Should Park Service lift Yosemite restrictions?

With the onset of summer, Americans' thoughts are turning to where to spend this year's family vacation. Our national parks, with their breathtaking scenery and generally affordable accommodations, have long been the destinations of choice for millions of families.

If a U.S. Park Service plan to limit public access to California's spectacular Yosemite National Park is allowed to stand, similar schemes could soon be in the works for other national parks, forcing many vacationers to go elsewhere for their relaxation.
Yosemite is one of the crown jewels of America's national parks. Nestled in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, its 761,000 acres feature giant sequoia groves with trees thousands of years old and many unique geological formations, including the glacial Yosemite Valley of the Merced River.
Campers, rock climbers, rafters, hikers, swimmers and fishermen are among the millions of tourists who flock to Yosemite annually.
A devastating flood in 1997 destroyed or damaged much of Yosemite's infrastructure, including roads, campgrounds and sewer systems. Under the direction of then-Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, the Park Service set about developing a plan to repair the damage caused by the flood and to reconstruct the park along what officials viewed were more environmentally sensitive lines.

The Park Service proposal, officially dubbed the "Yosemite Valley Plan," has a cost estimate of $442 million and would reduce the number of parking spaces in Yosemite by two-thirds — from 1,662 to 550. Instead of driving around the park and taking in the sights at their leisure, day visitors would be shuttled to and from Yosemite Valley in a fleet of 50 buses from remote parking lots on the park's perimeter.
What's more, none of the 361 campsites lost in the 1997 flood would be replaced, and 164 rustic housekeeping units as well as 141 cabins and tent cabins would be eliminated. Nearly 60 percent of the park's campsites accessible by car would be removed.
The only automobiles allowed in the Yosemite Valley would be those belonging to visitors able to afford the more expensive accommodations at the Ahwahnee Hotel and the Yosemite Lodge or those fortunate enough to grab one of the few remaining campsites accessible by car.

It takes little imagination to see how the prospect of being herded in and out of buses all day long will discourage parents with small children from visiting the park. Who wants to load and unload strollers, diaper bags, picnic coolers and other items on and off buses for hours on end?
Likewise, reducing the number of affordable campsites and cabins in favor of more upscale accommodations will further keep people of more modest means away from the park.
"The valley and the park belong to 285 million Americans, not a select few," says Rep. George Radanovich, R-Calif., chairman of the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over national parks. "I will not allow Yosemite to become an exclusive retreat."
While recognizing the need to repair the damage done by the flood, Radanovich has vowed not to let the Park Service use this as a pretext to restrict public access to Yosemite. "There is a concern about locking people out of the park," he notes.

Fewer people visiting Yosemite also will mean less business for the tourism-dependent communities surrounding the park. This should be of grave concern to communities near other national parks, because the Park Service's social engineering isn't likely to stop at Yosemite.
Once the precedent is set, what's to keep meddling bureaucrats from devising similar plans for Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Crater Lake, Great Smokey Mountains and countless other parks?
The Bush administration should heed Radanovich's message and tell the Park Service to return Yosemite to the tax-paying public.

Cohen (e-mail: bcohennationalcenter.org) is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

No: Natural values, visitors are both being served
BY JAY THOMAS WATSON

The 1997 floods in Yosemite Valley disrupted the expectations of park visitors, as well as the operations of local businesses.

Yet, there was a silver lining to the storm clouds that produced those floods — historic opportunity to transform into reality what had long been a grand, but elusive vision for a more vibrant Yosemite, where natural processes operate freely.
A Yosemite with less asphalt, fewer automobiles, less development, less congestion and an enhanced experience for visitors.

Fortunately, the National Park Service seized upon this opportunity by undertaking a three-year planning process that culminated in the adoption of the Yosemite Valley Plan. Intellectual honesty, rigorous analysis and extensive public participation characterized this planning process.
The final Yosemite Valley Plan, adopted in December 2000, struck an elegant balance between protecting Yosemite's natural resources and providing for visitor use and enjoyment. The plan guarantees that the millions of people who visit Yosemite every year will come away renewed.

