articles @ sedonainformation.com

Reprinted from the August, 1994 issue of

The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly

Authors - Jim Bergstrom, Dr. Lawrence Yu, and Edgar Medweth

© 1994, Cornell University

The fate of a single dirt road could be an indicator of how well an entire destination will be maintained.

Jim Bergstrom is a professional Jeep tour guide at Pink Jeep Tours, an operator of scenic and informa­tional tours in Sedona, Arizona. Larry Yu, Ph.D. , is an assistant professor at the School of Hotel and Restaurant Management at Northern Arizona University, where Edgar Medweth is a research assistant.

DESTINATION MAINTENANCE is an integral part of developing and retaining a particular location’s popularity. Too often, however, tourism planners focus only on destination development without also paying attention to. retaining and preserving the attributes that attracted travelers to the destination in the first place.

In this article, we will discuss the effects of overuse and inadequate maintenance on a site near Sedona, Arizona.

As a destination rises in popularity, tourism officials often make the mistake of believing that tourist arrivals will continue to grow no matter how crowded the destination becomes and no matter whether the destination has been maintained in close to its original condition. Specific instances worldwide have demon­strated that destinations that do not maintain the quality of the tourism experience risk losing

their attractiveness to international travelers.

Pattaya, Thailand, for example, is one location that has already suffered degradation as the result of poor destination maintenance.(1) Bali, Indonesia, is also suffering physical damage that may cause travelers to stay away. (2) And Huatulco, Mexico, runs a similar risk due to overdevelopment.(3) In contrast, Korean tourism officials realized that cleaning up the Han river was essential to their strategy of encouraging more travelers to visit Seoul.(4)

Without intentional maintenance, most destinations are subject to a pattern of growth and decline that has been recorded and studied for more than a decade. That paradigm, commonly known as the destination life cycle, has become an established theory used to explain the rise and fall of destinations.(5) Adapted from the product life cycle, the concept plots a destination’s specific growth patterns as an S-shaped curve with six phases: exploration, involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation, and either decline or rejuvenation. During the first phases, relatively wealthy, trend-setting travelers seek out the new destination. Gradually, the nature of the tourism changes from high-spending FITs to moderate-spending incentive travelers and, ultimately, low-spending SMERFS (society, military, educational, religious, and fraternal travelers). (6) While the number of arrivals may not decline at this point, tourism receipts may begin to suffer as the growth in arrivals stalls and per-traveler spending drops off.

The nature of the final phase - decline or rejuvenation - depends on whether a destination’s planners are able to restore or replace the attributes that gave the destination its initial popularity. Michael Leven, COO of Holiday Inn Worldwide, has used Atlantic City, New Jersey, as an example of rejuvenation by replacing attributes. (7) Atlantic City was a destination in decline until gaming casinos opened up, creating new tourism markets and inviting more growth.

In actuality, tests of the destination-life-cycle concept have yielded varying results. Studies of such destinations as Malta and several Caribbean islands have fit convincingly into the life-cycle pattern. In a study of Pacific-island destinations, however, Dexter Choy found that the life-cycle concept failed to explain growth patterns. (8) Choy concluded that each destination’s development should be considered individually and that planners should not automatically resign themselves to falling into a predefined pattern.

The key to breaking out of the pattern of growth and decline that has befallen so many destinations is to include destination maintenance as part of any development master plan. Destination maintenance improves the quality of tourism products and services, enhances the tourist experience, stimulates further tourist business, and preserves existing ecological relationships. Those goals are best accomplished by employing landscape architects and regional planners to develop destination plans, rather than relying solely on investors’ or developers’ whims.

