,711,536 odds of winning $255M.  Is this one ticket a sound investment?  The Kelly criterion tells you the fraction of your bankroll you should invest in this bet.  The formula is simple enough, divide the expected net returns ($0.451) by the net winnings if you win ($255M).  The result is 1.77x10-9 or 1 in $565,410,199.

If and only if you have at least $565,410,199 to invest, buying a $1 ticket is a mathematically sound investment.

Buying two tickets in the same lottery round is a slightly different gamble than buying 1 ticket each round.  It's a little better odds.  Taken to the extreme, buying 175,711,536 tickets guarantees a win whereas buying 1 ticket in each of 175,711,536 rounds does not.  A modified Kelley criterion can evaluate the case where you buy multiple tickets too, and it's going to be more favorable.  Unfortunately, I don't have the time at the moment to add that to the post.  If there is interest, perhaps I'll return and see if I can work through that math.

Etsy

Cristin, my better half, has been making jewelry for several years now and selling it in a store in her hometown in Virginia.  She just set up an etsy store and listed some of her first jewelry on it for sale.  Just a few pieces for now, but I think you should check it out:

strangeterrain.etsy.com

Yosemite High Sierras

I just returned from a 6-day, 50 mile hike between Yosemite's High Sierra camps.

Most people who visit Yosemite visit the iconic Yosemite valley, which is truly beautiful, but teeming with people.  A smaller fraction turn north as they are entering the Park and head up to the higher altitude area of Tuolomne Meadows and Tioga Pass.  Equally beautiful, although less iconic, this area of Yosemite has more limited amenities and is far less busy even in the summer months.

Fewer people still are even aware of Yosemite's High Sierra Camps.  These are 5 staffed camps (beds, cooked meals, running water, showers) that cannot be reached by road.  You can only reach these camps by trails, either on foot, or by mule.  Few people I've talked to have ever heard of these camps.  Still, availability is extremely limited so reservations are made a year in advance by lottery.  The season for some of the camps this year was less than 1 month, and they could only handle about 40 people per night.

The camps are arranged in a loop, and all of the camps can be reached via a long day hike from the road.  The most remote camp, at Merced Lake, is a 12 mile hike from the valley.  We decided to visit all of the camps along the loop in clockwise order (apparently counterclockwise is more common).  The route is below.



View High Sierras in a larger map

The days ranged from 6 - 10 miles, some of the days up days, some down.  The most elevation change was ~3000 ft.  The experience was different every day: granite, forests, meadows, waterfalls, streams, lakes, vistas, sunsets, stars, and wildlife.  I've detailed more of the trip below for those interested, but feel free to skip.

Day 1: Tuolomne Meadows to Vogelsang

The first day's issue is dealing with the altitude as we aren't yet acclimated.  We climb a modest 1,400 ft over 7 miles from Tuolomne Meadows to Vogelsang camp.  The climb is relatively steady uphill the whole way with forest cover some of the way and the most amazing meadows especially as you near the end of the trip.  Wildflowers, pikas running around, streams with fish, and granite walls on either side of the valley you are walking through.  A quick climb at the end over a lip and you are at the base of Fletcher peak at Vogelsang camp, the highest altitude camp of the 5.

Vogelsang camp sits a little above 10,000 ft on a ledge above a granite valley below with Fletcher peak above and Vogelsang Peak in the distance.  A few hundred feet away, a few of us took a brief dip in Fletcher lake, which is just above freezing even in August.  You can watch the snow melt immediately above the lake while you are swimming.  As it turns out Fletcher is a vast aquifer.  We are told that Vogelsang has the only legal non-chlorinated drinking water in California.  I didn't notice the difference.

After dinner, the stars at Vogelsang are fantastic.  Our trip chanced to schedule Vogelsang on a new moon, so it was very dark.  The milky way was quite bright and visible.

