Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
can be best managed to both preserve their delicate ecosystems and produce a re-
warding experience for park visitors.
Presently, visitors to both Zion and Bryce Canyon can still get away from human-
ity fairly easily by heading out onto park trails or into the backcountry, and they
can still find relatively unspoiled areas there. To preserve these unspoiled areas
and their ecosystems, increasing efforts are being made in both parks to make vis-
itors understand the need for zero-impact visitation, or as close as people can get
to zero-impact short of staying home. In most cases, people are getting the message
and are doing their best to stay on trails, not pollute water or drop trash, and cer-
tainly not to disturb the parks' plants and animals. In addition, shuttle bus systems
have been implemented at both parks to help relieve traffic congestion and parking
problems.
One issue that is expected to take on more importance in the years to come—and
over which the National Park Service has little control—is increasing development
in nearby communities. Major hotels have been built just outside Zion; and some
degradation to Bryce Canyon's delightful night sky is feared from continuing de-
velopment just outside that park's entrance.
Meanwhile, within park boundaries the main issue—both now and for the fu-
ture—is overcrowding, and how it affects the variety of habitats that support a vast
array of plant and animal life. Officials of the National Park Service have taken the
position that they do not want to limit the number of people who visit the parks,
and have concluded that the problem isn't too many people, it's too many cars. So
now we're seeing limitations and even outright bans on private motor vehicles in
the parks, especially during their busiest seasons.
Visitation at many national parks, including Bryce Canyon, has seen ups and
downs over the past 10 to 12 years. (An exception is Zion, which has generally seen
annual increases.) However, the long-term trend is expected to be increasing visit-
ation and park managers are rightly concerned about the future.
The issue of how the parks can handle an increasing number of visitors brings to
mind the question of the entire philosophy of the National Park Service, which es-
sentially is to accomplish two goals simultaneously—preserve resources and pro-
mote visitor enjoyment. But which is more important: protecting the plants, anim-
als, and geologic formations that make these parks the special places they are, or
helping people enjoy these very same plants, animals, and geologic formations?
Essentially, the question is how far should parks go to accommodate their visit-
ors—the people who pay the entrance and user fees and in most cases the tax dol-
lars that fund the parks—and at what point does visitor impact become unaccept-
able? It's a tightrope for park managers and a debate both within and outside the
park service that will not be settled soon, if ever.