The failure of a destination’s development can often be attributed to poor maintenance of its attractions and facilities, particularly when the destination’s growth rate levels off. Anarchic development can cause a destination’s attractiveness to deteriorate, discouraging repeat visitors. (9) On the other hand, a proper destination-maintenance plan can keep a location attractive to tourists and foster a successful tourism industry.(10)

Most travel planners will quickly agree that destination maintenance is critical to maintaining the growth and attractiveness of their destination. Yet degradation of an area can occur quickly and almost without notice. Such is the case of Schnebly Hill Road, a popular recreation spot near Sedona, Arizona, which itself has emerged as an international destination.

Red Rock Country

A community of approximately 8,000 residents, Sedona is one of the popular resort destinations in central Arizona. Located 120 miles north of Phoenix and about 100 miles south of the Grand Canyon, Sedona lies at the base of Mogollon Rim, the southern edge of the Colorado Plateau. Its semi-arid climate nurtures a diversified biological community ranging from desert grassland to pine and fir forests. Tourists come for its spectacular topography, Native American cultural locations, and a wide range of recreational opportunities (including downhill skiing in the San Francisco Mountains, 30 miles distant).

The rugged red-rock terrain near Sedona is a chief tourist attraction. Many travelers stop to climb at Bell Rock, south of Sedona, for example, and tourists are enthralled by the massive turreted sandstone buttes, red-rock monoliths, cliffs, and canyons. North of Sedona, Oak Creek Canyon offers such recreational activities as hiking, camping, swimming, and trout fishing. In summer Oak Creek is a retreat from the heat, and in autumn its brilliant fall foliage provides a display uncommon for the southwest.

The area’s natural attractions combine with opportunities to experience local arts and crafts. Local shops display and sell Kachina dolls made by Zuni and Hopi craftspeople, as well as blankets made on the nearby Navajo nation and those made by Zapotecs and imported from Mexico.

As a result of its many attributes, Sedona has seen a dramatic increase in tourist arrivals in recent years. Some three million tourists visited in 1992, and tourism officials were predicting a record year in 1993.(11) At the beginning of 1994, Sedona had 1,400 hotel and resort rooms, although expansion plans announced by Holiday Inn, Best Western, and others will add 700 rooms to that total.(12)

Tourism’s rapid growth has brought great economic benefits to local retailers and government. That same growth, however, has also noticeably degraded the landscape of red-rock country and Oak Creek Canyon. Schnebly Hill Road in Bear Wallow Canyon has particularly suffered from increased tourist use.

The Case of Schnebly Hill

Schnebly Hill Road provides memorable views of red-rock country as it climbs 2,000 feet over 12 miles in Bear Wallow Canyon.(13) Originally a cattle trail, in 1902 the road was turned into a wagon lane along its lower sections. In the early 1930s, the trail was widened, graded, and extended into a gradually ascending dirt lane that could accommodate motor vehicles. Eventually the road, still a rough washboard lane, was connected to Interstate 17, the north-south traffic artery through central Arizona that bypasses Sedona as it connects Flagstaff to Phoenix. Schnebly Hill Road was at last graded smooth in 1992, and red cinders were used to fill spots that had formerly turned into ruts.

Before the 1992 road improvement, almost all drivers turned around when they came to the rocky dirt road. High-clearance trucks or vans might venture on, and sometimes 4×4 recreational vehicles drove up to see how far they could go. Now that Schnebly Hill Road is smoothly graded, all kinds of vehicles can and do use the road, resulting in a substantial increase in traffic. By the author’s count, the typical traffic volume before the improvement was five to ten vehicles in any 90-minute period. In contrast, the volume on August 26, 1993, for example, was as high as 20 cars in a 90-minute period. The 1993 Verde Valley Transportation Study projects that by 1998 some 200 cars will be using Schnebly Hill Road each day. Overnight camping has also increased from three or four per night before 1992 to (on August 26, 1993) six tents, three recreational vehicles, and two other cars. That night’s count was typical of the level of use the site received in 1993, but the count has continued to grow. One evening in March 1994, 20 campers had set up - 18 of them with out-of-state license plates.

