See this link:

http://news.yahoo.com/yosemite-river-plan-could-limit-visitor-access-150213625.html

Here is an excerpt:

...."The Merced River Plan is a big deal that the public is snoozing through," said Rick Deutsch, who has written a book about the park. "It could radically alter the facilities, parking and recreation at the park."

The end result could do the unthinkable in a place that belongs to the people: set limits on the number visitors allowed in the gates, even as some worry whether the park with a hotel with big city prices has enough access as is for those of moderate means.....
------------------
....Almost certainly the end result will be reduced access to the river. Visitors already are funneled to riverbanks along paths instead of cutting through forests. Kayaking and rafting might be limited for the launching impacts on riverbank erosion. Some picnic areas could be closed or made smaller to reduce the trampling of vegetation. High country camp sites could be made fewer.....
------------------
....Stressing the park further is recent acknowledgement by officials that the hazards of boulders sloughing off the granite icons along the valley's edge are a threat to public safety.....
------------------

Wait. What? They are going to keep us away from falling rocks? OSHA will take over the Valley? Help. We may all be forced to stay on the paths.

They've been talking about limiting visitation for a decade or more. At one time, they were going to remove all buildings from the valley. Then they built more employee housing at Curry Village, so I guess that idea was quashed. Point is, they talk this stuff all the time and nothing ever happens.

While not perfect, I think the Yosemite General Management Plan adopted by the Park Service in 1980 is still the best blueprint for the future of the park. It provided a realistic and balanced vision for the future of the park. Too bad many parts of the plan have not been implemented, or have been ignored during the past 30 years.

In regards to the Merced River, I think one of the major fallacies of the Merced River Plan is classifying the portion of the Merced River that runs through most of Yosemite Valley as a wild and scenic river. It shouldn't be classified as such. The more accurate description of the Merced through most of Yosemite Valley would be as a recreational river. Pretending that it's a wild river even though its course has been altered by manmade levies and other structures (bridges) is ridiculous.

This is not to say that the river and its shoreline through Yosemite Valley could not use some additional safeguards to enhance its ecosystem, but that it's primary a recreational river used for recreational purposes, and while it's scenic, it's no longer should be considered wild in the true sense of the word.

---

"Limit access"? If it takes more than 3 hours to get from Pohono to the Chapel, your access is already limited. How can you get to the river if the road is packed solid with cars? Have you seen what happens when 300 people all want to go swimming at Devil's Elbow? Ever seen 50 cars parked at Swinging Bridge? Well.... if you do, come in on a holiday weekend.

I find it interesting that rather than visitation going through the roof, it has been remarkably stable at about 4 million per year since 1996.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

"I find it interesting that rather than visitation going through the roof, it has been remarkably stable at about 4 million per year since 1996."

The last time that I visited my beloved Yosemite was June, 2004, and I noticed that the carrying capacity of the Valley had been decreased by the closing of parking lots, roadside parking spaces and increasing the width of spaces in the parking lots. I'm glad that I lived and worked in Yosemite in 1969-1972.

Quote
Dearborn
the carrying capacity of the Valley had been decreased by the closing of parking lots

That and screwing up traffic with the Lower Yosemite Falls travesty.

Quote
Frank Furter
I find it interesting that rather than visitation going through the roof, it has been remarkably stable at about 4 million per year since 1996.

Not quite so. Here is the park visitation stats from 1990 to 2010. As you can see park visitation dropped 700,000 below 4 million in 2004, so that is a considerable swing, 20% or so:
2010 3,901,408
2009 3,737,472
2008 3,431,514
2007 3,503,428
2006 3,242,644
2005 3,304,144
2004 3,280,911
2003 3,378,664
2002 3,361,867
2001 3,368,731
2000 3,400,903
1999 3,493,607
1998 3,657,132
1997 3,669,970
1996 4,046,207
1995 3,958,406
1994 3,962,117
1993 3,839,645
1992 3,819,518
1991 3,423,101
1990 3,124,939

Quote
buster
Not quite so. Here is the park visitation stats from 1990 to 2010. As you can see park visitation dropped 700,000 below 4 million in 2004, so that is a considerable swing, 20% or so...

It would be interesting to compare those figures to the price of gas.