The proposed centralization of day-use parking to a 500-space lot is of vital importance if congestion is to be reduced in Yosemite Valley. It is an answer to the numerous days when automobile congestion renders a visit to Yosemite Valley an exercise in frustration.
Under the plan, there would be 500 campsites in the valley. Assuming a two-night stay, that is enough for 30,000 families or groups of friends to camp out over a four-month summer camping season. Add in the 1,065 other campsites outside of Yosemite Valley, but still within the boundaries of the park, and there is enough for a total of 94,000 camping opportunities during a four-month period.
Under the plan, the mix of overnight accommodations in Yosemite emphasizes those at the lower end of the cost scale. Of 1,461 total overnight opportunities in Yosemite Valley, 1,179 are campsites, rustic tent-cabins and economy-scale cabins, or 81 percent of all overnight accommodations. Only 282 beds, so to speak, would be at the upper-cost levels.

Without question, the Park Service has more than adequately found a way to accommodate camping and low-cost overnight accommodations in Yosemite.
The Yosemite Valley Plan is a grand plan that will protect the natural values of Yosemite Valley and allow people to use and enjoy the park. The plan sets forth a vision for Yosemite that is as strong as the park's legendary granite and as bright as the sun shining down on the Incomparable Valley.

The time has come to realize that Yosemite Valley is a finite place with real limits.
For years, Yosemite Valley was expected to be all things to all people, with far too much infrastructure stuffed into the place — parking lots, roads, pizza parlors, a bank, a beauty parlor, a gas station, campgrounds, offices, hotels, snack bars, restaurants, gift shops, a maintenance shop, bathrooms, bridges, a museum, a church, hiking trails, bike paths, tent-cabins, grocery stores, swimming pools, skating rinks, signs, stables, employee housing, water systems, sewage systems and a laundry.

The Yosemite Valley Plan sought to reverse that trend. Yosemite's time has come. Let's get the job done and done right as set forth in the final Yosemite Valley Plan.

Watson is the California/Nevada regional director for the Wilderness Society, www.wilderness.org. Readers may write to him at the Wilderness Society, Presidio Building 1016, P.O. Box 29241, San Francisco, Calif. 94129-0241.
Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

I don’t know. If they do it like Bryce Canyon did, it’ll probably flop. They don’t have enough shuttles and they don’t cover all locations and have limited hours of operation so most people don’t use them.

If they do it like Zion did, about 99% of the people will LOVE it. You park at the Visitor Center or Lodge and stay for two weeks and never have to drive at all. You can hike a trail from point A to point B then decide on the spur of the moment to continue to point C and you never have to worry about returning to point A (or your car) – you can catch the shuttle anywhere along the way and go anywhere you want. At the visitor center you can even catch shuttles that take you into Springdale free too - they want your business.

Of course, Zion got a big chunk of money to implement their system as an experiment to see if/how well it would work. It works great. They’ll tell you that the shuttles run every 6 minutes but I never had to wait more than about 90 seconds for one to arrive. And unlike the AC Transit busses here, the driver doesn’t drive off if he sees you headed for the shuttle.

I’d recommend Zion for anyone that is opposed to shuttles in parks. Once you cruise around the park in one you’ll be amazed that they once, during peak times, had up to 7,000 cars in a park with less than 600 parking spaces. I wouldn’t go now though – too hot for me. Go before May. Now would be a good time to hit the North Rim though. Or even Bryce.

Those tent camps were lovely, and offered wholesome family camping experiences.

Are you sure you're not confusing tent camping with Currey Village? If they're referring to the regular campe sites, good riddance - they're the polar opposite of camping in nature. More like vagabonding off the side of the road. Currey Village is another thing (wood floor/frames, canvas sides/tops), but I didn't see CV mentioned in the article.

Re cars vs buses. The removal of parking spaces will never fly. It's a hell-of-a-long way into the valley from any of the perimeter points. They had a pretty good system right after the floods - you couldn't drive in once the treshold number of vehicles was reached (3-4k) - you had to take a bus.

I think this type of compromise will work well. Those with kids will want to drive in early to avoid the bus. Capping the number of vehicles at the current level, not some lower level, still makes sense. At a certain point, the Valley floor can get like one of those chicklet games but without an open square in which to maneuver the pieces.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.