Tuesday, August 11, 2020


Moab, UT

89.9 F

    Reservation system would protect Arches, improve visitor experience

    Featured Stories

    Survey: Local parents want daily in-person teaching

    “I really don’t think that 40% of all people are not going to send their kid to school.”

    Tales of Trails: Savor spectacular views from thrilling Shafer Trail

    In the 1890s, Moab pioneer brothers Frank M. And John S. Shafer developed the route from what had been a Native American pathway connecting what is now Canyonlands National Park to the river below.

    At 99, Moab man is knighted by France

    “The French people will never forget his courage and devotion to the great cause of freedom,”

    Leaving Guatemala, Part 4: ‘A year in the land of eternal spring’

    Though I planned to return someday, whether as a Peace Corps volunteer or not, this experience proved that even the best-laid plans go awry.

    Leaving Guatemala, Part 3: Sudden departure came with painful goodbyes

    Men donned wooden masks and numerous layers of sweatshirts and ponchos then proceeded to hit each other with whips as they danced around the town square.
    Public submissions to The Times-Independent can range from press releases to obituaries to feature stories and news. All submissions are subject to editorial review and approval.


    Michael Liss argued in his letter to the editor (Letters, June 11, 2020) that everyone should be able to go to Arches National Park whenever they want, “during these unprecedented times … with our cities burning”.”

    Motorists queue up in front of the Arches entrance. File photo

    He noted that Teddy Roosevelt said the national parks were created “for the benefit and enjoyment of the people.” For the record, Roosevelt was involved in promoting some of the early national parks, but his involvement predated the creation of the National Park Service by a few years. In the meantime, developers and schemers trying to make a buck in the early parks caused extensive damage and took advantage of visitors.

    This drove the creation of the National Park Service and the more complicated directive in the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, giving the Park Service a legal dual mission: to conserve park resources and provide for their use and enjoyment, “in such a manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired” for future generations. Congress added a couple amendments to the act in the 1970s, but they left that dual mandate in place.

    I suspect that Liss’ interest in keeping the park open to all people all the time has to do with more than empathy. But I don’t believe that keeping the park less crowded is bad for the local economy.

    Most rivers in the West have permit systems, and most river runners accept these systems because they prefer an experience on a relatively uncrowded river, where nature can be heard above humanity. The river permit systems might slightly decrease the number of river trips overall, but mostly the systems spread out the trips through time. This outcome is something that cannot be predicted or managed by individuals; it takes a system.

    The Arches National Park proposed timed entry reservation system of a few years back was a collaborative effort by park staff with input from the public. It was not a largely one-person proposal such as what Liss has suggested. It was extremely clever in reducing crowding during peak times and seasons while still allowing a way in for both visitors arriving unaware of the reservation system and locals wanting to visit spontaneously.

    It would keep some reservation spaces open until two days prior, plus allow anyone to enter early morning and evening, every day. What could be a better way to address a truly democratic ideal, to address people who like to plan in advance and also those who don’t like to (me) or because of circumstances, can’t plan in advance? Liss fought against this proposal, and got a lot of press, but there were many, many local supporters.

    Visitors are accustomed to reservation systems; it’s difficult to stay overnight in Moab without reservations. National Park visitors want to visit parks that are not overcrowded, and that have their natural and cultural resources preserved, not overrun. As a community, we have an interest in preserving Arches, Canyonlands and all of our beautiful and inspiring public lands, for our quality of life, for the rights of the other creatures in the world, and for our own economic good. Word will get out if Arches becomes more and more crowded and degraded by too many visitors.

    I realize that the last paragraph refers to a previous version of a proposed reservation system, and that the current proposal is rather different in purpose if not particulars; it is intended to prevent overcrowding during a pandemic. I think most visitors and locals alike can see the wisdom in that purpose.

    — Mary Moran

    Share this!

    - Advertisement -

    Latest News

    County: No avoiding tax hike — even during a pandemic

    Were the property tax increase to be rescinded, he said Grand County “would literally be totally broke.”

    USFS proposes campground fee increases

    Members of the public are invited to comment on the proposed fee changes to the developed recreation program.

    Pine Gulch burns north of Grand Junction

    Bureau of Land Management spokesperson Maribeth Pecotte said the fire continued to grow in Sunday’s hot and dry conditions, which are expected to persist through the first half of the week.

    Zion rangers looking for vandals; squares painted on stone

    While most of the paint was removed, the area still has some paint remaining on the sandstone

    BLM lifts fire bans in Tres Rios, Uncompahgre field office areas

    “The BLM areas near the City of Durango are ‘Day Use Only,’ and overnight camping and campfires are prohibited to reduce fire risk."