Just doing a quick scan, there doesn't see any correlation.
Anyway, here is the data, and the source

Annual Average Domestic Crude Oil Prices
1946-Present
U.S. Average
(in $/bbl.)
Year Nominal Inflation Adjusted
1990 $23.19 $39.80
1991 $20.20 $33.36
1992 $19.25 $30.85
1993 $16.75 $26.09
1994 $15.66 $23.76
1995 $16.75 $24.73
1996 $20.46 $29.32
1997 $18.64 $26.12
1998 $11.91 $16.44
1999 $16.56 $22.30
2000 $27.39 $35.76
2001 $23.00 $29.23
2002 $22.81 $28.50
2003 $27.69 $33.86
2004 $37.66 $44.81
2005 $50.04 $57.57
2006 $58.30 $65.03
2007 $64.20 $69.51
2008 $91.48 $95.25
2009 $53.48 $55.96
2010 $71.21 $73.44

Quote
buster
Just doing a quick scan, there doesn't see any correlation.
Anyway, here is the data,...

Thanks. I'll put those in my spreadsheet program and see what kind of chart I can come up with. Some claim there is a correlation, but I'd like to crunch the numbers myself. They claim that with higher gas prices and less expendable income that people stay closer to home on vacations.

Quote
Dave
"Limit access"? If it takes more than 3 hours to get from Pohono to the Chapel, your access is already limited. How can you get to the river if the road is packed solid with cars? Have you seen what happens when 300 people all want to go swimming at Devil's Elbow? Ever seen 50 cars parked at Swinging Bridge? Well.... if you do, come in on a holiday weekend.

Well, I haven't been on a Holiday weekend in forever. Maybe they can limit access on certain weekends.

Quote
hotrod4x5

Quote
Dave
"Limit access"? If it takes more than 3 hours to get from Pohono to the Chapel, your access is already limited. How can you get to the river if the road is packed solid with cars? Have you seen what happens when 300 people all want to go swimming at Devil's Elbow? Ever seen 50 cars parked at Swinging Bridge? Well.... if you do, come in on a holiday weekend.

Well, I haven't been on a Holiday weekend in forever. Maybe they can limit access on certain weekends.

I don't think it would go by date but by the number of cars in the park. If I remember correctly, last Memorial Day there were 16,000 cars in the park. They tried to set up outside the park parking and then bus in the people for free, but that didn't work. My solution is that after a certain amount of cars are in the park that when a car exits another is let in. That won't work either. That would just cause 10 mile long lines to get in.

How about sending out press releases pleading people NOT to come to the park on a holiday weekend?

Quote
Dave
How about sending out press releases pleading people NOT to come to the park on a holiday weekend?

And telling the OD's they can get a $10 lifetime pass and hence should not come of fee-free days.

This was in The SJ Mercury News.

Something I already knew:

"Despite the park's 1,200 square miles of wilderness, 95 percent of the 4 million visitors each year end up in the one-by-eight-mile stretch of its valley, where senses are overwhelmed by the towering Half Dome and El Capitan granite monoliths, stands of pines and stair-step waterfalls."

---

Quote
chick-on
This was in The SJ Mercury News.

Something I already knew:

"Despite the park's 1,200 square miles of wilderness, 95 percent of the 4 million visitors each year end up in the one-by-eight-mile stretch of its valley, where senses are overwhelmed by the towering Half Dome and El Capitan granite monoliths, stands of pines and stair-step waterfalls."

They have set up "shunts" where visitors were shunted to other parts of the park by closing the Valley to more cars. That helps a little by spreading the traffic out.

Camped in the Valley over the Fourth of July. Park management created a man-made disaster by shutting down traffic lanes to keep things open for transit and park vehicles. Traffic would have flowed fine without the lane closure, but my passengers got to camp on foot long before I could get my vehicle there. The experience smacked of operant conditioning to make us all fear getting back on the road for the rest of the weekend.

Quote
Hiker Dad
Camped in the Valley over the Fourth of July. Park management created a man-made disaster by shutting down traffic lanes to keep things open for transit and park vehicles. Traffic would have flowed fine without the lane closure, but my passengers got to camp on foot long before I could get my vehicle there. The experience smacked of operant conditioning to make us all fear getting back on the road for the rest of the weekend.

