East Fork Quinault Trail and Enchanted Valley Overcrowding

In many of Olympic National Park's popular wilderness locations, overnight use is subject to an established limitation regarding the maximum number of daily permits issued. This is due to a variety of reasons to include, but not limited to, an area may be able to contain only a certain number of established camp areas based on the type of resources present; there may be sensitive natural or cultural resources within the area; or there may have been past damage to natural or cultural resources from overuse and quotas were issued to alleviate damage and allow these resources to recover naturally. The remaining park wilderness areas remain unrestricted, and some of these areas experience negative impacts to park resources, wilderness character, and visitor experience due to the frequent large number of permitted users.

These impacts include campsite overcrowding, trailhead congestion and limited parking, insufficient holding capacity for human waste in pit toilets, decreased opportunities for visitor solitude, and the expansion of current established, or the creation of new, camp areas by visitors. While bears are frequently in the Enchanted Valley area, to date there have been no issues with human-wildlife interactions and wildlife, in general, obtaining food rewards.

This project's primary focus is the loss of solitude along the East Fork Quinault River Trail and in the Enchanted Valley. Olympic National Park currently does not limit the number of overnight groups or people there, and the wilderness character, specifically opportunities for solitude, may be negatively impacted by the quantity of use that occurs.

Every person that uses the Daniel J. Evans Wilderness overnight is required to obtain a permit. Daily camper nights are tracked through the park's reservation system and indicates the total number of permitted users. Overnight use within the East Fork Quinault River Trail and in the Enchanted Valley has greatly increased in recent years. The following shows the respective camp areas along the East Fork Quinault River Trail and the Enchanted Valley, 2019 Daily Camper Nights, 2023 Daily Camper Nights, and the Percent Increase in overnight use:

Pony Bridge: 603 (in 2019); 1,087 (in 2023); 80% increase
Fire Creek: 15 (in 2019); 17 (in 2023); 13% increase
O'Neil Creek: 1,961 (in 2019); 4,415 (in 2023); 125% increase
Pyrites Creek: 1,625 (in 2019); 2,918 (in 2023); 79% increase
Enchanted Valley: 5,147 (in 2019); 10,367 (in 2023); 101% increase

*Permits acquired May 1st-September 30th

Daily camper nights for Enchanted Valley alone exceeded 300 people on one occasion in 2022, and twice in 2023. Camper nights in the valley, ranging between 100 and 299 people, occurred 31 times in 2022, and 34 times in 2023. This level of nightly use results in frequent overcrowding of campsites and a degradation of wilderness character. Parties are forced to camp close to, or within close sight of, numerous other campers. The crowding can be like that of a front-country campground. This contrasts wilderness values of:

• "generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable"
• "outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation"

Occasionally, concern about the issue is expressed through correspondence from the public.

Although park management has been identifying many of these issues during the scoping process of a Wilderness Stewardship Plan, immediate changes may be necessary to reduce ongoing resource degradation and improve the wilderness experience in the East Fork Quinault River Trail and in the Enchanted Valley.

A public comment period will open each year of this 3-year pilot project, from May 15-November 15, for overnight users to share feedback on their experiences in the East Fork Quinault and the Enchanted Valley under this pilot project.

Topic Questions Instructions:

Please provide your substantive comments in the space provided. Substantive comments are those that 1) question, with reasonable basis, the accuracy of the information in the NEPA document; 2) question, with reasonable basis, the adequacy of the environmental analysis; 3) present reasonable alternatives other than those presented in the NEPA document (please be sure to read through all the alternatives, including those "considered but dismissed" prior to commenting), or; 4) cause changes or revisions in the proposal. Please provide rational explanations. The comment process is not a voting process - we're not looking for which alternative gets the greatest number of votes, we're looking for substantive comments only. Comments submitted by phone or email will not be accepted. Comments submitted by individuals or organizations on behalf of other individuals or organizations also will not be accepted. You should be aware that your entire comment - including personal identifying information such as your address, phone number, and email address - may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Topic Questions:

1. Did you or others in your party have issues finding an established camp site within your camp area(s) (Pony Bridge, Fire Creek, O'Neil, Pyrites, or the Enchanted Valley)?

2. Where did you camp (list all locations), for how many nights (the number of nights at each location), and how many people were in your party?

3. Please describe your experience (i.e., did you experience a sense of solitude; were other campers nearby; if so, did you feel they were too close or there were too many; etc.)

4. Did you find that the level of overnight use was acceptable? If not, please provide an explanation as to what level of overnight use you and others in your party would find more acceptable.

5. Have you camped in this (these) area(s) in the past? If so, how would you rate this experience compared to previous trips? Better, worse, or no difference.

6. Please share any additional thoughts related to this pilot project.

Document Content:

EFQ-EV_Overcrowding_MRA.pdf   (2.0 MB, PDF file) EFQ-EV_Crowding_NHPA.pdf   (291.2 KB, PDF file) EFQ-EV_Crowding_ESF.pdf   (377.3 KB, PDF file) EFQ-EV_Crowding_CE.pdf   (226.1 KB, PDF file) Disclaimer: Links within the above document(s) were valid as of the date published. Note: Some of the files may be in PDF format and can be viewed using the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. You may download a free copy of from Adobe Systems.