Zion - Canyon Overlook Parking Lot to Close

[Iceaxe]

Canyon Overlook Parking Lot to Temporarily Close

Date: July 24, 2009
Contact: Ron Terry, 435-772-0160

Superintendent Jock Whitworth has announced that the Canyon Overlook parking lot will be temporarily closed for four weeks starting Monday, August 3, 2009. Visitors wishing to hike on the Canyon Overlook Trail will need to park in the paved lot 100 yards east of the Canyon Overlook trailhead and use the sidewalk to access the trail. The restroom in the parking lot will remain open.

The Canyon Overlook parking lot was designed and built in the 1930

[canyonguru]

That is the Gayest thing i have ever heard. I understand that it get a little crouded but come on if you get to pine creek or spry late there might not be anywhere to park at all even up the road. Maybe there should close it down and only let people with slot canyon permits park there and everyone ese can park up the road by shelf canyon parking. just a thought.

[Scott Card]

"If a permanent closure occurs, backcountry use limits for Pine Creek
and Spry Canyon may need to be reduced due to the limited available parking."


If closure??? May limit permits??? Any takers that it will not be closed and
permits will be limited?


My response...AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH..... IDIOTS.... Are you kidding me Zion Park?
STOP IT. WHY do you hate canyoneers, Zion Park????? Why do you hate groups,
Zion Park? Why not close the overlook trail and actually favor the canyoneers for once?
Why sacrifice the canyoneers and the most popular/visited technical route????
Where is the address for my congressman/senator....Jeeze I am so sick of the policy/bureacracy of that place.

Breath.... Breath......

Respectfully submitted and maybe over reacting at the present (but history says
otherwise),

[Iceaxe]

Yeah.... like those 8 parking spots really make a difference to the price of rice in China.

:roll:

[Scott Card]

Oh, oh, I know.... close the parking lot to everyone but Canyoneers. Send the tourists up the street and add 100 yards to their big hike. That would seem to make more sense. I don't think you see many, if any, canyoneers driving the mini hotels through the tunnel. (If you do this, don't admit this behavior. You will be shunned :haha: ) Let's see 8 stalls or so, times 4-5 people per car in each stall. . . . 32-40 people in the canyon at a time. Hmmm carry the three.... and it takes average 3-4 hours for most groups..... divide by seven.....24 hours in a day....wait a minute here, I think we could raise the limits for Pine Creek!

[ratagonia]

Letters of complaint can be directed to:

Superintendent
Zion National Park
Springdale UT 84767

please send a copy to:

Representative Jim Matheson
321 North Mall Dr., #E101B
St. George, UT 84790

I suggest 'supporting' efforts to make the area safer for Park Employees and Visitors if the data shows that accidents occur here, but questioning the need for drastic action. AND, stressing that further restricting access to the popular recreational venues Pine Creek and Spry Canyon is unnecessary. Let us compete for parking spaces in a free market of parking spaces!

Tom

[MiCanyoneer]

I think they are missing the actual problem.
They should ban oversized vehicles or severly restrict their times.

That way there would be no need of a range and you would have better trafic flow.

or just require people to turn right out of the parking area.

So many better solutions then closing it and/or restricting permits.

[Scott Card]

I think they are missing the actual problem.
They should ban oversized vehicles or severly restrict their times.

That way there would be no need of a range and you would have better trafic flow.

or just require people to turn right out of the parking area.

So many better solutions then closing it and/or restricting permits. Yes, you make sense. But good sense, well, lets not go there. It appears that Zion Park is in search of a justification to a predetermined solution to a non-problem. Reminds me of the DUI check points. :roll:

[Skylinerider]

:blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: One more thing in the name of "safety". That's how everyone is gonna be shut out of our public lands. If it's not safe to the average idiot, nobody is going there.

