To alleviate parking problems, for now, at the trailhead to Delicate Arch in Arches National Park, the National Park Service has settled on a plan to enlarge the existing parking area by almost one acre, a move that will add 82 parking spots.
Roadside parking will be prohibited, with the possibility that violators not only will be fined, but could return from the hike to Delicate Arch to discover their vehicle has been booted.
The plan, which will more than double parking to 155 spaces, will also add a sidewalk along the road, and rechanneling Winter Camp Wash to reduce the frequency of road closures due to flooding and sediment deposition. If these strategies fail to keep pace with increasing visitation, the park may explore a reservation system to the Delicate Arch/Wolfe Ranch site, or to the park overall, to manage visitation, a park release said.
Under the expansion plan, nearly 2,000 visitors a day will be able to access Delicate Arch and the Wolfe Ranch via the parking area, according to planners. But since the expansion plan is envisioned only to accommodate traffic that currently parks along the road, park officials don't expect an overall increase in the foot traffic to Delicate Arch.
Implementation of a reservation system will only occur as a separate future planning effort, one in which the NPS will engage with partners, agencies, and the public in determining the best way to design and implement such a system.
While parks such as Acadia, Zion, Bryce Canyon and Rocky Mountain have turned to shuttle bus systems to help manage traffic and congestion, the staff at Arches concluded that that was not a reasonable solution for their park.
Although it may seem that the shuttle would be the solution, the length of the park’s road system, a total of 52 miles, and the distance between several key areas in the park, planners concluded that in the best-case scenario it would result in a reduction of 23-28 percent of cars, require one-way travel times up to one hour and 20 minutes, and would require $3 million to operate during a five-month season under a service contract. This cost does not include purchasing and maintaining the 14 buses required to provide the service. Arches also looked at the shuttle operations at Zion, Bryce and Rocky Mountain national parks and noted that although visitors enjoyed this option, the pulses of 40 plus visitors who were dropped off on a trail at one time was causing resource damage and more crowding on the trails.
Arches officials say the expansion of the parking lot can be done while keeping the existing parking area open, although space might be limited. The first phase of the project is scheduled to begin in the coming months and is expected to take two months for the dirt work to be completed. In early summer, the expanded parking lot will be paved and striped, the park said. Once the parking lot has been expanded roadside parking will no longer be allowed.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Wow. 2000 visitors a day to Delicate Arch.
I recall when you once could go out there and be alone. Now it's almost impossible to get a photo of the arch without a crowd of people in the picture. I wish they'd also set up a "people free zone" around the arch to prevent people from wandering right over to it and gathering under -- and frequently on parts of its lower portions. I know many would object loudly, but how about setting aside certain times of the day when no one may approach so folks wanting pictures of just the arch will have a chance of getting one?
Or have I just succumbed to the Great American Entitlement Mentality? (Or have those who want to touch the arch?)
Just one more good example of the impossible challenges faced by park managers these days.
Obviously, the Park Service has yet to read DESERT SOLITAIRE. These are not "impossible challenges," Lee. The Park Service simply refuses to acknowledge there is a problem. Every problem gets solved with a parking lot. No wonder the problem persists. What would I do? Make it all a gravel road. No problem "accessing" the wilderness. You just have to ask yourself whether you want wilderness or a "perfect" car. 99 percent of Americans will answer for their car. Problem solved. Of course, the local businesses will scream bloody murder, but this is a NATIONAL park. If the resource is jeopardized, the resource prevails.
Ah, but then I am dreaming, too.
I've always felt that Arches was too small of a park to accomodate the auto traffic as it is. They should have long ago implemented the tram system. There's only one spot in that place where you can still find solitude... and yes, its in a section where it takes travelling on a dirt road to access the features. Sad to hear they are just going to expand the pavement, especially when there are other ways to combat ever increasing use. I also remember the days of walking out to the Delicate Arch and having it to myself... but those days are gone. I was last there in 2011, and got an early morning start only to find that I was not the only one walking up there. Times have definitely changed, and it's well past the days when Abbey saw it. He'd probably loathe what it has turned into.. I guess, he just couldn't uproot the engineers stakes fast enough.
Alfred and Gary -- Edward Abbey was enitrely correct when he opined that although the NPS may not be able to find money for interpreters or maintenance workers or other really essential essentials, they can always find money for asphalt.
I'm not sure if there really would be a very loud outcry from the local merchants. Moab is a different sort of place -- certainly for Utah. It's full of those strange creatures called "liberals" by other Utah inhabitants. Many, if not most, of the business owners there seem to be very protective of their parks. Even to the point of putting the parks and its resources first in their list of priorities.
Maybe we need more Moabs and Moabites.
Let me preface by saying that I for one have committed to increasing my visitation to the parks to demonstrate their necessary place in our culture. However, on my first visit to Arches and Canyonlands in 2012, it was disappointing to witness photographers themselves in both parks crowd shoulder-to-shoulder onto a specific area (such as the small terrace in front of Mesa Arch) and proceed to jeer and catcall at fellow visitors to "get out of their picture." Has it been forgotten that these resources are preserved for enjoyment by all taxpayers equally, and not simply to be a photographic subject of which the same is already widely available on the Internet? At what point do we take a step back and commit to remembering that founding principal relative to our fellow visitors?
But Sparky, shouldn't that be a two-way street?
That's why I suggested perhaps reserving some times when closely approaching the arch could be restricted. Two or three hours a day during the Times of Golden Light near sunrise and again at sunset?