Day 2: Vogelsang to Merced Lake


We opted for the slightly shorter / easier route of the two options.  This turned out to be one of the prettiest stretches on the trip so we were happy with the decision, although who knows what the other option had in store.  This day was the biggest elevation change of the hike, dropping ~3,000 ft over 7.6 miles, but it wasn't a smooth gradual drop.  Instead it was long switchbacks alongside waterfalls interspersed with more beautiful meadows.  Very difficult on the knees.  My favorite stretch along this hike was what seemed like a half mile long water slide that just kept going forever.  The image below shows a tiny section of it, but can't really do it justice:

Merced Lake camp used to be a military post.  The tents are arranged in a half circle around a central campfire which probably was once a flagpole.  This is the most comfortable of all of the camps, with 8 showers, a warmer swimming hole in the stream, washbasins, and lots of shade.  Not much for a view though as you are at the base of a valley and deep in trees.  It's also the most remote - the nearest road is in the valley, 12 miles away.  As with the other camps, all supplies are brought in by mules.

Day 3: Merced Lake to Sunrise

Day 3 started with a few hundred feet of drop, then climbing back up 2,300 ft.  All over 10 miles.  Here again the elevation is not evenly distributed, with several switchback sections.  Only this time they are up.  It was a long day, easily the hardest of the 6, and probably the least scenic of the trail stretches, although that's relative - it still packed some amazing views.

Sunrise camp on the other hand was likely my favorite, and I spoke with several people who would agree.  The camp is perched on a ledge above an alpine meadow at ~9,400 ft.  The meadow then drops off and you can see incredible views of several mountain ranges in the distance.  The view at sunset was amazing.  Sunrise in the morning was even more so as the meadow had frosted over during the night and would sparkle in the sun.  The camp also had showers, and the staff formed a one-song band at dinner, which was a fun experience.

The photo below is from the meadow below sunrise camp.  Sunrise Camp itself is a little higher, affording good views of the meadow as well as the mountain ranges behind the trees in this photo.

Day 4: Sunrise to May Lake


Day 4 was an 8 mile hike that was fairly easy except for a painful ~2 mile stretch of rapid descent along switchbacks above Tenaya Lake.  You begin by climbing over the ridge behind sunrise camp and dropping down gradually past several photoworthy "sunrise lakes" that might have been great for swimming had we had the time.  Immediately before the painful descent is a trail marker for Clouds Rest.  At the recommendation of someone at Sunrise, we took a side trip out a few hundred feet along this trail to be rewarded with a fantastic view down into Yosemite Valley, including the back side of Half Dome.

The switchbacks were panoramic as well, although overlooking the Tuolomne area and Tenaya lake rather than the valley.  At about the 6 mile mark, we reached our strategically placed car at Tenaya Lake, the only road crossing for the hike.  We switched out for some fresh gear and finished the rest of the hike uphill to May Lake.

May Lake is nestled halfway up Mt Hoffman, which a staff member from Sunrise mentioned is the geographic center of Yosemite.  The camp lies between the lake and a short granite lip.  Scrambling up the lip affords a panoramic view of the ridge you just climbed down as well as many other peaks, as seen in the photo below.  May lake is pretty comfortable too.  The manager, Brian, treated us to some colorful historical stories of the camp as we enjoyed the delicious salmon dinner.

Day 5: May Lake to Glen Aulin


Day 5 was pretty mellow - a gradual downhill, mostly flat, over 8 miles.  We got into camp fairly early as a result.  Most of the day is within forested areas, so there is little to see.  The only challenge was a few patches of mosquitos and flies.  We donned some mosquito nets and moved on - I've seen much worse.  The only real vista was early in the morning, but  it was fantastic - you could almost see all the way to the next camp, below is a fraction of that view.  Glen Aulin is just behind that small mountain almost in the center of the photo, right behind the first forested saddle.

Glen Aulin itself is in an amazing location.  It sits directly beside a large waterfall on the Tuolomne River.  You can barely see some green benches and one or two of the white tents on the opposite side of the river in this photo.

Downstream a short bit, we took a swim in the river, below yet another waterfall.  Still cold, but much warmer than Vogelsang.  Glen Aulin has no showers, so this was the only option for washing off.

