Signage that lies and tells untruths

[Max Rockatansky]

Along Chowchilla Mountain Road there are several signs which indicate there is no access to Yosemite National Park.  This isn't actual true but rather is a Mariposa County effort to stop people following GPS directions onto an ungraded and heavily rutted road over Battalion Pass.  You can actually reach the Wawona Road during Spring-Fall and shun-pike the park entrance fee (and reservation system).

IMG_9342 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

IMG_9376 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

[Rothman]

If one has an America the Beautiful pass (or any of the others), no need to shunpike.

[Max Rockatansky]

If one has an America the Beautiful pass (or any of the others), no need to shunpike.

Between 6 AM-2 PM from 6/15/25 to 8/15/25 at Yosemite this year you do (I have an annual pass good until October).  The Coulterville Road likewise is another shun poke through Stanislaus National Forest to the Big Flat Road north of Yosemite Valley. 

Then again, I can easily make the Wawona or El Portal entrances to Yosemite before 6 AM (unless Jessica is with me).  A bunch of Oakhurst locals gave me the low down on the fibbing signs on Chowchilla Mountain Road when I did a museum presentation at Fresno Flats not long ago.

[Scott5114]

In your Chowchilla Mountain Road thread, you linked a news article about a family that ended up on it because of a Mapquest routing. In that story, the family was unable to reach Yosemite because of a locked gate across the road.

I wonder if the "no access" signage was installed because of that gate, which apparently has since been removed or is left open part of the time now.

[Max Rockatansky]

In your Chowchilla Mountain Road thread, you linked a news article about a family that ended up on it because of a Mapquest routing. In that story, the family was unable to reach Yosemite because of a locked gate across the road.

I wonder if the "no access" signage was installed because of that gate, which apparently has since been removed or is left open part of the time now.

Apparently, there is a Yosemite forum (who knew?) where they keep tabs on obscure road and trail openings.  The Chowchilla gate opened on April 12th for the season this year.  Amusingly the road doesn't appear on the official park brochure but does on the NPS standard map. 

https://yosemitenews.info/forum/read.php?3,99393

The gate in question is located at the intersection of Chowchilla Mountain Road and Summit Road.  Summit Road (also maintained by Mariposa County) also never closes and takes traffic down to CA 41 Fish Camp a mile or so from the southern Yosemite Park boundary.  If someone had balls big enough and a capable vehicle, they could make the journey even in the winter (apparently many off road enthusiasts do).  Also, heading west from CA 41 along Summit Road traffic will see a "no access to Mariposa" sign (which is in GSV) just west of CA 41).

The gist I've gotten is that the Mariposa County locals want these roads open for their own purposes (fire evacuation comes up a lot).  It seems that the county also doesn't want non-locals using these corridors despite them being public highways.  I guess the comprise was to throw up a bunch of warning signs that aren't completely accurate and let everyone sort it out for themselves.

[Rothman]

If one has an America the Beautiful pass (or any of the others), no need to shunpike.

Between 6 AM-2 PM from 6/15/25 to 8/15/25 at Yosemite this year you do (I have an annual pass good until October).   

Nah.  You need a reservation.  Pass is still good.

[Max Rockatansky]

If one has an America the Beautiful pass (or any of the others), no need to shunpike.

Between 6 AM-2 PM from 6/15/25 to 8/15/25 at Yosemite this year you do (I have an annual pass good until October).   

Nah.  You need a reservation.  Pass is still good.

I'd argue before 6 AM in the morning you don't even need a pass.  I've never seen an NPS person at any gate of Yosemite before 6 AM.  Every time I've stopped on my way out nobody has ever checked my pass or to see if I otherwise paid entry.

[Rothman]

If one has an America the Beautiful pass (or any of the others), no need to shunpike.

Between 6 AM-2 PM from 6/15/25 to 8/15/25 at Yosemite this year you do (I have an annual pass good until October).   

Nah.  You need a reservation.  Pass is still good.

