But is it a mistake to place the "blame" on the likes of Ansel Adams, considering that as far back as 1872, Yellowstone, the first USA National Park, was conceived as "a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people." (see "The First National Park Emerges" here: https://www.nps.gov/articles/npshistory-origins.htm).
Contrast this with the Russian concept of the Zapovednik, which at least in theory, were not conceived as leisure areas, and in fact, access by the public is restricted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapovednik
But in any event, Yosemite Valley is but a small part of Yosemite National Park, with much of the high country remaining inaccessible to the public for much of the year due to heavy snow.
That would be somewhere I'd love to go if I had a time machine- pop back to the Yucatan in 1000 AD at the height of the Maya civilization to see what it actually looked like.
Depending on how you arrive, you could become one of their deities.
That would be somewhere I'd love to go if I had a time machine- pop back to the Yucatan in 1000 AD at the height of the Maya civilization to see what it actually looked like.
That would be somewhere I'd love to go if I had a time machine- pop back to the Yucatan in 1000 AD at the height of the Maya civilization to see what it actually looked like.
Alan - If too much area is made accessible to the general public and all the amenities it expects, you essential destroy it. That's why the second great wave of conservation occurred, the Wilderness Act movement. But many places are de facto protected by the sheer ruggedness of the terrain. People who needed to get in have done it for thousands of years. Yosemite Valley is somewhat different because it's only one of the only two deep glacial valleys in the Sierra Nevada realistically accessible by road or prior wagon path. My babysitter as an infant, who was 95 at the time, was allegedly the first white woman (actually, little girl) to ever enter Yosemite Valley. But not long thereafter it was a mauled mess with a big hotel, lumber mill (where John Muir once worked, cattle herds in the meadows to feed all the tourists, etc). Today it's basically a city of 30,000 on many summer days. Even in my youth we called it "Curry National Park" due to all the commercialism from the Curry Company. That's been dialed back somewhat, thank goodness.
But deeper back in there are areas you can walk for a week with high odds of not seeing anyone else. I've done it. And to say it's all been photographed - utter hogwash. I've accidentally stumbled onto the exact spots in both Yos backcountry as Sequoia NP as certain famous AA images, yet aimed my camera at something entirely different that I found much more compellling to my own manner of looking at things. And even in Yos Valley itself, where I rarely take pictures, every single one of them I've printed doesn't duplicate anyone else's pictures, no matter how many millions of times some kind of camera has been aimed at the same nominal feature. If fact, I've even got shots right from the road higher up of splendid rock formations and actual peaks that I've never seen another rendition of, unless for sake of a climbing diagram with dotted lines all over it.
Then you get down into King Canyon NP, which AA was quite involved with getting set aside, and you've got major areas not only roadless, but trail-less. Some really rugged country, which I've personally spent far more time in than in Yosemite NP. And despite having taken literally hundreds of backpacking trips in the Sierra, I'd probably need another 8 lifetimes to see a token amount of all of it.
People need the ability to actually discover things for themselves. But 99 % percent of them just want to check off their list of postcard "must see" stereotypes. Just a few weeks ago, in fact, briefly passing through Yos Valley during perhaps its last of the classic snowstorm of the season, and with especially abundant waterfalls, I saw people going to the Bridalveil Falls viewpoint turnout, taking Selfies of themselves in front of the sign, and not even bothering to look at the Fall itself ! - that's their perfect right, but leaves me scratching my head why even bothering taking the trip.
Otherwise, like I already tried to explain, much of that country remains defacto wilderness by its very nature. At my former property, before I retired, I could simply cross the road and start walking, and enter a hundred square miles so rugged that the only people who have ever been deep within it, besides myself, were three of my early climbing companions and one ancient Indian. But that doesn't necessarily protect it. Another damn dam was proposed which would have ruined most of it, and actually have diminished overall water supply and hydro power. But the sheer insane cost of another mega-project like that is what really stopped the idea. And now, finally, a third category of protection is entering the equation, with the Nature Conservancy involved in the protection of rare or special biota ecosystems in the area; and in some cases (not all) with a provision for limited supervised public access. But one still has to be in serious shape.
And back to Yosemite Valley - it was already made famous by great photographers well before Ansel Adams, especially Carleton Watkins, Edward Muybridge, and Fiske. But an Army Corps had to be brought in to protect the high meadow from sheep overgrazing. Sometimes sheepherders got to such remote places, by such difficult routes, that nobody today even thinks about trying it themselves with all their modern mountain gear.
What is the point of having a beautiful National Park and turning it into a parking lot?What's the point of having a beautiful park and letting no one in to commune with nature at all? The trick is to have a balance of interests in these things.
What is the point of having a beautiful National Park and turning it into a parking lot?
What is the point of having a beautiful National Park and turning it into a parking lot?
---
Yes, one can easily escape the crowds by walking a few miles from the main attractions, but first one must find a place to park ones car. Last time I visited Yellowstone, there were literally no parking spaces available in any of the 4 or 5 parking lots we visited. We left the park without getting out of our car. More parking lots is not the answer, because more tourists will fill them up as fast as they can be built.
I think Henry Ford and Dwight Eisenhower are more to blame for overcrowding in America's national parks than Ansel Adams. If the Eisenhower administration had devoted the same resources to building a national rail transportation system as was spent building the interstate highway system, America would need far fewer parking lots.
More recently, many national parks are starting to limit the number of cars into some of the most crowded parks, bringing visitors in by shuttle instead. This system still requires a giant parking lot be built somewhere near the park, but at least it can be located farther away from the wilderness. It would be better if I could leave my car in my driveway back home and take a train to the park, but except for a few areas, most of America is not accessible by passenger train.
