Fewer happy campers

A generation of environmental opposition to the expansion of quality visitor opportunities in the National Parks is having an effect. The quality of the visitor experience continues to deteriorate. Not surprisingly people are finding other things to do. Environmentalists ought to be very worried that this will weaken the environmental constituency. If people continue to be driven away the sustainability of the whole movement may be threatened along with the quality of life of our fellow citizens.

---

Fewer happy campers
Declining overnight stays signals worrisome trend
Boulder Daily Camera
September 27, 2006

Camping in the national parks is apparently losing popularity, and while that might be temporarily beneficial for the overcrowded parks themselves, it signals a worrisome political trend.

Between 1995 and 2005, overnight stays in national parks dropped by 20 percent, CDenver Post reported Monday. Overnight visits fell about 4.3 percent in the first eight months of this year, perhaps showing that the decline is accelerating. Those numbers reflect campground stays (both tents and RV) and backcountry visits.

The national parks have just under 14 million overnight visits a year. That's no small number, but in context of the demographic and political realities that sustain the parks, the decline is a concern.

"Let's face it: It's hard to protect the parks if no one is interested in them," Butch Street, a statistician for the National Park Service, told the newspaper.

Explanations for the trend vary. Some note that U.S. population growth is fueled in large part by ethnic minorities, who have traditionally been "underserved" by the parks. Others suggest an inverse relationship between park visitation and video games, DVDs and other gadgets.

Additionally, some worry about the danger from humans in the parks. As some note, though, the parks aren't alone in being neglected. Large numbers of people choose not to go outside much or at all.

That may be hard to remember here in Colorado, whose residents are unusually outdoorsy. And it may be hard to believe on brilliant autumn days like Tuesday, which lured legions of locals outside.

But it's worth remembering that the protection of national parks, like other national treasures, depends on the abiding support and good will of citizens. Such advocacy is weakened when parks are merely two-dimensional abstractions, pretty pictures flashing on a screen or passing by a window.

So get out there. Breathe the crisp air. Grow deaf in the silence. Drift off under a billion stars. And perceive the parks as they really are: worthwhile.

Where Gorillas and the Antelope Play

If environmental preservation efforts are going to be successful they must also serve the interest of the human population. If things are framed as the environment or people, sooner or later the environment will lose. This is a greate example of how this idea can work in practice.

---

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: September 26, 2006
BAYANGA, Central African Republic
The New York Times

The first thing they tell you here is not to play with the gorillas or the elephants.

A young male elephant gored a young Italian woman here when he attempted to play with her. And if you creep too close to the gorillas, a 375-pound silverback will charge you and, if you’re lucky, stop inches from you and slap the ground in rage.

But even if you can’t play with the animals, you can ogle them — and there are few places in the world as good for that as this remote jungle where the Central African Republic, Cameroon and the Congo Republic come together. And now the three countries have joined forces to preserve this jungle by establishing adjoining national parks that cover an area the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined.

It’s part of a growing trend that deserves strong support from the West: poor countries seeking economic opportunities by protecting nature rather than pillaging it. The grandest and most unlikely of these experiments is this one, for the Central African Republic may be the single most wretched country in the world: life expectancy is 38, and every year it falls by another six months. One-fifth of children die by the age of 5. Outside the capital, government is only a rumor.

Yet while many national parks in Africa exist primarily on paper, this one is real. Game wardens patrol vigorously: they pursue poachers across international borders, and seized 70,000 snares last year alone.

Read entire article

National parks seeing fewer camping visits

Sep 25, 11:37 AM EDT

National parks seeing fewer camping visits

The Park Service reported that overnight stays in national park fell by 13.8 million, or 20 percent, between 1995 and 2005 and have fallen an additional 4.3 percent in the first eight months of this year.

The Park Service said tent camping dropped 23 percent, backcountry camping 24 percent and RV camping 31 percent in the 10-year period.

Visits to "gem parks" in the intermountain region, which include Yellowstone, Grand Canyon and Rocky Mountain, dipped between 2 percent and 15 percent during that time.

"Let's face it: It's hard to protect the parks if no one is interested in them," said Park Service statistician Butch Street.

---

Information from: The Denver Post, http://www.denverpost.com

The “Social Trail” Problem: Myth or Reality?

Note: This post was written at an earlier stage in the ongoing public debate over Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks policies. While somewhat dated, the post still raises important issues which are still relevant.