I assure you that was not any part of their thought process. They are trying different ways of handling the traffic so that an ambulance and other emergency vehicles, not just park vehicles or buses, can get from one end of the Valley to the other. If someone in Curry had a medical emergency it could take hours for an ambulance from El Portal to get there. The one at the SAR cache is not always available. It could go up North Side Drive the wrong way, but that is not a very safe thing to do.

They're trying and things don't always go the way they planned.

Quote
Dave

Quote
Hiker Dad
Camped in the Valley over the Fourth of July. Park management created a man-made disaster by shutting down traffic lanes to keep things open for transit and park vehicles. Traffic would have flowed fine without the lane closure, but my passengers got to camp on foot long before I could get my vehicle there. The experience smacked of operant conditioning to make us all fear getting back on the road for the rest of the weekend.

I assure you that was not any part of their thought process. They are trying different ways of handling the traffic so that an ambulance and other emergency vehicles, not just park vehicles or buses, can get from one end of the Valley to the other. If someone in Curry had a medical emergency it could take hours for an ambulance from El Portal to get there. The one at the SAR cache is not always available. It could go up North Side Drive the wrong way, but that is not a very safe thing to do.

They're trying and things don't always go the way they planned.

I would agree with Dave there. Once there are so many cars in the valley there is very little you can do to alleviate congestion, there is a tipping point. In my view, one of the biggest problems facing smooth traffic flow in the valley is the lower yosemite falls crossing, as eeek pointed out as well. All the traffic backs up from there. On summer days it is backed up to Curry Village almost everyday, with weekends and holidays being worse. Though this year was especially bad. I believe the valley set new records for cars for 4 or 5 consecutive weekends starting in mid-June. Day-use parking was filling up by noon during the week in June. It was very busy. And this problem goes way back, see this quote: "[This] summer... has clearly demonstrated that parking is one of the most urgent, pressing problems of the entire Yosemite Valley." This is from Don Tresidder (Curry Co. president) in 1927.

Quote
buster
I would agree with Dave there. Once there are so many cars in the valley there is very little you can do to alleviate congestion, there is a tipping point. In my view, one of the biggest problems facing smooth traffic flow in the valley is the lower yosemite falls crossing, as eeek pointed out as well. All the traffic backs up from there. On summer days it is backed up to Curry Village almost everyday, with weekends and holidays being worse. Though this year was especially bad. I believe the valley set new records for cars for 4 or 5 consecutive weekends starting in mid-June. Day-use parking was filling up by noon during the week in June. It was very busy. And this problem goes way back, see this quote: "[This] summer... has clearly demonstrated that parking is one of the most urgent, pressing problems of the entire Yosemite Valley." This is from Don Tresidder (Curry Co. president) in 1927.

That reminds me of that old Joni Mitchel song:

They took all the trees, and put em in a tree museum
And they charged the people a dollar and a half to see them
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you got till it's gone
They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot

Quote
buster

In my view, one of the biggest problems facing smooth traffic flow in the valley is the lower yosemite falls crossing, as eeek pointed out as well. All the traffic backs up from there. On summer days it is backed up to Curry Village almost everyday, with weekends and holidays being worse. Though this year was especially bad.

One thing the Park Service could do, and it was suggested by the Park's staff in the mid 1990's before being vetoed by the park's Superintendent, would be to install a temporary (moveable) traffic signals both at the Yosemite Lodge - Northside Drive intersection and also at the intersection of Northside Drive and Village Drive (by the Day Use Parking Lot entrance) during the peak visitation summer months. The would greatly reduce (but not eliminate) the congestion caused by those two intersections.

An other measure that could be tried is to make Northside Drive a two lane one-way road (during the summer months) staring at its junction with Southside Drive near Curry Village. (Yes, this would result in all vehicle traffic (including the Valley Shuttle buses) in having to loop over the El Cap Bridge to head back eastbound but it would also greatly relieve the traffic congestion especially in conjunction with the use of the temporary traffic signals.

---

Quote
plawrence
One thing the Park Service could do, and it was suggested by the Park's staff in the mid 1990's before being vetoed by the park's Superintendent, would be to install a temporary (moveable) traffic signals both at the Yosemite Lodge - Northside Drive intersection and also at the intersection of Northside Drive and Village Drive (by the Day Use Parking Lot entrance) during the peak visitation summer months. The would greatly reduce (but not eliminate) the congestion caused by those two intersections.

