5 ms·

I'm a reasonably well travelled Australian (30+ countries, 40ish US states) and think that Southern Utah has one of the best concentrations of natural attractio

by prawn 7y ago

I'm a reasonably well travelled Australian (30+ countries, 40ish US states) and think that Southern Utah has one of the best concentrations of natural attractions on the planet. I've visited a number of times and would love to visit at least yearly if I could. I can appreciate that locals detest being swamped, but should everyone have a chance to visit such unique features for themselves? National parks in the US have incredible brand recognition and cachet and I imagine that this campaign is only part of the story. The big name parks across most of the country are swamped - Yellowstone, Yosemite, Rocky Mountain, etc. I don't know that there's a brilliant solution short of virtual tourism. Raising prices deters anyone but the rich. Adding carparks just reduces the magic of the wild. Increasing awareness of the second-tier features or developing more is an option. Naturally, the crowded experience will push people to visit outside primetime or peak season. Absolutely do not be deterred though. As the article suggests, avoid peak times for the best experience. Get up early. Stay late. You can sleep in at home. In Moab specifically, loads of people start later than they'd hoped or concentrate in particular places for sunset or return to the town for dinner. If you want a meal in town, make it lunch when the light is most stark and the park is packed. See Delicate Arch at sunrise instead of sunset, as one example. On this year's trip, we started Devils Garden at 6-7pm and came back in the dark with headlamps - had an amazing sunset and only saw a handful of people out there (I wouldn't recommend this to first-time visitors as the primitive trail can be adventurous to follow). Outside of the big five, there are outstanding places nearby that are popular but not completely overrun. Byway 12 is superb, Buckskin Gulch is fantastic, the slot canyons near Escalante, Coyote Gulch, Goblin Valley, Horseshoe Canyon, Cedar Breaks, Snow Canyon State Park, Kodachrome Basin, etc. Even in the big parks, there are top-shelf experiences that most people don't see - hiking into Canyonlands' The Maze is one of the best things I've ever done, hiking Trans-Zion is full of premium scenery without huge crowds, Fiery Furnace in Arches sans-guide is good fun, at Bryce you can get some great early/late viewing without hordes just by skipping the two main viewpoints. If you need help with an itinerary, ask away or my email is in my profile.

arethuza 7y ago
Why not have a lottery and give non-transferable tickets to US nationals and have a fixed number of tickets for non-US nationals that are charged for? [NB I'm not from the US but have been to a few US national parks].
- rjtavares 7y ago
  This should be done more. I was absolutely bummed for not being able to the see Da Vinci's "The Last Supper", but in hindsight I understand and feel that is the way to deal with precious places. At the time, you were required to book ahead, could only stay for 15 minutes, and the number os visitors was limited (so even in November you had to book weeks ahead).
  - KineticLensman 7y ago
    The Tower of London which houses the Crown Jewels [0] has a conveyor belt / moving walkway that you have to stand on to see some of the exhibits. It thus controls access and limits the time you can spend in one of the rooms (I can't remember if it possible to get back to its start to go round again) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Jewels_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Jewels_of_the_United_Kin...
- prawn 7y ago
  There is a permit system for Half Dome in Yosemite that expanded after we climbed it, and one for Machu Picchu that came in after we hiked the Inca Trail. The Wave has had an infamously brutal one for a while, and I think Buckskin Gulch has a limit for overnighting. So it's already done in a few places. It can be frustrating though - I've tried for The Wave a few times and never been successful. Their limit seems low. One thing worth doing is a shuttle system. Zion has one for peak months and as well as removing cars from the main canyon, you then have a captive audience which you can reach with messages about best practice in the wilderness though people ignore everything and feed animals anyway. Bryce has a shuttle too. Wouldn't surprise me if Arches was already planning one. That at least helps with the need for more and more parking.
- prawn 7y ago
  Another option is used in Arches. For Fiery Furnace, if you want to go in without a ranger-led guided tour, you need to pay $6 for a permit, and there are a maximum number issued. In addition, you need to watch an orientation video and then answer some basic questions about it. It's trivial for those who are interested but might limit the place getting flooded at least.
codingdave 7y ago
I live in Utah, and comments like this give me mixed feelings of "I love living here" and "Stop telling everyone else about the quiet places." Not that I really want to keep people away - the only way to fall in love with the outdoors is to spend time there. But that is also why your comment of virtual tourism really strikes home. One of the reasons I enjoy getting out so much is that I've had health problems that means it isn't always possible to get out. Sharing the landscapes out here with other people who can't get out has always been an interest of mine. With VR technology moving steadily forward, maybe a Streetview-style experience of all these parks would be a timely project.
- prawn 7y ago
  I think it would need to be more engaging than Streetview to offer anything serious enough to lure people. That said, I've recently finished playing through the story of Red Dead Redemption 2 and the environments in that are both mesmerising and often based on real world places. Horizon Zero Dawn is similar and features a lot of iconic Utah scenery. Given decent VR tech and maybe a climate-controlled room that could heat up, gust wind, etc, I can imagine spending time akin to meditation in a virtual camp setting. Come home and want to relax for an hour. Pick the setting, put on the goggles, sit back and take in the view, sounds, etc. Golden hour forever.
tonyedgecombe 7y ago
Raising prices deters anyone but the rich. I don't buy that argument, mainly because the poor aren't visiting these places in any numbers. They are too busy trying to put the next meal on their table.
- prawn 7y ago
  Which is why I didn't say "Raising prices deters the poor." I think reading it in good faith covers things and that my intent was clear? Really, it's not going to help encourage anyone that is price sensitive for whatever personal reason and would be quite easily criticised. I think if you are going to respect the environment, you should have every right to witness the best of our planet.
  - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
    I think if you are going to respect the environment, you should have every right to witness the best of our planet. Even if visiting that place destroys what you supposedly cherish?
    - mft_ 7y ago
      (Again reading the comment with good faith/will) presumably "if you are going to respect the environment" covers that aspect?
    - prawn 7y ago
      National parks are generally massive. It's possible to visit the most stunning parts with a light touch, and for the broader ecosystem to endure in other areas. I don't think they need to be the same place within a park - e.g., endangered bird atop Delicate Arch, or bears on Clouds Rest. Obviously we can impact the park from a distance too, but I'd say "destroys" is overly strong language for the respectful traveller I'm discussing. I suspect we damage it almost as much whether we step into the park or not with everything else we do collectively. Certainly a lot of the iconic geological scenery will survive our personal influence.