I'd argue before 6 AM in the morning you don't even need a pass.  I've never seen an NPS person at any gate of Yosemite before 6 AM.  Every time I've stopped on my way out nobody has ever checked my pass or to see if I otherwise paid entry.

Well, sure.  But, we were talking about 6-2.

[hotdogPi]

I can't find it on GSV anymore, but I seem to remember a sign on I-95 just north of MA 128 saying that the fastest way to MA 128 north is to stay on I-95. It's not; taking a surface road shortcut is faster.

[kphoger]

This well-known Texas sign doesn't technically lie, but it doesn't mean what you think it means:



That's because, while the associated law ...

Title 6 — Roadways

Subtitle Z — Miscellaneous Roadway Provisions

Chapter 472 — Miscellaneous Provisions

Subchapter C — Criminal Offenses and Penalties Regarding Warning Signs and Barricades

§ 472.022 — Obeying Warning Signs and Barricades

(a)  A person commits an offense if the person:

(1)  disobeys the instructions, signals, warnings, or markings of a warning sign;

... seems nonsensical on its face—because a warning by its nature is only an alert, not a command to obey or disobey—it is actually intended to only apply to special situations such as road construction:

(3)  "Warning sign" means a signal, marking, or device placed on a barricade or on a road, street, or highway during construction, repair, or dangerous conditions by the department, a political subdivision of this state, or a contractor or subcontractor to warn or regulate motor vehicular traffic.  The term includes a flagger deployed on a road, street, or highway by the department, a political subdivision of this state, or a contractor or subcontractor to direct traffic around or on the road, street, or highway during construction, repair, or dangerous conditions.

[Scott5114]

... seems nonsensical on its face—because a warning by its nature is only an alert, not a command to obey or disobey—it is actually intended to only apply to special situations such as road construction: [text of law follows]

I would argue it is still nonsensical, because just because a diamond-shaped warning sign (which the phrase "to warn or regulate" seems to indicate the intent to still include) is posted in a construction zone still doesn't mean it's a thing that one can choose to obey or not.

As Road Guy Rob noted in his video about the MUTCD, a quick way to tell if something makes sense as a regulatory sign is if you can append "...or you're getting a ticket" to the end of it. Warning signs, meanwhile, tend to have their consequences dictated by physics or other forms of reality. "Loose gravel or you're getting a ticket" doesn't really make much sense as a regulatory sign, and it's hard to imagine what sort of legal case could even be constructed to penalize something like skidding on loose gravel if it doesn't cause a collision or some other infraction of other traffic laws. At worst, the "obey warning signs" law could be construed as carte blanche for a police officer to cite people for things like skidding on gravel in construction zones, when those same acts are not illegal elsewhere.

So while you're correct that the sign doesn't tell the law's whole story, I'd say the law is still pretty confused even with the additional context.

[ElishaGOtis]

This well-known Texas sign doesn't technically lie, but it doesn't mean what you think it means:



That's because, while the associated law ...

Title 6 — Roadways

Subtitle Z — Miscellaneous Roadway Provisions

Chapter 472 — Miscellaneous Provisions

Subchapter C — Criminal Offenses and Penalties Regarding Warning Signs and Barricades

§ 472.022 — Obeying Warning Signs and Barricades

(a)  A person commits an offense if the person:

(1)  disobeys the instructions, signals, warnings, or markings of a warning sign;

... seems nonsensical on its face—because a warning by its nature is only an alert, not a command to obey or disobey—it is actually intended to only apply to special situations such as road construction:

(3)  "Warning sign" means a signal, marking, or device placed on a barricade or on a road, street, or highway during construction, repair, or dangerous conditions by the department, a political subdivision of this state, or a contractor or subcontractor to warn or regulate motor vehicular traffic.  The term includes a flagger deployed on a road, street, or highway by the department, a political subdivision of this state, or a contractor or subcontractor to direct traffic around or on the road, street, or highway during construction, repair, or dangerous conditions.