While the increase in visitor use seems small by downtown Sedona’s standards, the fragility of the area is shown by the degradation seen at Schnebly Hill Road. That degradation has not brought with it an equal increase in supervision, cleanup, and enforcement. As a result, three elements of destination degradation are clearly visible. They are (1) cut green trees, (2) runover plants, and (3) trash.

Because most fallen wood and deadwood has long ago been consumed by campers, current visitors cut and strip green trees to build campfires. Low-lying shrubs and plants are also not immune to the human invasion. Poor maneuvering by many drivers and intentional trail blazing by drivers of four-wheel-drive vehicles have caused substantial destruction of vegetation. Efforts to prevent off-road drivers from pushing trails deeper into sensitive areas, typically a line of flat boulders that can be driven over, have been ineffectual. Finally, the increase in overnight camping has resulted in a considerable trash buildup, as many campers leave their trash at their campsites when they leave. Moreover, the increased day and overnight use has also created many “bush sites,” contaminated with human waste and toilet paper. Most of those sites are located in or directly above the main wash and run-off area that drains directly into Oak Creek, which is the water source for local residents.

Preserving the Site

The preservation of Schnebly Hill Road must be undertaken immediately. Without increased supervision, cleanup, and enforcement of regulations, the impact of increased visitation will continue to degrade forest lands and tarnish the natural beauty of the entire area. The following five recommendations, which can apply to many destinations, should maintain Schnebly Hill Road’s attractiveness to visitors. The overall approach is to retain Schnebly Hill Road as primarily a drive-through area that permits daytime stops for photographs or brief hikes.

Control campers.

Campers must be encouraged to obey regulations for use of the land, which is under the supervision of the U.S. Forest Service. Unless lie test service can increase daily and nightly road patrols, it should discourage or regulate overnight camping. With the Forest Service’s close supervision, most campers will obey camping rules and not leave behind garbage and unburied human waste.

The issue of human waste is the most difficult, since there are no toilet facilities in the area. The forest service has considered installing chemical toilets, but they would cause “visual pollution”. We estimate that at least ten such facilities would be required along the four-mile stretch of Schnebly Hill Road that is popular for camping.

Ban campfires.

Campers should be required to use stoves or charcoal fires for cooking, as occurs in the Grand Canyon. If authorities choose to allow campfires, campers should be on notice that they must bring in their own wood, as is required in campsites in many other states. An education effort to demonstrate the damage to green trees can also limit further destruction.

Put up signs.

Large and detailed signs posted at the trailhead should outline specific regulations governing the use of the area. Existing signs are generic and uninteresting posters that are easily overlooked or ignored. Signs should be attention-grabbing and educational, explaining the importance of maintaining the area.

Restrict off-road activity.

Although many pullouts have lines of boulders intended to prevent off-road driving, those rocks are easily driven over, driven around, or pushed aside. More or larger boulders should be added to pullouts in particularly sensitive areas.

Reduce speeds.

The 1992 grading was so successful that drivers are encouraged to speed recklessly up the road. By reducing the speed limit to no more than 15 miles per hour, the road would be returned to its status as a leisurely scenic drive.

Reaction

Schnebly Hill Road is just one small part of the Sedona area, but its preservation seems to be integral to maintaining the attractiveness of the area to visitors. Because of its remote location, it is possible that not all tourism officials realize the damage being done to Schnebly Hill. In October and November 1993, we tested that assumption by interviewing resort operators and tourist officials in Sedona. We found that some were, indeed, unaware of the damage being done, while others who were aware of the problem felt unable to deal with it.

Resort operators.

Four resort operators contacted were willing to discuss destination management generally and Schnebly Hill specifically. We met with managers of L’Auberge de Sedona, Poco Diablo, and Enchantment Resort. The manager of the fourth resort, Los Abrigados, could not meet due to time commitments.