[Scott Card]

Letters of complaint can be directed to:

Superintendent
Zion National Park
Springdale UT 84767

please send a copy to:

Representative Jim Matheson
321 North Mall Dr., #E101B
St. George, UT 84790

I suggest 'supporting' efforts to make the area safer for Park Employees and Visitors if the data shows that accidents occur here, but questioning the need for drastic action. AND, stressing that further restricting access to the popular recreational venues Pine Creek and Spry Canyon is unnecessary. Let us compete for parking spaces in a free market of parking spaces!

Tom Letter written to Zion and Rep. Matheson. I will let you know when I receive a response. :frustrated:

[JoeAllen]

While the closure of the parking lot may be an inconvenience, the reality is, we (the canyoneering community) have no say in the matter. There are too few of us, and there is too much disorganization among the few who care to make any difference.

Pine Creek is a fun, short, warm-up for most of us. Toughen up and enjoy the mandatory extended hike that has been created for you. While upper Pine Creek does not contain any rappells that so many canyoneers desperately crave, it is truly a beautiful and scenic section of canyon. Relish in the opportunity that you have to extend your adventure. Life is too short to worry about walking an extra 500 yards.

[ratagonia]

While the closure of the parking lot may be an inconvenience, the reality is, we (the canyoneering community) have no say in the matter. There are too few of us, and there is too much disorganization among the few who care to make any difference.

Pine Creek is a fun, short, warm-up for most of us. Toughen up and enjoy the mandatory extended hike that has been created for you. While upper Pine Creek does not contain any rappells that so many canyoneers desperately crave, it is truly a beautiful and scenic section of canyon. Relish in the opportunity that you have to extend your adventure. Life is too short to worry about walking an extra 500 yards.

Perhaps you did not read the whole press release:



If a permanent closure occurs, backcountry use limits for Pine Creek and Spry Canyon may need to be reduced due to the limited available parking.


The suggested response is to support the Park's goals in creating a safe working environment, but...



I suggest 'supporting' efforts to make the area safer for Park Employees and Visitors if the data shows that accidents occur here, but questioning the need for drastic action. AND, stressing that further restricting access to the popular recreational venues Pine Creek and Spry Canyon is unnecessary. Let us compete for parking spaces in a free market of parking spaces!


Tom :moses:

[Iceaxe]

Yeah.... I don't know of any canyoneers who really care one way or the other about walking the extra 200-yards..... but reducing the number of Pine Creek permits would really suck.

[JoeAllen]

For the sake of discussion, allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. What is the current daily allotment of permits for Pine Creek? Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe 50 are available every day. How many canyoneers enjoy descending through Pine Creek with 50 other people? I sure don't. Conversely, on how many days in any given year are all 50 permits taken? I don't have an answer, but I would be interested to find out. My guess is that there are more days that have less than 10 people in the canyon than days where 50 people are in it. By restricting access to Pine Creek under the guise of protecting the safety of park visitors and employees, and reducing the number of permits available, the Park is in essence giving us the opportunity to experience Pine Creek in a more quiet, pristine environment.

[Iceaxe]

the Park is in essence giving us the opportunity to experience Pine Creek in a more quiet, pristine environment.

:roflol: :roflol: :roflol:

Quiet and pristine? 50-feet from a major road? :lol8:

You want to improve on quiet and pristine your time would be better spent outlawing horns and Harley's in the tunnel....

Thanks for the troll to brighten my day....
:2thumbs:

[Brian in SLC]

By restricting access to Pine Creek under the guise of protecting the safety of park visitors and employees, and reducing the number of permits available, the Park is in essence giving us the opportunity to experience Pine Creek in a more quiet, pristine environment.

Pristine? The canyon starts and finishes from blacktop, you travel under a well travelled road/bridge to gain the canyon, and, it traverses next to a man-made tunnel. Hardly "pristine".

Although, pretty amazing canyon for where it is...

The nice thing about walking down from further up Pine Creek is that you usually don't get hassled to show a permit for the canyon. Worth it, IMHO.

