[HN Gopher] Researchers are studying how to minimize human impac...
___________________________________________________________________
Researchers are studying how to minimize human impact on public
lands
Author : droptext
Score : 61 points
Date : 2025-04-29 19:45 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (undark.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (undark.org)
| xtiansimon wrote:
| > "Calls for such research became louder in the 2000s. As
| visitation to national parks and forests increased, and climate
| change and human development put more pressure on public lands,
| the need for evidence-based approaches to human impacts became
| stark [...] In 2009, the director of the National Park Service
| hired its first official science adviser."
|
| Sounds like necessary work-- creative and effective management. I
| dont envy the choices.
|
| I live now in NY we have the privilege of wilderness dispersed
| camping. In some of those areas you will find designated
| campsites.
|
| I planned and took a camping trip to PA and they don't have
| wilderness camping. Everything is designated AND they require
| reservation.
|
| Some of the areas I go to in NY have these old outhouses. Kinda
| sketchy. There are some areas where the use pressure is high, and
| they don't even have the sketchy outhouses. There you may find
| areas 100 feet from designated campsite a surrounded by a sea of
| toilet paper tufts.
|
| In PA, when you reserve your spot, the reservation system directs
| you to odd or even numbered sites to reduce pressure and let the
| ecosystem recover. And the outhouse I found on my trip was
| literally a brick s#!thouse.
|
| I think I can say peeps in PA have upped their game.
|
| While I like the opportunity to do wilderness camping, of what
| I've seen in NY, unmanaged sites suck.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| You can do dispersed camping in the allegheny national forest
| in PA.
| WillAdams wrote:
| Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints.
|
| Pack it in, pack it out.
| _fat_santa wrote:
| I live in CO and we have been to our fair share of national parks
| and other outdoor spots in the past few years and one of the
| things I now blame for overcrowding is: social media.
|
| Much in the same way that you can have 100 content creators
| producing similar content but only 3 out of that group go viral.
| I've seen instances where certain spots will go viral on social
| media and garner way too much attention while very similar places
| largely go unnoticed.
|
| A great example of this is about a year ago we were in Moab and
| visited both Arches and Canyonlands National Parks. Arches is
| arguably the prettier park but it's also much more "viral" than
| Canyonlands. When we went into Arches it was so crowded and we
| needed a "timed entry" ticket.
|
| Contrast this with Canyonlands where we felt like the only ones
| there, no timed entry and we saw maybe a handful of other folks
| at the park. This mind you is one day after Arches and these
| parks are maybe 45min apart.
|
| Now we have an "anti-social rule". Basically if we want to go
| somewhere we first check if that place is "viral" and avoid it if
| there's loads of buzz on social media about it.
| jimlawruk wrote:
| This is where locals have an advantage. My friend lives in CO
| and knows a bunch of fantastic hikes that maybe are not in a NP
| or that tourists don't know about yet.
| _fat_santa wrote:
| TBH there's not that much of an advantage over someone just
| doing their homework before a trip. For things like hiking
| trips I highly recommend going on AllTrails and look at
| places there, you can find tons of awesome spots on there.
| motohagiography wrote:
| I live next to a large park that requires a nominally priced
| parking pass to enter ($7) with an online portal, and it keeps
| the numbers somewhat managed, but it creates an overflow of
| people who just park on the road instead. If there are no
| attendants for crowd control, you get mobs. My area is now a
| dense forest of no-parking signs and with lists of things not to
| do. loitering isn't outdoorsy behavior, and what's acceptable
| outdoorsiness is a sensitive topic.
|
| the crux of it is a class and culture issue in how people use
| parks and nature. where previously it was hikers and cyclists,
| people who actually _moved_, many people today just want a place
| to sit in their cars or have tailgate parties, often on any given
| roadside. they're looking for social and family gathering spaces
| that are cheap or free, and nature is incidental and not primary
| for that.
|
| the article concludes with:
|
| > Fees for permits are frowned upon all around. The idea is to
| give recreation managers enough analysis to make informed
| decisions.
|
| This is naive to me. Most of our parks and outdoors culture is
| based on assumptions about population, accessibility, culture,
| and demand that just aren't true anymore. What's more likely is
| we will need to adopt more semi-private policies that resemble
| tourist nature preserves elsewhere in the world.
| josefresco wrote:
| That photo of "Bison crossing the road in Yellowstone National
| Park" triggers me. When I visited there was a family of bison
| crossing the road, and the young bison became separated from
| parents. I stopped my truck to give them space, but people behind
| me kept racing around and past me oblivious or uncaring. Park
| Rangers were were nowhere close, I can only assume (hope?) it's a
| frequent occurrence given the traffic but overall it was fairly
| traumatic.
| charlescearl wrote:
| Land back
|
| https://www.therednation.org/10-point-program/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-30 23:01 UTC)