That would also save a bunch of money I would think, not having to pay the 2 or 3 people that just stand there and direct traffic & people. It would be annoying to have a stoplight in the middle of a national park and the valley, though the current semi-permanent gridlock is not attractive either.

Either way that idea is in the Merced River Plan that is open for comments now. You can check out the planning workbook at Merced Wild and Scenic River Planning Workbook (5.8 MB pdf) and all the river plan documents at Merced River Plan Docs It also addresses the Camp 6 intersection congestion and the valley plan in general. I would encourage you, and everyone, to share their thoughts on the plan.

I copied the relevant section from the workbook for the lower falls intersection. It's on page 18, if you want to find it yourself.

Land Uses and Associated Developments

20 Yosemite Lodge: Intersection Congestion

Throughout the peak summer season, significant
delays in outbound traffic flow are experienced at the
pedestrian crossing from Yosemite Lodge to Lower
Yosemite Falls.

Management Options:

20A: Relocate lodge entrance and replace with
pedestrian promenade and underpass for pedestrian
access to Lower Yosemite Falls.

20B: Implement an electronically controlled
intersection for both vehicles and pedestrians.

20C: Construct a pedestrian overpass as primary
road crossing. Provide for accessibility requirements
by maintaining a secondary crossing at surface level.

20D: Your Ideas?

20C and ELIMINATE roadside parking along Lower Yosemite Falls on certain days.
It only takes a few clowns to REALLY back things up.
No stopping/standing - or get a ticket. Please drive thru.

Note that bus drivers in the valley are not allowed to use their horns. Not matter how
stupidly someone may cut them off or whatnot.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2011 03:52PM by chick-on.

Quote
chick-on
20C and ELIMINATE roadside parking along Lower Yosemite Falls on certain days.
It only takes a few clowns to REALLY back things up.

I've had shuttle bus drivers be those clowns a few times.

Quote
Dave
They're trying and things don't always go the way they planned.

They have created a few choke points. Those should be the focus of their efforts.

Quote
eeek
They have created a few choke points. Those should be the focus of their efforts.

I have one suggestion: Take out that picnic area at Lower Falls and put in a parking lot.

Quote
Dave
I have one suggestion: Take out that picnic area at Lower Falls and put in a parking lot.

Like the one they removed without thinking about the consequences?

Quote
eeek

Quote
Dave
I have one suggestion: Take out that picnic area at Lower Falls and put in a parking lot.

Like the one they removed without thinking about the consequences?

Exactly! I told them not to, but they never listen to me.

What about the fancy mansion sized bathroom? How could one go without it there?

Though I find it interesting that as people are advocating having a parking lot there others are advocating to remove roadside parking 200 yards down the road as it causes traffic back-ups.

Quote
buster
Though I find it interesting that as people are advocating having a parking lot there others are advocating to remove roadside parking 200 yards down the road as it causes traffic back-ups.

The roadside parking wasn't so heavily used before they tore out the Lower Yosemite Falls parking lot. Now it's packed and a problem.

Even when the Yosemite Falls parking lot still existed, the roadside parking was heavily used during the spring and summer weekends. And congestions still existed on Northside Drive. It just wasn't as bad as it is now.

One way they (DNC and the Park Service) could greatly reduce the congesting at the crosswalk next to Yosemite Lodge would be for them to strictly restrict parking at the Yosemite Lodge parking lots during daytime hours to registered Lodge guests only. All Lodge guests already get a parking permit to place inside their car while staying at the Lodge, so it wouldn't be too difficult to enforce the parking restriction. Doing so would greatly ease the backup by greatly reducing the number of pedestrians using that crosswalk during the day.

---

Quote
plawrence
Even when the Yosemite Falls parking lot still existed, the roadside parking was heavily used during the spring and summer weekends. And congestions still existed on Northside Drive. It just wasn't as bad as it is now.

One way they (DNC and the Park Service) could greatly reduce the congesting at the crosswalk next to Yosemite Lodge would be for them to strictly restrict parking at the Yosemite Lodge parking lots during daytime hours to registered Lodge guests only. All Lodge guests already get a parking permit to place inside their car while staying at the Lodge, so it wouldn't be too difficult to enforce the parking restriction. Doing so would greatly ease the backup by greatly reducing the number of pedestrians using that crosswalk during the day.

