|
|
|
|
|
|
by trailbits
1095 days ago
|
|
|
Too many public lands in the US are managed like amusement parks instead of nature parks. These places would be less crowded and there would be less need for lotteries and permits if visitors had to make more of an effort to get there and use them. You don't even need to pack a picnic when you can count on a cafe and restaurant in the park. Once you are there and tying up a precious parking spot, you don't have to hike to see the scenery -- you can go into the air conditioned theatre and watch the park movie! Have an ice cream! Don't want to listen to the birds? You can listen to a live band at the lodge instead. Instead of allowing contractors and concessionaires to exploit these unique public treasures, the parks could focus on preservation instead. |
|
|
Some, like the most prominent parts of National Parks, are specifically managed to enable easy access (and also ADA accessibility, like wheelchair-friendly paths). There are also preservation-focused areas, especially but not only Wilderness (our highest form of protection, designated by Congress, prohibits motorized traffic and most buildings, often no use of machines like chainsaws or ATVs, though most will allow pack mules and such). Many multi-use areas (National Forests, BLM land, etc.) also have minimal facilities, often just a dirt lot and maybe a pit toilet if you're lucky. On the other hand, some smaller National Monuments might have no accessible areas EXCEPT for a visitor center and parking lot, usually to protect some extremely limited or fragile resource.
The USA is HUGE and many lands are public and/or protected for various reasons, to different goals. Not every trail is a National Park, and not every National Park is there for hiking or backpacking.
And it's also not merely a matter of land designation. Crowding can happen even in designated wilderness areas, often the result of a place going viral or being in close proximity to a major city or whatever.