The North Cascades Parkway

     It took nearly 100 years for the North Cascades Highway to finally be completed since the concept of a northern crossing in the state was first considered. The first public crossing of the highway took place in 1968, back when this stretch of road was referred to as the North Cross State Highway. Officially, the highway opened in September of 1972 for two and a half months. And since then, except for the winter of 1976-77, the highway has closed for several months in the winter.
    Relative to its youthful age and remote location, the North Cascades Highway has been a longtime popular traveling destination for tourists and recreation enthusiasts as well as being an important commerce and transportation route for the rural communities on both sides of the mountain range. The highway also continues to grow in popularity as evidenced by the increase in traffic the last past decade. Statistics from the Washington State Department of Transportation from their Cutthroat junction traffic counter show a steady, yearly increase in the average daily number of vehicles from 640 in 2006 to 920 in 2009.
     That may not seem like much traffic, but if you are familiar with the highway, then you know that for a daily average, those numbers, growing as they are, are pretty impressive. The past week, especially given this time of year and weather conditions, there certainly wasn't 920 vehicles coming or going over the North Cascades Highway each day.
     Without a doubt, the bulk of the traffic occurs on weekends from July to September. Before that time, there is some periods of significant travel, but with much of the high country that is accessible from the road still buried under snow, the vast majority of the traffic is just passing through.
     And that is one of the main concerns with plans to expand the park: This could turn the North Cascades Highway into an absolute nightmare to drive, especially on certain weekends. Already annual traffic counts are growing. Creating a national park that encompasses the highway, changing that section into the North Cascades Parkway, as presented in the AALP Economic Study, will suddenly jack the number of vehicles way beyond what is steadily growing now. AALP proponents, concerned as they seem about climate change, laud the increased visitation that will come to the highway with a park expansion. Nearly all of this increased numbers will be by vehicle. Congestion, traffic hazards, noise and air pollution could all become major issues on this scenic highway.
      The North Cascades Highway is an unique and beautiful stretch of road that will have its current qualities diminish if the North Cascades National Park is expanded along its corridor.

What about the NCNP?

     In addition to impacts on the USFS, expanding the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park would also have impacts on the existing NCNP management situation. What kind of impacts could those be?
     Like any other national park, the NCNP has its budgetary deficits, backlogged maintenance issues and other administrative challenges. The park units themselves are quite large, plus there is the additional oversight of the entire NCNP Complex, which includes the Ross Lake and Lake Chelan national recreation areas. Administratively, park infrastructure and personnel are spread out in wide distances: from the way-out-of the-park headquarters in Sedro-Woolley to Glacier, Stehekin, Marblemount and Newhalem. Expanding the park boundaries eastward along with constructing a visitor center in the Methow Valley would stretch these distances, geographically- and administratively-speaking, even further. Obviously this would require additional federal dollars, funding which is already lacking for the park currently, yet still coming from the same pot of taxpayer revenue.
     With an expanded area to cover, the NCNP would undoubtedly have some growth and continual oversight headaches. An expanded National Park Service presence, including enforcement and maintenance, would cost more park money and demand more park resources along with the task of incorporating the new lands into the current management plan, especially with the recreation exceptions that AALP proponents have discussed in regard to current recreation usage that conflict with the park's current rules.
     The east side lands along the Highway 20 corridor provide ready access and popular spots for the public to enjoy. Use in these areas would likely additionally increase because of the new national park status. This increase in visitation numbers would require similarly increased park oversight and management undoubtedly equating more regulation.
     It appears that the NCNP has its hands full now overseeing such a vast complex with its various issues and challenges. Adding extra acreage that has been under forest service jurisdiction for a long time seems like an unduly burden that is neither desired or needed. But, again, one can inquire with NCNP personnel as to what their viewpoint is regarding the notion of expanding the park.

Additional quotes

Park expansion proponents want the public to believe that they are recreation-friendly. This apparently depends on what type of recreation meets their approval:

"N3C opposes all motorized recreation on Ross Lake."
– From NCCC letter (Sept. 30, 2010) to North Cascades National Park Superintendent Chip Jenkins regarding the Ross Lake National Recreation Area general management plan.

"... hunting should be banned in all areas of the RLNRA."
– Same letter from above.

"And so it is with the profusion of high tech ski gear that the back country is not as protected as it used to be, even 10 years ago. I see there is a new usage challenge to consider as we work to protect and enhance our North Cascades"
– NCCC board member Tom Hammond, July, 2010. 

What about the USFS?