---

It seems to me that most of those peds are staying at the Lodge. I rarely visit on weekends, so I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the parking lots aren't full by the Lodge, and I thought the parking pass was required, day or night.

Quote
hotrod4x5

Quote
plawrence
Even when the Yosemite Falls parking lot still existed, the roadside parking was heavily used during the spring and summer weekends. And congestions still existed on Northside Drive. It just wasn't as bad as it is now.

One way they (DNC and the Park Service) could greatly reduce the congesting at the crosswalk next to Yosemite Lodge would be for them to strictly restrict parking at the Yosemite Lodge parking lots during daytime hours to registered Lodge guests only. All Lodge guests already get a parking permit to place inside their car while staying at the Lodge, so it wouldn't be too difficult to enforce the parking restriction. Doing so would greatly ease the backup by greatly reducing the number of pedestrians using that crosswalk during the day.

---

It seems to me that most of those peds are staying at the Lodge. I rarely visit on weekends, so I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the parking lots aren't full by the Lodge, and I thought the parking pass was required, day or night.

Not so. First, the lot directly across the highway from the lower falls is not included in that ban. Second, I have been going there for many, many years, and I have never seen any enforcement of the parking ban at the lodge, except for the small lot across from the lobby that has been turned over to buses during the day, and the north side of the west lot, which has been given only to buses all the time. I suppose that it is possible that someone does look at the parking passes when they do their evening inspection through vehicle windows for visible food. But I can assure you that no lodge employee wants the job of trying to police the parking lot. The hostility that you would get from both guests who forget to post their passes, and from the interlopers, is more than any kid wants to experience. Has anyone on this forum ever seen anyone ticketed or towed at the lodge?

As a lodge guest, I have more than once had to poach a place in the far western lot, which is beyond the employee rec building and beyond the path to Swinging Bridge, because every other space was full. This unpaved far lot is also posted as being only for buses and service vehicles, but we haven't been bothered there.

I used to donate to the Yosemite Fund, but I quit in disgust after seeing what their Lower Falls project did to parking for the lodge guests. In my experience, the bus lots sit half empty, while lodge guests are forced far afield looking for parking...

Agreed. The Yosemite Lodge parking gets filled up with day use park visitors, especially on weekends. Most parking lots at loding establishments seat nearly deserted between check-out and check-in times of the property. Not the Yosemite Lodge. After 11:00 AM, the Lodge parking lot tends to fill up with day use visitors who usually immediately head straight to the Lower Yosemite Falls. Having stayed at the Lodge often, I've seen this phenomenon occur countless of times.

---

Quote
plawrence
Agreed. The Yosemite Lodge parking gets filled up with day use park visitors, especially on weekends. Most parking lots at loding establishments seat nearly deserted between check-out and check-in times of the property. Not the Yosemite Lodge. After 11:00 AM, the Lodge parking lot tends to fill up with day use visitors who usually immediately head straight to the Lower Yosemite Falls. Having stayed at the Lodge often, I've seen this phenomenon occur countless of times.

---

We almost always stay at the Lodge and have experienced this on every stay. We usually park the car and use other methods of going places but there are some times that we want to use the car and have a problem getting parking when we get back. We often have to wait until the stores and restaurants close and the day use people leave to find one. We have been known to park either at Curry or the Big Store and go back later for the car. Having a pass for the car does nothing because they do not enforce it. One time, in the afternoon, we counted the cars with or without passes while walking back to our room and found that 75% (husband and son are math fanatics) of the cars did not have passes. With the removal of the cabins after the flood, there would have been plenty of parking but now they use one complete lot and part of another one for buses during the day. It is a bit maddening to pay almost $250/night and not be able to park when you want to.

It seems odd to me that to relieve congestion at a choke point, one would want to add to it by expanding the intersection by having cars going in & out a parking lot. Plus, I imagine the parking lot would be relatively small, so there wouldn't be enough parking available for all the visitors wanting to go there, leading to a queuing of cars, which would slow traffic further.

Quote
Dave

Quote
eeek
They have created a few choke points. Those should be the focus of their efforts.

