Backpacking permits have been placed on hold in Arches National Park in Utah, where officials want to study whether the existing program is sufficiently protecting natural resources in the red-rock park.
According to park officials, over the past decade the annual number of backpacking permits has increased dramatically. "Given this increase, we implemented a moratorium to evaluate whether current backcountry use allows for adequate protection of park resources," a park release said.
Park officials hope the study, which started last fall, will lead to new backcountry overnight regulations later this year. They note that the temporary hold affects only overnight backcountry trips, and that day-hiking continues to be allowed in the backcountry.
Front country camping at Devils Garden Campground will also be impacted this year, from March 1 through the end of October, as road work in the park will require the campground's closure. Construction crews will work on the entire 26-mile park road system. Areas, roads, and trails will close during construction. Road work will begin at Devils Garden and will gradually move toward the park entrance as work progresses.
That road work will carry impacts for all visitors, whether hiking or simply exploring the park's front country. If Arches is on your vacation planner this year, you might consider Canyonlands National Park next door, or wait until November to visit.
Stories about:
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
This is where the NPS would like to go with all backpacking. They would like to end it permanently outside of guided trips by concessionaires. The NPS doesn't want people in the backcountry and their fee schemes are a great way to do it.
Unfortunately, I think it's very common for park backpackers to lack simple "Leave no Trace" ethics, or basic skills. Arches is a unique, delicate landscape, that sees an incredible amount of traffic. The only possible way a place like Arches (or many other parks) can keep most of their visitors safe, and keep them from spoiling every area of the park, is to devise systems and regulations. Make rules, and keep foot and auto traffic concentrated to certain areas of the park. For people with experience, Moab has plenty of other options.
That is a pretty broad statement to say that all National Parks do not want backpackers. This article suggests they are looking into ways to protect the resource not keep out backpackers.
Beyond 'broad statement' it sounds closer to 'parnoid fantasy'.
Looking for an education. Why can't this be done with people using the back country overnight? Or at least using it on a smaller scale? Guess I'm struggling to come up with how allowing back country camping would interfere with a study but not day hiking.
"Parnoid Fantasy". (Try spell checking Rick B., but I swear I'm not out to get you.) The NPS frequently employes "resource degradation" as a justification for reducing backcountry camping. Yet they provide no data to back it up. The NPS has successfully reduced backcountry camping throughout the system. But, guide services are BOOMING.
And that's how it's done ladies and gentlemen, make an obvious observation, as all American citizen should do. And an Government employee Rick B. Will use the post World War II tried-and-true tactic, of deflecting it back to you like you're crazy.
SB--
To the best of my knowledge, there are no commercial guide services for backcountry overnight camping in Arches. If you want to argue about commercial guide services vs non-commercial ranger-led use, feel free to argue about day hikes into Fiery Furnace. Given the need for guides to reduce danger to visitors (and, to a lesser extent, damage to resources), and limits to how many visitors per day can be accommodated, my preference would be more slots for ranger-led tours and fewer for commercial tours. But, just like park lodges vs tent camping, some visitors prefer commercial package tours over individual arrangements. Getting the balance right when there are limited slots is difficult, whether Fiery Furnace hikes, Grand Canyon float trips, or the boat over to the USS Arizona at Valor in the Pacific.
As for NPS more generally trying to reduce backcountry camping relative to commercial guides in the backcountry: I don't know about GRSM, but that doesn't seem to be the case out west. Maybe things are different out here, where almost all commercial services use pack stock, and thus have greater resource impacts per visitor than backpackers. Out here the argument is over reducing stock use and thus commercial guide services in the backcountry.
Finally, I've never seen a fee structure where the permit/fee directly from NPS costs more than through a commercial guide service. I'm not saying they don't exist, only that I've never seen one.
Thanks for pointing that out backpacker. I'm seeing docs right now for both my arthritis [my typing is lousy] and my vision [cataract surgery soon]. You understood what I was saying and my observations were still spot on. Just watch out for them black helicopters.
And thats how it's done ladys and gentlemen, point out something that is wrong. That all good citizen who are thinking adults are supposed to do. And the our government employees (Rick B.) are quick to use the tried-and-true post World War II tactic of all civilians are crazy. Anyone that reads the above statements understands that backpacking is the lowest impact to the environment there is. By just allowing day hikes, what's the most amount of stress and limited areas. And as far as the roadwork goes, they just have to start from the front and work their way back to slowly open the park. By starting from the back, they could always say that the construction could overtake campsites and block them in. The roads in national parks are repaired by the department of transportation, they are completely Able to work around any traffic situation. And it certainly doesn't take an entire season, to repair 26 miles.
Well said. They may be down some employees due to the hiring freeze and want to cut their workload in an offical sounding way. It's your park! (for the benefit and enjoyment of the people" Write or call the superintendent, Kate Cannon at:
Mailing Address:
PO Box 907
Moab, UT 84532 Visitor Information: (435) 719-2299
Business Office: (435) 719-2100
Phone:
(435) 719-2299
Contact Person 1: Kate Cannon, Superintendent
Phone: 435-719-2100
Email: [email protected]
Contact Person 2: Paul Henderson, Deputy Superintendent
Phone 2: 435-719-2100
Email 2: [email protected]
And you stutter in double posting, Mr Hide Behind a New Name.