     If the North Cascades National Park were to be expanded, particularly on the east side of the crest, many acres of public land that have been managed for a long time by the United States Forest Service would then be under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service.
     It isn't hard to fathom that the folks at the Methow Ranger District may not want to see these lands along Highway 20 as well as several major tributaries near the Methow Valley turned over to the NPS. These lands are a major highlight, practically the crown jewel, of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, whether from a biological/habitat point of view or that of tourism and recreation.
     The management of these lands have long provided good, federal jobs for community members in the Methow Valley, both full time and seasonal positions. The same jobs that park expansionists say would come to the area if NPS moved in. So, it is plausible that there would be some personnel reduction within the Methow District if these forest service lands were designated national park lands.   
     What other impacts may occur?
     The timing of the park expansion proposal really could not have been worse given the long-term management plan revision process the OWNF is currently undertaking. Losing a vast chunk of prime acreage certainly isn't a consideration of the plan.
     Revenue loss would occur from commercial outfitters that utilize these recreational-rich lands and annually pay the USFS  a percentage of their gross profit.    
     The USFS would lose a lot of public recognition with their presence in being replaced by NPS management along such a visible and important tourism corridor like the North Cascades Highway. Their presence, at a time when the agency striving to impress its existence in managing these public lands, would certainly be diminished.

     It is a safe bet that many locals involved with the USFS do not want to see the park expanded using national forest lands. But don't take NOPE's word on this matter, ask some USFS employees what they think.

More quotes

"Jenkins brought peanut-butter bars and a puppy named Rocket."

– From a recent Settle Times article where the reporter encounters North Cascades National Park Superintendent Chip Jenkins on Desolation Peak in Ross Lake National Recreation Area. This would most likely be another area where dogs would no longer be allowed if the NCNP was expanded to include these NRA lands.

“This is not a recommendation that the heart of the North Cascades wilderness be opened to motorized visitation in order to boost local rural economies. It is just pointing out that the park’s front-country potential along State Route 20 has not been made as attractive, interesting, and educational as it could be and this has impacted the number and character of visits and reduced significantly their local economic impact.” – AALP Economic Study

“We cannot use data specific to the NCNP Complex to estimate the local economic impacts.” – AALP Economic study

Early Winters National Forest Recreation Area

This article was submitted by Mazama resident Eric Burr:

 Noparkexpansion.blogspot.com (NOPE) contains a wealth of negative ideas. I think however, that we need to answer the sincere concerns of park expansion proponents with some positive suggestions too. I’m a retired national park ranger, who has also worked, as a Wilderness ranger for the U.S. Forest Service, and lived in the Methow for 28 years.

    My first suggestion is the alternative of my title. The second is to endorse merging the north and south units of the park, by including part of Ross Lake NRA, The National Parks and Conservation Association has already proposed this, as part of their input to the Ross Lake NRA planning process.

   Spring and fall are when the North Cascades really needs an economic boost, which I think these two ideas could best help provide. More overnighting in Marblemount would be encouraged because it facilitates early starts to enjoy not only Cascade Pass, but also our east side spring skiing and flowers, or fall colors, with para-gliders, climbers, snowboarders, and skiers, to watch and rub shoulders with. This NFRA should have more trails that encourage, not just allow, dogs, horses, and mountain bikes, in addition to hiker-only foot paths for birdwatching. The short loop trails envisioned by N3C’s Alps Project are only a start on what’s required if this NFRA is to serve as an effective buffer for the Park and Wilderness. Longer trails too are demanded by today’s fitness sports.

    When the pass is closed, we have the announced intention of WSDOT to install additional east side closure gates, which would enhance spring skiing. Ski huts are standard in Europe and Canada to absorb the impact of increasingly popular backcountry skiing, and at last beginning to catch on stateside, but still usually not allowed in American National Parks. They were rejected from the 1968 national park and Wilderness establishment, (“Hickel’s Hostels”) and a good thing too, because the eastern planners sited all but one in avalanche paths. Early Winters has plenty of safe and sunny places for more huts, if demand and impact warrants them. For details, read my Ski Trails and Wildlife book.

    MVSTA (Methow Valley Sport Trails Association) has proven that ski trails allow summer and shoulder season use by a wide variety of users, without the potential conflicts managed too often in national parks, on limited trails, by regulations, permits, and cop-rangers.  Trail design and maintenance as zoning tools are the user friendly ways to help recreationists do the right things. The Methow has pioneered this better way, than the “police state Wilderness” typical of national parks. An NFRA could encourage the Forest Service to continue to improve their recreation management by inspiration, instead of regulation.