I have one suggestion: Take out that picnic area at Lower Falls and put in a parking lot.

lol There WAS a lot there!

Quote
Dave

Quote
eeek
They have created a few choke points. Those should be the focus of their efforts.

I have one suggestion: Take out that picnic area at Lower Falls and put in a parking lot.

Better yet, since it seems the Yosemite Conservancy has a boat load of money that it doesn't quite know where to spend it all and that it was a key contributor of the ill-advised plan to remove the Yosemite Falls parking lot, they can make amends for the past sins by building a a multi-level UNDERGROUND parking garage underneath the Lower Yosemite Falls picnic area. Not only would it help reduce the congestion caused by pedestrians crossing Northside Drive at that junction, but it would make a major dent in Yosemite Valley's parking space shortage!

---

When we were there Memorial Day Weekend they closed one lane down starting just east of the Chapel and also you could not turn onto Sentinel Bridge. What really was strange was the road sign kept flashing "road closed ahead for rafting." Not quite sure what they meant by that.

Quote
parklover
When we were there Memorial Day Weekend they closed one lane down starting just east of the Chapel and also you could not turn onto Sentinel Bridge. What really was strange was the road sign kept flashing "road closed ahead for rafting." Not quite sure what they meant by that.

Two different things going on. The river was closed because the water flow was too fast and too cold.

Labor Day they, I'm pretty sure, changed the lane closure back to just after Bridalveil Straight. The entrance stations gave out a special pass for those with reservations so they could use the fast lane. I don't know if it worked, but they are trying to figure out something. I do whatever I can to avoid the park on holiday weekends. Go the week before or the week after. The park is usually empty those days.

Quote
Dave

Quote
parklover
When we were there Memorial Day Weekend they closed one lane down starting just east of the Chapel and also you could not turn onto Sentinel Bridge. What really was strange was the road sign kept flashing "road closed ahead for rafting." Not quite sure what they meant by that.

Two different things going on. The river was closed because the water flow was too fast and too cold.

Unless they were trying to run two messages on the electronic board , it said "road closed ahead for rafting." Not river closed for rafting. That is what made us wonder who typed in the message and did they look at what the sign actually said.

Quote
parklover
Unless they were trying to run two messages on the electronic board , it said "road closed ahead for rafting." Not river closed for rafting.

I saw the same sign. At first I read it as "road closed" but after looking closer I realized it was saying "river closed".

Quote
eeek

Quote
parklover
Unless they were trying to run two messages on the electronic board , it said "road closed ahead for rafting." Not river closed for rafting.

I saw the same sign. At first I read it as "road closed" but after looking closer I realized it was saying "river closed".

Maybe, because they had part of the road closed all of us read road when it was river. In some ways that makes it more confusing because why would they have a big electric sign right before the part of the road was closed that said river closed to rafting? Especially since it was May and the river is never opened for rafting at that time. Ah, another mystery of life.

By the way, has anyone else tried to look at the comment material for the Merced River Plan? The printing is so small on my computer screen that I can hardly read it and it is a lot of pages to print out in color. I think I am going to do the webinar that is on Nov 14.

Quote
parklover
The printing is so small on my computer screen that I can hardly read it

Maybe a ctrl-+ would help?

Quote
parklover
By the way, has anyone else tried to look at the comment material for the Merced River Plan? The printing is so small on my computer screen that I can hardly read it and it is a lot of pages to print out in color. I think I am going to do the webinar that is on Nov 14.

The pdf is sized to be 17 x 11. Printed out it looks big and very nice. A big widescreen monitor helps with that too. It makes looking at the plan a lot more appealing compared to previous plans that looked just like a bound ream of paper and seemed really daunting & boring. Solving one problem creates another. Seems like planning in a nutshell. (But overall I think they are moving in the right direction. Can't be 'perfect' for everyone/thing)

I have a Macbook Pro laptop so the screen is not that big and when I zoom in then I lose part of the page so trying to look at the document is frustrating. The document was designed to print out legal size and we don't have a printer that can do that. I might just email and ask for a hard copy.

I actually like having a hard copy for some of the plans that they put out so I can highlight the areas that I want to comment on. What can I say, I was born before the computer age. Unfortunately every time I get large documents on paper, I think of all of the poor trees that gave their lives.