If you've ever decided to hike Delicate Arch during the high season at Arches National Park in Utah, you know how difficult it can be to find a parking spot at the trailhead. Park officials realize that, too, and have developed a proposal for improving the congestion there that they want your thoughts on.
The proposed solutions "include expansion of the existing parking lot, eliminating roadside parking, implementing a future reservation system for parking at the trailhead, and re-channeling Winter Camp Wash to reduce the frequency of road closures due to flooding and sediment deposition."
You can find a breakout of the alternatives at this site under "Delicate Arch/Wolfe Ranch Site Plan.
One option describes expected conditions if no changes are made with the parking situation, another addresses the implementation of a reservation system in lieu of expanding the parking area, and the third outlines both expanding the parking area and implementing a reservation system.
"Elimination of roadside parking, construction of a bike/pedestrian path along the road between the Delicate Arch Viewpoint and the Delicate Arch/Wolfe Ranch parking lots, and re-channeling the Winter Camp Wash are included in both 'action' alternatives," park staff note.
The environmental assessment will be available for public review and comment through September 25th. Hard copies will be available for review at the Southeast Utah Group Headquarters on Resource Blvd., the Arches National Park Visitor Center, and the Grand County Public Library in Moab, Utah.
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.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
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 arches needs to work on a tram system for that park. The delicate arch is one of those most iconic hikes in the National Park system, and it's well worth the hike out to see it. However, I don't want to see them build bigger lots to accomodate more autos, when they should consider going the Zion Canyon route, which has been very successful and made that canyon a way better experience after they implemented the shuttles.
A good idea, Gary. I suspect one of the issues is the cost of a shuttle system (both start-up and on-going operational costs) but one has to wonder how long a shuttle system could operate on the money spent on "expansion of the existing parking lot, eliminating roadside parking, [and] implementing a future reservation system for parking at the trailhead."
Part of the problem NPS-wide for such questions concerns the limits placed on federal agencies when it comes to shifting money between various funding streams (i.e. congress authorizes "construction money" separately from "operating" money, and never the twain shall meet.) Most dollars also have to be spent in the year they were authorized, so money saved from not building a parking lot can't be spread over several years to fund a shuttle system.
This is a case where I would be in favor of a fee to at least help fund a shuttle system. I for one would gladly pay a reasonable fee for a shuttle ride in such situations to avoid hassles of limited parking - and to avoid more paving of the landscape.
Plus, for the shuttle system, they could start the route in Moab, where they could have most of the parking areas. There's already a lot of parking available in Moab, and the park entrance is just a few miles down the road. The shuttle costs could all be included and absorbed in the gate fees. Arches is such a small park, that having a lot of cars in that place makes it feel more overcrowded, than what it would feel like if they had shuttles absorbing most of those cars from the roadway. Heck, the model is already in place across the state in Zion.
I could also see this sort of model put in Bryce Canyon. The government really needs to consider those options as the popularity of these places grow astronoically. I remember 15 years ago going to arches, and having the delicate arch mostly to myself. Now that never happens.
The partnership between Zion and the town of Springdale would be a great model to follow. Problems of overcrowding are not going to magically disappear. If anything is to be done, it needs to be done before visitation reaches disastrous proportions.