    Perhaps the most cost effective aspect of this plan is that it doesn’t require expensive Congressional action to implement. Ross Lake NRA is already run by the Park and the windshield wilderness tourists think they’re in the “park” now anyway. That arrowhead symbol, and the Smokey Bear hats on rangers have them fooled or confused. Their ignorance is also an opportunity for education, if designed for the urban visitor, who needs more basic orientation than the old traditional visitor center.

    A highly visible Information (not “Visitor”) Center, right on Highway 20 proper, before the Marblemount turn-off to Cascade Pass is what’s needed.  This Information Center run jointly by Seattle City Light, the U.S. Forest Service, North Cascades Institute, and the Park, is the critically missing facility that could let pilgrims know they’ve arrived in the Wilderness Alps. They could also learn where they can go to find the recreation and lodging or camping they seek, without getting busted for breaking some rule they never had the opportunity to learn about. And yes, the dams are part of what’s interesting here, just as in the European Alps. National parks are for history and culture as well as nature. Organic farms too, on both sides of the divide, are a critically important biological saga that needs a greater audience. The European Alps don’t allow pesticides or GMOs.

    Early Winters NFRA too, like the “park,” already exists – although in neglected form. If it could reopen the old ranger station and more old trails, we’d be on our way to filling those shoulder season slumps. So the westside could provide the traditional style American National Park, Seattle City Light provides dramatic boat tours, and the eastside provides the alpine huts, heli-skiing, lift and self powered skiing, with plenty of sunny user friendly trails, much like the European Alps but more like Canada, only sunnier and less crowded.  The American Alps Legacy Project needs an Early Winters NFRA if it is to pass political muster and truly fulfill the alpine vision many, on both sides of the controversy, had back in the 60s.                                                         

Unrealized potential

"... NCNP is largely “invisible” and unvisited. This has dramatically reduced its contribution to the small town and rural economy surrounding it." – AALP Economic Study

Aside from seeking greater protection, warranted or not, for public lands surrounding the North Cascades Highway by including them in an expanded North Cascades National Park, the North Cascades Conservation Council is apparently looking to squeeze more money out of the park for the nearby rural communities. If you look at comments and conclusions made throughout the NCCC-sponsored Economic Study, the NCNP, as it is now, is clearly not producing desirable financial benefits, especially when compared to the two other national parks in Washington.

"If the national park component is considered by itself, i.e. without the two national recreation areas associated with it, in 2008 it [NCNP] had the lowest estimated local economic impact of any national park outside of Alaska." – AALP Economic Study

It seems that 42 years later after the park's creation, the group primarily responsible for that monumental feat is now concerned that NCNP isn't pumping enough money into the economies of the communities on both sides of the crest. Interestingly, when the park was created, there wasn't much, if any, concern over the economic health of these same rural areas.

This a disconcerting stance, viewing a national park as an economic generator, and that a park like NCNP has this "unrealized potential" to be tapped into. This sentiment, unfortunately, is not uncommon in the conservation world.

Here is a quote from a Seattle staff member of the National Park Conservation Association in regard to garnering support for converting Ross Lake National Recreation Area land into NCNP:

"Along with protecting our national heritage, national parks are important economic engines. Across the country, national parks pump nearly $12 billion into park gateway economies and sustain hundreds and thousands of jobs. In Washington, Olympic and Mount Ranier National Parks represent roughly $150 million of the state's economy. Meanwhile, North Cascades pump $15 million into surrounding communities. North Cascades National Park has a minor impact upon Washington in part because most visitors who travel along Highway 20 never enter into the park proper. Rather, Highway 20 takes them through the Ross Lake NRA with views of the park in the distance. Only the most hardy who take to the trails actually enter the park"

The last sentence is especially ironic as the NPCA (as well as the NCCC) is opposed to the rerouting and rebuilding of the Stehekin River Road which would allow, as it had for decades, the less able or hardy to access and experience the North Cascades much easier.

The North Cascades National Park is unique in many ways. Much of the usage of the park is dictated by seasonal weather conditions, its remoteness that is such a major part of its character and, of course, accessibility issues. (It should be pointed out that in entire 60-plus page AALP Economic Study, not once is it mentioned that the North Cascade Highway is closed in the wintertime for several months; perhaps the consultants from Montana did not know this.) That NCNP doesn't generate the visitation and economic numbers that other national parks do certainly shouldn't be seen as a deficiency nor a supporting reason to radically change the park boundaries.

Especially since it can be readily pointed out that visitation along the North Cascades Highway and the resulting economic boost for the adjacent rural towns appears quite healthy and continues to grow modestly. This was especially evident during an extremely busy Labor Day Weekend.