.gif){kind=small}
Public Use of the
National Park System
MENU
Chapter 10
|
Public Use of the National Park System (1872-2000)
Chapter I0 |
|
CHAPTER 10
Regulating Public Use (Part Two)
(continued)
We now turn from indirect methods of regulating public use to consideration of direct controls over visitors. Over the years the Service, quietly and unheralded, has developed numerous direct controls and in this section we will review some of the principal ones that affect the volume and impact of public use in the System. It is the thesis of this report that regardless of other measures, direct controls over visitors will have to be greatly extended between now and the year 2000. It may even be that the largest single task facing the Service in the next decades will be to extend these controls substantially and to achieve public acceptance for them.
a. Entrance Requirements. In most parks, though not in all, control begins at the park entrance. Here we are at once faced with a significant policy, stated as follows in one of the guidelines for MISSION 66: "All persons desiring to enter a park area may do so." It is a long-standing principle in the United States that National Park System areas are the heritage of every citizen and each has an equal right to enter. Certainly, any system for controlling the number of visitors at the entrance would and should be defeated before it began if it were based on anything other than equal treatment for every citizen. It is entirely conceivable, however--though we are far from that point today--that future visitors may be informed that a condition of entrance is an advance reservation or entrance before a certain hour, or is permitted under other conditions. We know that entrance controls are already in effect at certain state parks where the park entrance is closed when the campgrounds are full. Similarly, Jones Beach is closed at the entrance when parking areas are full, with the result that traffic may back up for several miles as potential visitors wait in line for someone to leave so they may enter. Closing state and metropolitan parks when campgrounds and parking areas are full may be difficult but not impossible to justify to the public. The National Park Service, however, faces an even more difficult and less tangible problem. When is a scenic sightseeing road full? When is an historic tour route full? To justify requiring reservations, or closing such facilities when a certain capacity is reached, will be difficult but must be considered as a possible future step if the quality of park experience is to be maintained in the fact of mounting travel.
In many units of the National Park System, a fee is an entrance requirement. The fee policy of the National Park Service, as laid down by the Bureau of the Budget and Congress, is not intended to serve as a means of reducing public use. If fees were increased for this purpose, the result would be discriminatory, favoring affluent visitors in contrast to those less economically fortunate. Such a public policy would be intolerable in the United States. It is interesting to note that nevertheless, Marion Clawson, in his notable 1959 article, "The Crisis in Outdoor Recreation," suggested that entrance fees to national parks might have to be raised to twenty-five dollars. Today, the situation is further influenced by official adoption of the Golden Eagle Passport to all Federal recreational areas which makes no provision for limited use.
Although control over the amount of public use by raising or lowering fees seems impossible, entrance stations do provide the physical machinery for administering some other kind of use limitation, if a fair one could be devised, such as rationing among the entire population on an equal basis a given number of opportunities to visit a given national park. Such arrangements would have to be based on a pre-determined "carrying capacity" of the park, and their acceptance lies in the future. It is time now, however, to begin thinking of them, which makes the Service's current study of the "carrying capacity" of Rocky Mountain National Park particularly interesting and significant.
b. Limitations on Numbers of Visitors to Areas within a Park. Once a visitor has entered a unit of the National Park System, he may encounter quite specific limitations on visits to certain features or facilities within a given park.
(1) To a park feature. In a number of historical and archeological areas, ceilings have been in effect for years on the number of visitors permitted within a particular park feature at one time. One of the earliest examples is "Montezuma's Castle," the remarkable cliff dwelling that is the principal feature of Montezuma Castle National Monument--a small structure built into a recess in a precipitous cliff overlooking a valley. Many years ago, the Service, concerned over the safety of visitors who gathered in numbers in this cliff dwelling, caused a study to be made by the Bureau of Standards. After careful structural examination, the study recommended that no more than nine persons be allowed in this cliff dwelling at one time. For a while, only this number was permitted to enter, but many more visitors had to be denied than admitted, Finally the Service excluded all visitors, but built a careful model of the cliff dwelling and placed it along the main trail so that visitors could examine the model and view the cliff dwelling at the same time. This appears to work well during 235,700 visits a year to Montezuma Castle National Monument.