Don't get me wrong, I like to drive. We just got back from a 10-day road trip to Santa Fe NM, and we had a great time. But if we would have had the option to take a passenger train from my home town to Santa Fe, we would have done that instead.
Don - Yosemite Valley isn't all that big compared to the overall Park area. But most of that is roadless, and should be. They can barely keep open what they do have paved higher than the Valley.
Tioga Pass and Glacier Point aren't even open yet this year. But the Valley is where most of the visitors and nearly all the tour buses go. So yeah, it has a number of big parking lots, and they get even more crowded at times than shopping mall lots.
Go there off peak season. Same with Zion, Yellowstone. But in ALL these areas there are PLENTY of uncrowded alternatives to the stereotypical NP destinations. What I tell folks is to collect all the postcards they can, look at all the must-see RV videos on the web, and all the "scenic turnout" locations, clearly identify those - and then when you get near to any of them, head exactly the opposite direction! It always works for me.
Timing is everything. Even the summit of Haleakala turns into a tour bus zone by late morning. Last time we were there, we were just about to leave when the first two buses arrived. A lot of Japanese twenty-somethings piled out. Most of them just stood outside the bus flirting. Some went to the restroom. Some took selfies in front of a sign. Only two walked to the nearby guard rail and actually looked at the scene, which really is remarkable and highly photogenic (but terribly windy at times too).
And anything less than a few miles from the road is unphotographable with an 8X10 if you want peace of mind free from traffic noise.
As far as AA's mule train days, that custom was still in effect in my younger years, and we locals, especially the real cowboys who appreciated the quiet of the mountains, cursed those long S.C. stock convoys, and all the people and portable facilities they hauled into the backcountry, as if a military expedition. Litter everywhere, horse races in the meadows, skits and theater with seating, snack dispensaries, my gosh. The new version of "hoofed locusts". But eventually the double standard was erased, and now the Wilderness Areas limit the impact of horses and forbid any large groups. A sad exception was these past few years during the covid crisis, when big illegal outdoor "raves" occurred at a certain well-known high altitude lake, since Rangers were so thinned-out at the time. But it backfired, because lots of those rule-breakers got caught in terrible forest fire smoke while still back in there, right when they were darn few people to help rescue them.
What is the point of having a beautiful National Park and turning it into a parking lot?
---
Yes, one can easily escape the crowds by walking a few miles from the main attractions, but first one must find a place to park ones car. Last time I visited Yellowstone, there were literally no parking spaces available in any of the 4 or 5 parking lots we visited. We left the park without getting out of our car. More parking lots is not the answer, because more tourists will fill them up as fast as they can be built.
I think Henry Ford and Dwight Eisenhower are more to blame for overcrowding in America's national parks than Ansel Adams. If the Eisenhower administration had devoted the same resources to building a national rail transportation system as was spent building the interstate highway system, America would need far fewer parking lots.
More recently, many national parks are starting to limit the number of cars into some of the most crowded parks, bringing visitors in by shuttle instead. This system still requires a giant parking lot be built somewhere near the park, but at least it can be located farther away from the wilderness. It would be better if I could leave my car in my driveway back home and take a train to the park, but except for a few areas, most of America is not accessible by passenger train.
Don't get me wrong, I like to drive. We just got back from a 10-day road trip to Santa Fe NM, and we had a great time. But if we would have had the option to take a passenger train from my home town to Santa Fe, we would have done that instead.
You are correct that use of cars was more important than anything Adams did in popularizing parks. There had been photos and paintings of the scenic West all along. In the early days, the most convenient and popular way to visit National Parks in the West was by rail. Some of the most popular parks had rail spurs made specifically to go to the park. In the post-war era, the building of interstate highways and the economic boon that increased auto ownership made accessing parks by car more viable.
The railroads would engage artists and photographers to promote tourist destinations on their lines. For example, the Santa Fe line hired painters of the Taos School to make paintings of scenic areas for calendars, posters, and magazine features.
The auto industry also encouraged car vacation travel in various ways. I remember TV commercials where Diana Shore sang, "See the USA in your Chevrolet."
….Remember that people that have only experienced urban areas have no context for what they are seeing, it is like going to an alien planet, they don't know what to make of it….
There is a problem that wild lands are being loved to death. But saying that all those who never want to venture far from roads in parks are insensitive Philistines is a bit unfair and an oversimplification of the problem. It is likely that an appreciation of nature is something that has to be cultivated. Many of the hard-core backpackers, Sierra club members, etc., likely benefitted from growing up in a cultural milieu, including supportive relatives, that valued the natural world. They likely tend to come from higher-income, more highly-educated social classes. Huge numbers of people from urban areas or lower-income communities lack those advantages. Those people subsidize parks and wilderness areas with their taxes. To say they should be happy to know that most of those areas will only be accessed by a few elite hikers does not seem very equitable.
While there was a movement to promote conservation after WWII that Adams participated in, there was also a backlash against that that came to the fore in the era of James Watt, Interior Secretary under Reagan. The conservation movement was accused of being elitist. Watt said if people want to engage with public lands by cars, by snowmobiles or off-road vehicles they should be able to do so. That elitist charge was pretty easy to make.
The only way wild areas will be preserved in the long run is if many people value them. Visiting a park and never going far from a car may seem shallow, but it may at least be a first step. It shows that people have at least a glimmering of interest in natural areas. Remember that people that have only experienced urban areas have no context for what they are seeing, it is like going to an alien planet, they don't know what to make of it. The question is how to develop that interest into a deeper appreciation. As a part of primary education, Oregon has students participate in Outdoor School where they live for a time in natural areas and learn about the natural world. It may be a small step, but it is a step in the right direction.
I am not saying that unlimited car travel to parks is desirable. I am saying that solutions to the problems will require encouraging large numbers of people to value scenic areas. In valuing them they will support ways to experience them that are less destructive.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?