I believe the intent of the statute is for situations where traffic is directed by warning signage, such as obeying detour markings or actually shifting over after an advance warning of a lane shift. Despite that, there is the giant debate on whether or not that also applies to work zone advisory speed limits, which opens up a whole new can of worms...

[kphoger]

I would argue it is still nonsensical

I'd argue that a flagman, which the vehicle code specifically mentions, both warns and also regulates traffic at the same time.

[Scott5114]

I would argue it is still nonsensical

I'd argue that a flagman, which the vehicle code specifically mentions, both warns and also regulates traffic at the same time.

Wouldn't a law saying "you must obey flagmen" do the same thing and be less convoluted, then?

[kphoger]

Wouldn't a law saying "you must obey flagmen" do the same thing and be less convoluted, then?

Surely you've read enough laws to know that one should not expect simple and direct language.

[Scott5114]

Wouldn't a law saying "you must obey flagmen" do the same thing and be less convoluted, then?

Surely you've read enough laws to know that one should not expect simple and direct language.

I don't have a ton of experience with it, but it seems like it depends on the jurisdiction. Nevada laws are usually direct and to the point enough that it's a common part of the culture to see Nevada Revised Statute numbers quoted in day-to-day communications (like signs that say "No Trespassing, NRS 207.200", a statute which contains the excellent phrase "intent to vex or annoy the owner or occupant"). I've probably consulted the NRS more during my year and a half here than I did the Oklahoma equivalent for the 33 years I lived there.  I feel like sitting down and reading the entire NRS would be a thing I could do. I probably won't, because it's long and there's other things I could do with my time, but I feel like I could read it.

I would theorize that this has something to do with the part-time nature of Nevada's legislature putting them under such a time crunch they don't have time to faff about with overly complex language. But Texas has that too, and we got that obey warning signs law out of it. I know that the Legislature here has a number of non-elected Legislative panels whom bills are filtered through (one of which attaches a very useful summary to pending legislation of what the bill will change), so maybe one of them is responsible for de-linting the proposed NRS language.

[kphoger]

Interesting thought:  is this a regulatory sign or a warning sign?

[Scott5114]

I don't see how it could be regulatory. How can you penalize someone for not going "slow" without defining how slow? To some people, 70 mph is slow.

[kphoger]

I don't see how it could be regulatory. How can you penalize someone for not going "slow" without defining how slow? To some people, 70 mph is slow.

Therefore, one need not obey the flagman when the <SLOW> side is facing.

[LilianaUwU]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

[Max Rockatansky]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

110kmph on limited access roadways is slow (now you've read it).

[LilianaUwU]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

110kmph on limited access roadways is slow (now you've read it).

I saw that post before you edited it. No, I never saw anyone say 110 kilomiles per hour is slow... that's over 177000 km/h.

[Max Rockatansky]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

110kmph on limited access roadways is slow (now you've read it).

I saw that post before you edited it. No, I never saw anyone say 110 kilomiles per hour is slow... that's over 177000 km/h.

Yeah, the proofreading skills in me have been deteriorating through the day.  I was hoping to get that fix in quick.

I will say that 110kmph on some of the Mexican Autopistas I've been on is a questionable even in ideal conditions. 

[LilianaUwU]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

110kmph on limited access roadways is slow (now you've read it).

I saw that post before you edited it. No, I never saw anyone say 110 kilomiles per hour is slow... that's over 177000 km/h.

Yeah, the proofreading skills in me have been deteriorating through the day.  I was hoping to get that fix in quick.

I will say that 110kmph on some of the Mexican Autopistas I've been on is a questionable even in ideal conditions. 

Some of the roads in Québec you can struggle doing the speed limit.

[Scott5114]

To some people, 70 mph is slow.

I know you live in Vegas, but I never heard anyone say 110 km/h is slow.

110kmph on limited access roadways is slow (now you've read it).

110 km/h on some two-lane undivided roads (e.g. US 50, US 6) is slow.