Other examples of limitations on the number of visitors entering a particular park feature are:
Home of Franklin D. Roosevelt, where a ceiling of 75 persons is in effect, on visitors permitted at one time in the Home (not on the grounds, which are freely open), based on the fire code of New York State. Visitors enter on a first-come, first-served basis, and in the peak season 2,000 a day are able to go through the Home.
Glenmont, the home of Thomas Edison adjoining the Edison Laboratory in West Orange, New Jersey, where the special circumstances of acquisition resulted in a Service agreement to limit travel to 100 visitors a day, on a first-come, first-served basis. Tickets are bought at the Edison Laboratory and after 100 are sold, sales cease for that day's tickets.
Bishop White House, Independence National Historical Park, was recently opened to the public on a limited basis. Visitors who desire to see the house may apply for tickets at the visitor center. Ten tickets are issued for each hourly tour, blue tickets for the ten o'clock tour, green for the eleven o'clock, and so on, When the tickets are exhausted, no more visitors may enter on that day.
(2) To a park facility. It is a long-established practice to close certain park facilities when they are full. Most commonly, these are campgrounds and signs saying "campground full" are frequent sights. Furthermore, when all the campgrounds in a park are full, which may happen by noon, additional visitors arriving at park entrance stations with the intention of camping are advised there are no camping facilities available and if they enter they may have to leave at nightfall. For example, it is understood this practice is in effect at Grand Canyon National Park.
Parking areas also fill up and can be marked "full." This can happen in any park, and would seem to be a certain destiny for national recreation areas.
Park concessioners who operate lodges and cabins, of course, follow the same practice when their accommodations are sold out, sometimes advising potential visitors seeking reservations that none are available and sometimes having to refuse them at the registration desk. Some concessioners allot half their accommodations for advance reservations and half for booking on a first come, first-served basis.
Methods of communicating with actual and potential visitors on the availability of facilities would appear to be of growing importance, particularly when long distances must be travelled to reach park areas.
This may require, among other means, adopting methods used in metropolitan areas to advise motorists by radio of traffic congestion situations.
c. Limitations on the Duration of Visits. Another type of limitation now in effect restricts the length of time a specific visitor may use a specific park facility. For example, the Superintendent may establish a limit on the time allowed for camping in a campground. Over the years, in some parks, the limit has been reduced from thirty days to fifteen days, and even shorter. Such a step increases the number of persons who can enjoy the park without building additional intrusive facilities. In many parks present limits should be further reduced for this reason, probably to a three-day stay. This simple step would materially increase the number of visitors who can use present campgrounds.
Similarly, the Superintendent may establish reasonable limitations on the time any person may use any picnicking facility when such limitations are necessary to accommodate the visiting public. We are not informed of instances in the National Park System where a time limit is established for parking, but there may be such cases. Certainly the motoring public is accustomed to and accepts such limits every day, and pays a fee for the limited parking privilege in addition.
d. Limitations on Character of Visits.
(1) Requirements for guides. Another type of limitation now in effect prohibits visitors from entering an individual park feature unless they are accompanied by a National Park Service guide or other employee. This control is often used to protect archeological ruins from damage and insure visitors safety. Such regulations are in effect, for example, for visits to the cliff dwellings of Mesa Verde National Park and to the canyons in Canyon de Chelly National Monument.
This control is also used to protect some historic buildings and regulate their use by visitors. For example, no person is permitted to enter the Vanderbilt Mansion in New York, or the Adams House in Massachusetts, unless accompanied by a National Park Service employee.
The same control is exercised in certain caves. For example, no person may enter Oregon Caves unless accompanied by a guide. Although not specifically provided in the Code of Federal Regulations, this is also believed to be the practice in other caves, including Mammoth Cave and Carlsbad Caverns.