To: Participants in the OSMP Visitor Planning Process

From: Guy Burgess

Subject: The “Social Trail” Problem

Date: May 5, 2004

The area in which I believe that I could make the greatest contribution to ongoing Visitor Plan deliberations is with respect to the “social trail” problem. I thought that the best place to start would be by doing a realistic and current assessment of the scope of the problem. To do this I took the social trail map embodied in the current draft Visitor Plan and set out, with my digital camera, to document the current status of the social trails marked on the map. This information together with the experience of having hiked extensively in this area since the late 1960's has enabled me to create a current and accurate map social trail use in the area. (See attachment.) My principal conclusion is that the current situation is vastly better than that implied by the clearly outdated map contained in the draft plan.

The construction of new climber access trails, the closure of many undesirable social trails, and changing attitudes of the vast majority of park visitors have resulted in the effective abandonment of a great many of the marked trails. In virtually all cases the scars are well on the road to recovery. These trails are marked in gray on the map.

It's interesting to note that the trails that are taking the longest to recover are those that were deliberately constructed and involved the significant recontouring of the land. This fact suggests that future trail planners should realign existing, serviceable trails only when there are clear environmental or visitor enjoyment benefits. In the past trail realignments have created networks of braided trail corridors which mar the land for decades. Unconstructed paths, even those with substantial erosion problems, seem to heal much more quickly when abandoned. For example, it's now hard to find the steep and highly eroded social trail it used to connect Gregory Canyon with Crown Rock. (This social trail was replaced a few years ago by the new switchback trail). I can show you constructed trails that are still clearly visible even though they have been abandoned for decades.

A great many of the social trails marked on the map almost certainly resulted from the lost rock climber effect. In the absence of clearly marked descent routes, climbers on steep and vulnerable terrain create a braided and destructive patchwork of routes. The construction of clearly marked access trails eliminates this problem by channeling traffic into a single corridor. Construction of the First Flatiron, Crown Rock, and Amphitheater access trails has virtually eliminated the social trail problem in these areas. Something as simple as cairned, climber access routes in the areas west of the Amphitheater, on the north side of the First Flatiron, and on the south side of the Second Flatiron could eliminate the remaining problems at very little cost. Remember climbers don't need expensive and environmentally destructive switchbacks. They are used to hiking steep trails. Cairns suggesting the best route combined with some simple educational materials are all that's needed. My map indicates a number of areas in which such consolidated access routes are needed. (Blue lines in brown areas.)

Role of Urban Wilderness

From an ecological perspective the most important role of wild areas adjacent to urban centers is the building of human/environmental connections. It is these connections which ultimately underlie public support for a broad range of environmental goals. Preservation of urban wilderness at the cost of undermining environmental constituency building is likely to be a great mistake.

Obligation to Provide Visitor Access

Assuming that the recreational opportunities embodied in the Open Space and Mountain Park system represent an important part of our community's quality of life, then we, as a community, have a moral obligation to preserve, to the maximum extent possible, those opportunities for future generations. At a minimum this means planning for visitor increases proportional with increases in the community’s population. Beyond this there is an obligation to extend these opportunities to serve a larger portion of the population (should they desire it). And, these obligations are not just limited to citizens of the City of Boulder. As a community blessed with extraordinary natural beauty, we also have an obligation to allow continuing and increasing visitor access from the larger metropolitan area. (After all, we enjoy a great many of the amenities contributed by these communities.)

Facts and Values

Anyone involved in a public policy making process needs to be clear about the distinction between fact finding and the making of value judgments. All policy making ultimately boils down to choices between alternative courses of action. These choices are ultimately based upon fact-finding predictions of the likely consequences of each alternative under consideration. While the most reliable fact-finding efforts tend to be based upon well-funded and well-executed scientific research there are also "other ways of knowing" (generally based upon deep personal experience and thoughtful, honest reflection) that can fill in many of the inevitable gaps and expensive, scientific research. Fact-finding also has its limits. Even the best research is unlikely to eliminate important risks and uncertainties. The world is simply too complex and chaotic and fact finding resources are inevitably limited.

By contrast, value judgments are based on subjective, public assessments of the desirability of alternative policies. They involve a choice between alternative futures and the policies designed to bring them about. In cases where significant uncertainties remain about the likely consequences of alternative policies, value judgments must also be made regarding the level of acceptable risk. These value judgments are not and should not be the province of technical experts. Rather, they should result from the collective moral judgments of affected constituencies.