Day 6: Glen Aulin back to Tuolomne Meadows


The final day is also pretty easy, you follow the Tuolomne river upstream for a little under 6 miles back to parking lots at Tuolomne Meadows.  For the first few miles, it's literally one waterfall after another and progress is slow due to enjoying the views and taking photos.  After a while, the river slows down, flattens out, and widens into a Tuolomne Meadows.  A different type of amazing view, more relaxed.  Overall, this hike is just a wonderful finale.

I'll eventually upload some more photos and I'll post a link on Google+ if you want to follow along there.

I also thought I'd share a few boring notes on logistics, as I had a little bit of a hard time figuring out much of this online.  Only read the remainder if you are planning on making this trip yourself and have questions about the camps and what you need to bring:

• The camps are tent cabins.  4 (usually) spring cots with matresses.  You'll share with strangers depending on your party size.  Each bed has 2 army blankets and a heavy comforter.  This was plenty to keep me warm at night and it got below freezing at least one night.  The only other thing you'll need to bring is a sleep sack or sheets, no bed linens are provided.  The beds also have a pillow and a pillowcase that gets washed.  Don't bring pads/sleeping bags/pillows.
• Except for Merced Lake which is lower elevation and warmer, every tent has a wood burning stove and you'll be provided with wood, starters, matches, candles.  Everything you'd need to start a fire.
• As for temperature, it seemed plenty warm as long as the sun was out.  After sunset but before you climb into bed, you'll be chilly and the morning will be chilly.  Still, all I needed was a light jacket.  Unless you plan on staying up late and watching stars, my experience was that lots of heavy clothing was unnecessary.  The Yosemite packing list suggested a down jacket, fleece, mittens and thermal underwear. It was nowhere near that cold, but check your weather forecast I guess.
• Speaking of weather forecast, use NOAA and click on the map where your hike is - the nearest station which is what weather.com and others use is too far away to be useful.
• Merced Lake, Sunrise, and May Lake have showers.  You will want to bring a towel and soap/shampoo, although you may be able to buy a towel from the camp store if you forget.  A small washcloth is provided at every camp, but that's it.  Other than sunrise, all of the camps have great nearby swimming options which might cover for a shower depending on your preferences.  Best to bring some kind of shoes you can wear into the water though as the rocks can be a little annoying.  Flip flops worked for me.  You might need these for water crossings on the trail anyway.
• Either carry lots of water (4 liters) for the day or carry a filter.  We toted a filter and were rarely far from water, so we didn't need to carry as much water weight.
• On food, breakfasts and dinners are plenty of food and wonderful.  Best backpacking food ever.  Bag lunches include a decent sandwich and optionally fruit, trail mix, cookies, and a fruit drink.  You can order it all or a la carte.  You order at the camps the night before, not much advanced planning required.  Credit Cards are accepted if you don't want to tote cash.  Basically, you don't need to bring any food, or just some snacks if you would like.

Canyon Creek Backpacking, Trinity Alps

Last weekend I got the chance to go hiking in Trinity Alps Wilderness in Northern CA.  It's an area I've been wanting to visit for some time, but logistics are challenging - it's a ~6hr drive from the Bay Area and there is only a narrow season when hiking wouldn't require snow traversal.

The Trinity Alps area is very large, we hiked only one valley.  The trail starts down the valley shown in the upper left side of the above photo, climbs slowly along Canyon Creek, and then there is a short scramble up to these lakes: Lower and Upper Canyon Creek Lakes at around the 8 mile mark.  The trail then cuts between the two lakes and after a short stream fording wraps around to the northern side of the upper creek (right side of photo).  Most folks stop and camp around here.

We cut east (camera in the above photo is facing west) climbing at a 40-60% grade for the another mile up to L Lake (some maps show "el" or "ell").  We camped on the granite domes above and to the south. That last mile was quite tiring, but rewarding.  We were sitting in a bowl with a great view of the surrounding area and night sky.  We enjoyed the Perseid meteor shower until around 11pm when the full moon rose above the nearby ridges and the whole valley was illuminated.

The map below shows the rough trace of the trail, although I just drew this by hand from memory rather than GPS, so it's not entirely accurate.

View Trinity Alps, Canyon Creek in a larger map