(2) Requirements for permits for specific recreation activities. Another type of control is the requirement that a permit be secured before a particular outdoor recreation activity can be pursued. Permits (or in some cases, licenses) are required for many different visitor activities in units of the National Park System where volume of use warrants, including:
Camping
Fishing
Mountain Climbing
House Trailers
Hunting (where legal)
Athletic Games (in NCP)
Parades
Public Meetings
Boating
It is interesting to note that in some instances the issuance of permits may occur days or weeks in advance of the actual use of the facility. This is true, for example, in National Capital Parks where a group desiring to picnic may be granted a permit for a certain time and place several weeks in advance. This then introduces the idea of a reservation. Reservations are presumably made on a first-come, first-served basis. The instances where a citizen can today make advance reservations for use of a public facility in the National Park System are very limited, however. Of course, the reservation of accommodations in concessioner facilities is standard practice.
e. Physical Limitations. Last of all, visits to a park feature are frequently limited by the physical capacity of the facilities to handle crowds. Visits to the top of the Washington Monument are limited by elevator size. Visits to the top of the Statue of Liberty are limited by the width of the stairway. Visits to the top of the Arch at Jefferson National Expansion Memorial are limited by carrying capacity. The doors of Independence Hall are open to everyone and there is no fee. The doors, however, may be manned under extremely congested conditions, such as the spring season of school visits, when classes are required to wait in line and only three classes are usually permitted in the Hall at one time. Instances could be multiplied to note the limited capacities of hallways in historic houses, ladders to cliff dwellings, narrow passages in caves, and so on. The same physical limitation is reached at parking areas, campgrounds, amphitheaters, and other similar facilities.
f. Codes of Visitor Conduct. Note should be taken of the growing importance of codes of conduct for users of the out-of-doors. These codes may have begun with Smokey Bear. At any rate, they are now an important regulatory tool. The anti-littering campaign is an example, with the "Keep America Beautiful" slogan. The Service has developed codes for back-country use, and campaigns on special issues, particularly "Don't Feed the Bears." The Vatican Congress asked the International Union of Official Travel Organizations to draft a code for international travellers which, among other points, would emphasize the importance of respecting the people, customs, and cultures of countries less "developed" than one's own. The process of living together in a more crowded, mobile world will require public acceptance of codes of conduct, the regulation of travel, and limitations on use of public facilities.
g. Information and Interpretive Programs. The information and interpretive programs offer the best vehicles to guide park use through voluntary means. Aldo Leopold said the objective of park management is to improve the quality of park use. Here is where the information and interpretive programs can make a central contribution to management.
h. Conclusions.
(1) For only a little while longer, in many older areas, can the Service meet the pressures of increased travel by additional development without unacceptable impairment of park values.
(2) Over the years, the Service has developed many effective direct controls over visitor use, including limiting the number of visits to special features, and limiting the duration of use of certain popular facilities.
(3) These direct methods of visitor control must be steadily extended to cope with mounting use.
(4) The methods for regulating public use outlined in the previous section offer the possibility of postponing the time when controls may be required for an entire park, They should be given high priority. If the automobile could be eliminated in key areas, and other means of transportation substituted, it is conceivable that many features in the parks could be viewed with reasonable satisfaction by many more visitors.
Nevertheless, it is not too soon thoughtfully to review the long-standing policy that "all persons desiring to enter a park area may do so." The accepted practice of limiting travel to a particular park feature may have to be extended to an entire section of a park when its capacity is reached, and then ultimately be applied to an entire park. The Service should study and experiment in a consistent and progressive way with such methods, including various concepts for reservations and rationing use, and their policy implications.
(5) A study should be made of direct visitor controls developed by other agencies, including metropolitan, county and state parks; historic houses and villages; crowd control at sports events; and methods in use in other countries. Codes of conduct for travellers should be part of this study.
Top
Last Modified: Thurs, Mar 14 2002 7:08 am PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/lee3/lee10a.htm
.gif){kind=small}