"And the our government employees (Rick B.) are quick to use the tried-and-true post World War II tactic of all civilians are crazy."
I have been on the federal payroll a couple of times. Three years active duty 67-70, including 14 months of combat - you do have a DD214 yourself? I was a short term federal employee the winter of 80-81 for 3-4 months when I was on the transition staff for President Reagan's first inauguration. My last job, after retiring from 20 years of nursing [non-federal service] was a short term summer spent driving a bus and giving a spiel to tourists visiting Alaska. I've been fully retired for several years now. You aren't dumb enough to consider my Social Security check makes me a government employee.
I don't consider all civilians are crazy. Howsomeever, as a retired psychiatric nurse I do have a few very informed opinions about a couple folks.
Don't forget to change your name back before you get to bed tonight.
What they need to worry about is dumpster and his minions leasing the whole park to oil companies.
Rick, I've got news for ya. I'm not the only one who gets tired of your NPS Kool Aid drinking. The NPS does make grievous mistakes. And you are totally blind to them because you are a government employee. Just like the NPS, your blinders make for some laughable justifications.
Backpacker - NOT a government employee. NOT. Go pound sand.
All--
Read the other recent NPT articles about Arches. http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2017/02/road-through-arches-nationa...
They're having a major road reconstruction project this year; more than just slurry sealing or paving: slope stabilization & culvert & shoulder & roadbed work. The roads will be closed to all traffic for the construction activities every night. [Constuction at night not only allows daytime visitors, at least in the summer it is much easier on the construction crews.] The developed campground will be closed, whether for construction staging or for visitor safety given the only reasonable road in and out will be closed all night. If you need a temporary closure of backcountry camping to set up study plots & quantify the impacts of recent use (and rates of recovery), doing it when the rest of the park is closed at night minimizes the visitor impact.
Why study impacts of overnight backcountry use? Yes it's your park, but it's also our descendents' park, those "future generations" it's supposed to remain unimpaired for. Arches isn't Great Smoky Mountains NP. The cryptogamic crusts in Arches are a lot more sensitive to trampling and a lot slower growing than anything in GRSM. The few seeps & springs & potholes are very sensitive. Human waste is a big issue: you can't simply dig a little hole & bury it.
Should they require hikers to carry out their waste like dog walkers do (rocket boxes and portable toilet systems work fine for rafting & 4wd camping, not so much for backpacking)? Yuck, especially in the summer heat! Should they identify a couple of strategic locations to put in composting or vault toilets, as Canyonlands did in some of their backcountry (vehicle) campsites? Does that concentrate usage too much, or can it help protect more sensitive sandy/cryptogamic areas by putting the designated camping sites in other areas?
I'd rather them perform a study to inform a plan instead of simply make an abritrary decision. That doesn't mean they'll come up with the best plan, but at least there will be some data on the tradeoffs between uses and resource conditions that we can all argue about. Whatever plan they develop for backcountry camping will require alternatives & public comment, whether it decreases or increases backcountry camping.
Meanwhile, there's BLM campgrounds upstream & downstream along the Colorado River within 20 minutes of the Arches visitor center. [There was so much impact along the Colorado River that BLM stopped letting us freely camp just anywhere along the river corridor several decades ago. Moonflower Canyon downstream from Arches is the nicest if you have a tent, but it's on the other side of Moab & the river so perhaps an hour away, and you have to walk in a ways from the parking area & vault toilets to get to the sites.] The campground in Canyonlands NP Island in the Sky is an hour or so away. Canyonlands allows backcountry overnight camping while hiking, floating, or driving (with toilet regulations). Dead Horse Point State Park has camping & yurts within an hour of Arches.
The national parks (and so many other outdoor spaces) were absolutely mobbed last year. It was insane. I'm a "heavy user" of parks since I live near a few, and there were hours long lineups to get in, and just a staggering amount of people on the trails. I know there were a lot of complaints about that--that the NPS isn't adequately managing crowds and the wilderness experience. No one wants to plan a vacation to a park and go to the effort of backpacking just to be surrounded by other people. I think a lot of parks are in the middle of trying to get a handle on the increased crowds. It sounds like Arches was overwhelmed and needs to figure out how to better manage backcountry use. Resource damage lasts a long time, better to shut it down and figure it out than to let it continue unabashed.
As for concessioner guided backpacking trips...the only place I've ever heard of these is Yosemite. There aren't any in the parks that I regularly visit. I think it's very rare in the west.
Excellent, Tomp and Kelly. But you're probably confusing some folks by laying out facts. Let's see what kind of responses you get.
Our parks have been blindsided by the explosion in visitiation. It's a matter of trying to figure out how to manage stampedes of visitors while still meeting the most important management mandate: Conserving Unimpaired For Future Generations.
On top of that, most parks are trying to keep up with all this and the other demands placed upon park managers by Acts Of Congress and Political Pressures from myriad sources and you have a situation that would baffle Solomon.
Moderator, the comment thread on here is why I cringe coming to this site. I know you ran a poll a while back, but please, please, please, reconsider getting rid of comments on your articles. Instead, use some of these "human" resources and maybe hold a moderated round table one e in a while. The mudslinging and name calling are a huge distraction from the news on this site.