by prawn 7y ago

arethuza 7y ago

Why not have a lottery and give non-transferable tickets to US nationals and have a fixed number of tickets for non-US nationals that are charged for? [NB I'm not from the US but have been to a few US national parks].

rjtavares 7y ago
This should be done more. I was absolutely bummed for not being able to the see Da Vinci's "The Last Supper", but in hindsight I understand and feel that is the way to deal with precious places. At the time, you were required to book ahead, could only stay for 15 minutes, and the number os visitors was limited (so even in November you had to book weeks ahead).
- KineticLensman 7y ago
  The Tower of London which houses the Crown Jewels [0] has a conveyor belt / moving walkway that you have to stand on to see some of the exhibits. It thus controls access and limits the time you can spend in one of the rooms (I can't remember if it possible to get back to its start to go round again) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Jewels_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Jewels_of_the_United_Kin...
prawn 7y ago
There is a permit system for Half Dome in Yosemite that expanded after we climbed it, and one for Machu Picchu that came in after we hiked the Inca Trail. The Wave has had an infamously brutal one for a while, and I think Buckskin Gulch has a limit for overnighting. So it's already done in a few places. It can be frustrating though - I've tried for The Wave a few times and never been successful. Their limit seems low. One thing worth doing is a shuttle system. Zion has one for peak months and as well as removing cars from the main canyon, you then have a captive audience which you can reach with messages about best practice in the wilderness though people ignore everything and feed animals anyway. Bryce has a shuttle too. Wouldn't surprise me if Arches was already planning one. That at least helps with the need for more and more parking.
prawn 7y ago
Another option is used in Arches. For Fiery Furnace, if you want to go in without a ranger-led guided tour, you need to pay $6 for a permit, and there are a maximum number issued. In addition, you need to watch an orientation video and then answer some basic questions about it. It's trivial for those who are interested but might limit the place getting flooded at least.

codingdave 7y ago

I live in Utah, and comments like this give me mixed feelings of "I love living here" and "Stop telling everyone else about the quiet places." Not that I really want to keep people away - the only way to fall in love with the outdoors is to spend time there. But that is also why your comment of virtual tourism really strikes home. One of the reasons I enjoy getting out so much is that I've had health problems that means it isn't always possible to get out. Sharing the landscapes out here with other people who can't get out has always been an interest of mine. With VR technology moving steadily forward, maybe a Streetview-style experience of all these parks would be a timely project.

prawn 7y ago
I think it would need to be more engaging than Streetview to offer anything serious enough to lure people. That said, I've recently finished playing through the story of Red Dead Redemption 2 and the environments in that are both mesmerising and often based on real world places. Horizon Zero Dawn is similar and features a lot of iconic Utah scenery. Given decent VR tech and maybe a climate-controlled room that could heat up, gust wind, etc, I can imagine spending time akin to meditation in a virtual camp setting. Come home and want to relax for an hour. Pick the setting, put on the goggles, sit back and take in the view, sounds, etc. Golden hour forever.

tonyedgecombe 7y ago

Raising prices deters anyone but the rich. I don't buy that argument, mainly because the poor aren't visiting these places in any numbers. They are too busy trying to put the next meal on their table.

prawn 7y ago
Which is why I didn't say "Raising prices deters the poor." I think reading it in good faith covers things and that my intent was clear? Really, it's not going to help encourage anyone that is price sensitive for whatever personal reason and would be quite easily criticised. I think if you are going to respect the environment, you should have every right to witness the best of our planet.
- tonyedgecombe 7y ago
  I think if you are going to respect the environment, you should have every right to witness the best of our planet. Even if visiting that place destroys what you supposedly cherish?
  - mft_ 7y ago
    (Again reading the comment with good faith/will) presumably "if you are going to respect the environment" covers that aspect?
  - prawn 7y ago
    National parks are generally massive. It's possible to visit the most stunning parts with a light touch, and for the broader ecosystem to endure in other areas. I don't think they need to be the same place within a park - e.g., endangered bird atop Delicate Arch, or bears on Clouds Rest. Obviously we can impact the park from a distance too, but I'd say "destroys" is overly strong language for the respectful traveller I'm discussing. I suspect we damage it almost as much whether we step into the park or not with everything else we do collectively. Certainly a lot of the iconic geological scenery will survive our personal influence.