Would be a bummer to reduce the permits available. Nice to have a back up if any of the longer canyons are booked up, and, crowds on any given weekend are a given.

That small parking lot is pretty worthless. Surprised it's lasted this long.

Cheers,

-Brian in SLC

[ratagonia]

For the sake of discussion, allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. What is the current daily allotment of permits for Pine Creek? Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe 50 are available every day. How many canyoneers enjoy descending through Pine Creek with 50 other people? I sure don't. Conversely, on how many days in any given year are all 50 permits taken? I don't have an answer, but I would be interested to find out. My guess is that there are more days that have less than 10 people in the canyon than days where 50 people are in it. By restricting access to Pine Creek under the guise of protecting the safety of park visitors and employees, and reducing the number of permits available, the Park is in essence giving us the opportunity to experience Pine Creek in a more quiet, pristine environment.

The 50 people do not show up at the same time. Even on "days of 50", a more solitudinous experience can be found by starting early or late. Since the canyon takes most parties 2-4 hours to traverse, even on a 'full' day, the saavy canyoneer can have the canyon to themself if they wish.

One of the goals of the Backcountry Plan is to provide "a variety of experiences". Currently, all but a few Zion Canyons are managed to provide a "minimum of social encounters" (as you suggest could be appropriate for Pine Creek). It seems more appropriate to the stated goals to allow some canyons to get somewhat crowded on "full days", and certainly Pine Creek (next to and under the road, easy access, few technical challenges, short, wonderful, resistant to erosion) would be the first pick of canyons to allow to get somewhat crowded at times.

If people are really interested in a zero-social-encounter experience, there are plenty of really good canyons in Zion that will meet your needs. Right Fork, Corral Hollow, SE Fork of Beartrap, Observation Point Canyon, Lodge Cyn, Grotto Canyon, Spearhead Cyn, Telephone Cyn, Boundary, Icebox etc. etc. etc. Please do not insist that ALL the canyons in Zion should be managed for this narrow interest.

Tom :moses:

[Scott Card]

Conversely, on how many days in any given year are all 50 permits taken? I don't have an answer, but I would be interested to find out. . In reality, the only days that matter are the days you have available to go. Now statistically speaking, it is different but to the canyoneer, it is when you can go that matters. Last Tuesday, the online permits were all taken. I had to go and add to my permit for a couple of extra guys that were arriving late. That was a not an easy process.

[JoeAllen]

"More quiet and pristine." 'More' being the critical term. I agree, I do not go down Pine Creek for the solitude nor the peace and quiet. However, I do believe limiting the people in Pine Creek will enhance the experience.

Maybe the park should put signs in the tunnel that say: 'please do not honk your horn, there are people in the canyon below you.'

Better yet, 'In order to protect sensitive plant and animal species, do not honk your horn.' You can do anything in the name of protecting a peregrine.

[Skylinerider]

"More quiet and pristine." 'More' being the critical term. I agree, I do not go down Pine Creek for the solitude nor the peace and quiet. However, I do believe limiting the people in Pine Creek will enhance the experience.

Maybe the park should put signs in the tunnel that say: 'please do not honk your horn, there are people in the canyon below you.'

Better yet, 'In order to protect sensitive plant and animal species, do not honk your horn.' You can do anything in the name of protecting a peregrine.

You sure seem annoyed with anybody who wants to go to Zion. Maybe you need a new destination. Zion is one of the busiest parks in the state, if you want solitude and quiet, you probably should find another place.

[ratagonia]

I do believe limiting the people in Pine Creek will enhance the experience.


For the few people who draw the permit, perhaps.

But seriously, looking for a wilderness experience in Pine Creek is like a fish riding a bicycle... er, something...

