More Camping at Yosemite Is Considered

In 1997, Mother Nature performed a demolition job in the heart of Yosemite Valley. Winter floodwaters raged over the banks of the Merced River, devouring whole buildings, roads and campgrounds. In a day, 374 campsites were gobbled -- nearly half the total in the valley.

In the years since, the old riverbank campgrounds have not been rebuilt. The simmering debate over those sites soon may boil over.

A study set for release soon has identified ways to establish 204 new campsites outside the valley, easing pressure inside the narrow and crowded rock caldron. But a California congressman with deep roots in the valley has vowed to continue pushing for the return of at least some of the riverside campsites.

Rep. George P. Radanovich (R-Mariposa), whose district includes the 761,000-acre park, grew up visiting Yosemite. He has many fond memories of the Upper and Lower River campgrounds that hugged the banks of the Merced.

And while he is happy to see that the park service is looking to develop campsites outside the valley, the congressman figures there is room for the return of at least some of the old outposts along the meandering river.

“We get letters from people all over the country who spent summers in their youths at Upper and Lower River, and really want to see those things reopen,” said John McCamman, Radanovich’s chief of staff. “We’d like to see a restoration.”

Environmentalists see nothing but trouble.

In the years after the flood, Yosemite embarked on an ambitious development plan for the valley meant to steer it into a new, more environmentally conscious century. From the get-go, the valley plan ruled out the possibility of restoring the riverfront campgrounds, deemed an ecologically destructive use of perhaps the most sensitive landin the valley.

Under the plan, campers, tents, pets and cars were to be replaced by natural habitat -- riparian trees, erosion-controlling natural vegetation, oaks and scenic meadows.

Before the flood, the valley had 849 campsites. Today, there are 475. The National Park Service has proposed increasing the total only slightly, to 500.

“This is the heart and soul of the restoration effort in the valley, and to renege on it would totally undermine the integrity of the plan,” said Jay Watson of the Wilderness Society. “Yosemite has suffered from too many years of political meddling, and what I see Congressman Radanovich doing is continuing this history.”

Michelle Jesperson, associate regional director of the National Parks Conservation Assn., a nonprofit parks advocacy group, said she too is concerned about revisiting what seemed a done deal.

“We feel the final plan maintained the ecosystems,” she said. “We’ve always been supportive of more campsites, provided they don’t threaten sensitive resources like the river.”

Under the park’s plans for the valley and Merced River, a 150-foot buffer is planned on both sides of the river. Beyond that, only day-use activities such as hiking and picnicking would be allowed in the river’s broad flood plain.

McCamman said the congressman has no desire to push for campgrounds back on the banks of the river. But he said Radanovich hopes that camping might be allowed outside the 150-foot buffer.

A study by the park service is underway at the request of the congressman. It will look at the cost of building campgrounds hardy enough to withstand the Merced’s floodwaters.

In particular, the plan will look at sewage systems and other infrastructure that cannot be moved out of harm’s way in the wintertime.

In a briefing Thursday by National Park Service Director Fran Mainella and Yosemite Supt. Mike Tollefson, Radanovich was told that 144 campsites could be accommodated outside the 150-foot buffer, McCamman said.

But questions remain, he said, about the costs and how complicated it might be to build the sites.

McCamman said the congressman, who heads the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, is pleased that the park service found space for 204 new campsites outside the valley.

“It’s great. It helps distribute people out to other parts of the park,” McCamman said.

But he noted that those sites would get the park only part way back to replacing the campsites lost in the flood. “That doesn’t cut it.”

The loss of the popular riverfront campsites has caused consternation in neighboring communities, where residents have found themselves boxed out of affordable overnight opportunities during peak summer months and have seen a decline in tourists, the region’s economic lifeblood.