T :moses:

[JoeAllen]

I am not seeking a wilderness experience in Pine Creek. The fact is, I have avoided it because of the crowds, noise, and pollution. It is a beautiful canyon and I have enjoyed it many times in the past. Limiting the number of people in the canyon would reduce the crowds. If the Park is going to eliminate the parking lot, then it makes sense that they would reduce the number of permits they issue. The other option is to create a new, larger parking lot, which is logistically unrealistic, or provide a shuttle through the tunnel. Parking is a problem. If they opened up the highway for anyone to park anywhere then the canyon could be destroyed. Social trails would appear all over the place.

Debating the topic in this format is a moot point. The Park is closing the parking lot. The result of their study will determine if the lot will close permanently. The issue of reducing permit numbers will then be analysed. At that point there may be something to get worked up over. In the mean time, write the superintendant and your congressman. I, myself, am indifferent to the outcome.

[Iceaxe]

Limiting the number of people in the canyon would reduce the crowds.

My guess is it will just push the "crowd" into anther area/canyon.....

kinda like cops and drug dealers..... 5-0 push da hoppers off one corner an' dey just move ta anther.... an' da real problem never gets solved......


When its my turn to be God I'll run a shuttle bus to the east entrance and back every 30 minutes.... that should do more to help with "quiet and pristine" than all the permits, parking lot removals and DUI check points combined......

:cool2:

[oval]

I would take a trade...

...trade 20 slots from Pine Creek to 5 more in Mystery per day, plus 5 more in Imlay, plus 5 more in X,Y,Z... you get the idea. Why is Pine Creek so stacked, and yet the others are capped out at 12 or less? Makes no sense to me...

Peter

[Scott Card]

Why is Pine Creek so stacked, and yet the others are capped out at 12 or less? Makes no sense to me...

PeterYou have correctly identified the eighth mystery of the world, a wonder of the universe, a trick that defies reason and logic.... :frustrated:

[ratagonia]

Why is Pine Creek so stacked, and yet the others are capped out at 12 or less? Makes no sense to me...

Peter

The permit system is built on roughly freezing the canyon use levels at that when they initially did the study, in 1999. At that time, few of the canyons saw much action, outside of Pine Creek, Orderville, The Narrows and The Subway - thus those canyons are in the "Primitive Zone", while almost all other canyons are in the "Pristine Zone".

If you're REALLY interested, a LOT of information is available here:

http://canyoneeringusa.com/zcc/process.htm

and hunt around from there.

Tom :moses:

[oval]

Thanks Tom, I look at your site (and yours too, mr ICEAXED!) frequently but have never seen that page.

This is one of my beefs with the national parks in general, I suppose. I personally like hiking off trail, and like camping/bivying in random spots when on a climbing/canyoning excursion. What I've never actually seen in print is anything that directly prohibits such a thing... the day that I see "you are prohibited by law to go off-trail anywhere in the NP" is the day I give up on the NPs completely for my wilderness experience.

Anyhow, I still have a couple more of those pages to read, but thanks for that info, very good.

ps- the un-named canyons that aren't on the Zion NP website for reservations... is it required that you get a permit for them? I've never seen anything that actually says as much, though I'm guessing for anything technical they'd want you to get a permit.

[ratagonia]

ps- the un-named canyons that aren't on the Zion NP website for reservations... is it required that you get a permit for them? I've never seen anything that actually says as much, though I'm guessing for anything technical they'd want you to get a permit.

The "Law" is the Superintendent's Compendium

http://preview.tinyurl.com/mtkh5o (pdf)

which says:

[quote=Superintendent's Compendium]

(a)(2)(i) A permit is required for the following activities:
- Any through day hike of any tributary of the North Fork of the Virgin River, regardless of direction of travel.
- Any hike along any portion of the Subway route from the Northgate Peaks Trail to the Left Fork Trailhead, regardless of direction of travel, to include all portions of the Left Fork of North Creek drainage between Russell Gulch and the Left Fork Trailhead exit trail.
- Any hike within any canyon in the park which normally involves the use of rope, webbing, or other device for descent or ascent.
- All travel above the Moki Steps in Orderville Canyon.
- All travel above Big Spring in the North Fork of the Virgin River.

Justification: Due to the unique and often-times pristine quality of Zion

[bruce from bryce]

Off trail hiking is not necessarily prohibited, but most often is not allowed in areas of high use trails. An example is in the main ampitheater at Bryce where if you were to go off trail you would be putting yourself at risk. Plus it would create more social trails and corner cutting. Any where else in Bryce off trail hiking is discouraged but not specifically prohibited.

And, I would suggest that the same also goes for Zion, and for the same reasons.

bruce from bryce

[trackrunner]

Limiting the number of people in the canyon would reduce the crowds.

IMHO if you really want to reduce crowds & improve saftey: close the canyon overlook trail. Most people trying to park in the area are hiking that trail. An optional east side shuttle would reduce the crowding of traffic since parking is so limited on the entire east side. Ban overside vehichles using the tunnel the reason for the traffic jams (not hikers or canyoneers).

Epic accidents each of the first two or three days of this new policy because of the parking spaces may get things reversed. Remember the epic kayaking this spring got the narrows closed.

Wonder if it's closed now if someone can get a protest permit for the lot. Not that I'm motivated to apply just curious what uses there are for the lot.

:cool2:

[Iceaxe]

This is one of my beefs with the national parks in general, I suppose. I personally like hiking off trail, and like camping/bivying in random spots when on a climbing/canyoning excursion.

I agree with you on this, which is why I seldom visit Zion any more. While I think the canyons are awesome the Zion power brokers work too hard at making the experience more akin to visiting Disneyland.

Personally I always liked the idea of herding the masses into Pine Creek and Keyhole (if they are going to have quota

[ratagonia]

bump.... :naughty:

[UtahAdventureGuide]

There are 1000's of accidents on I-15 every day because it's 'overcrowded', it's dangerous to the public and the highway patrol. Does that mean they should close it or restrict access? why don't they just build a bigger parking lot? oh, because it's in a National Park and I'm sure the Tree Huggers wouldn't allow it. Screw Zion, there's plenty of parking in the Swell.

[Jaxx]

why not run a shuttle from the VC to the parking lot there. Have the bus back into the parking lot drop people off and then go back down. Stopping traffic would be needed while backing up and getting back into the lane. Problem solved. Where are my millions in grant money to study the effect this would have?

[ratagonia]

For the sake of discussion, allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. What is the current daily allotment of permits for Pine Creek? Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe 50 are available every day. How many canyoneers enjoy descending through Pine Creek with 50 other people? I sure don't. Conversely, on how many days in any given year are all 50 permits taken? I don't have an answer, but I would be interested to find out. My guess is that there are more days that have less than 10 people in the canyon than days where 50 people are in it. By restricting access to Pine Creek under the guise of protecting the safety of park visitors and employees, and reducing the number of permits available, the Park is in essence giving us the opportunity to experience Pine Creek in a more quiet, pristine environment.

One of the objectives of the Backcountry Plan is provide a "variety of recreation opportunities". The park already manages 95% of Zion Canyons with a focus on "very few social encounters". For there to be a "variety of opportunities", there should be a FEW canyons where permits are pretty easy to get, and one would expect social encounters. Pine Creek, Keyhole, Subway (not easy to get) and Orderville are the few technical canyons in this class. If you really want solitude, there are many, many places to get that in Zion - but let's not use the full force of the Federal Gov'mint to add Pine Creek to that list.

As you mention, there are many, many opportunities to experience Pine Creek without crowding. Try off-season, on weekdays, with a bit of an early start or a latish start - all of these strategies generally work if your goal is to have the canyon to yourself.

Tom :moses:

[jiveassmother]

They just extended the closure for further review until Sept 13th. Please call your friends, family, ex-girlfriend (if she's still speaking to you), everyone you can to send in comments so we can let them know how you feel and any other ideas for what they could do. :five:

Superintendent
Zion National Park
Springdale, UT 84767