All three resort managers concurred that destination maintenance is important. hut none of the three was aw are of the extent of the degradation of Schnebly Hill. Each of the three managers pointed out that educating tourists about Sedona is a crucial factor in maintaining the destination. They thought the proposed Sedona Cultural Park, a performing arts center, would be an excellent vehicle for promoting tourists’ awareness of the fragility of Sedona’s environment.

Forest service.

The U.S. Forest Service needs a plan to keep up with the many visitors traveling through its lands near Sedona, including Schnebly Hill. The forest service, however, lacks sufficient staffing and budget appropriations to handle the problem by itself. Consequently, it has developed a creative solution, called “partnership with the private sector.” This approach emphasizes the importance and effectiveness of cooperation between the public and private sectors. As an example of that cooperation, the forest service gave Pink Jeep Tours permission to build adequate blockage for certain areas on Schnebly Hill Road. Tourists had removed boulders blocking areas that were not appropriate for off-road use. Pink Jeep restored the blockades with larger rocks.(14) The forest service is also considering allocating an employee to patrol the road once a week.

City officials.

Until recently, Sedona city officials made no active input into tourism plan-fling because tourism grew spontaneously. The amount of traffic that the city now faces has forced the city to consider planning and control measures. Among those measures is the Environmentally Sensitive Land Ordinance, which went into effect in December 1993. This land-use code regulates buildings close to ridges and washes and attempts to preserve steep slopes. It also covers such aesthetic matters as color coordination of buildings. While the ordinance tightened regulations on new commercial and residential building develop­ment in Sedona, it does not affect Schnebly Hill Road.

Chamber of Commerce.

The Chamber of Commerce’s goal is developing Sedona. While its mission clearly states that “the basis of our economic well-being is this area’s unique beauty and small-town character,” it is also clear that development outweighs destination maintenance in the chamber’s estimate. Few systematic methods are used to measure tourist arrivals and to study the impact on the environment and community of increasing numbers of tourists.

Keep Sedona Beautiful, a private, non-profit organization founded in 1972, is a driving force in destination maintenance. With more than 1,000 members, this organization is focused on preserving the natural beauty of the area. It has, for example, more than 100 “litter lifters,” who collect trash along highways. Despite its members’ hard work, however, this organization cannot keep up with the detrimental effects of heavy tourist traffic.

Ecotourism

The concept of environmentally responsible tourism has grown to the point that “ecotourism” has become a designation for a recognizable segment of tourists. All of Sedona, but particularly Schnebly Hill Road, could benefit from promotion of environmentally sensitive tourism. Such an approach could help Sedona maintain its growth without damaging the destination. A pattern of appropriate growth should be the goal of destination development plans, because that pattern will avert the almost inevitable decline phase of the destination life cycle. Instead, tourism officials should develop a balanced tourist approach that enhances the tourist experience, protects the tourism resource, and stimulates local business. With those factors in place, the destination’s popularity should hold strong and the destination should be in a constant phase of rejuvenation.

As it stands now, the case of Schnebly Hill Road indicates that Sedona tourism officials may not be able to maintain the quality of their destination. The negative effects of the destruction along Schnebly Hill will eventually be felt throughout the Sedona area, especially if tourists treat other scenic locations with such reckless abandon. The cumulative effect of such behavior could eventually destroy the base on which Sedona’s tourism is built. If Sedona is to escape the paradigm of the destination life cycle, it needs an effective destination-maintenance plan to sustain its tourism development and protect its tourism resources. CQ

(1) Kye-Sung Chon, Anirik Singh, and James R. Mikula, “Thailand’s Tourism and Hotel Industry,”

The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 3 (June 1993), p. 47.

(2) Charles Anderson Bell, “Bali: How to Maintain a Fragile Resort,’ The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 5 (October 1992), p. 30.

(3) Hana Ayala, “Mexican Resorts: A Blueprint with an Expiration Date,’ The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 3 (June 1993), p. 39.

(4) Jong-Yun Ahn and Zafar U. Ahmed, “South Korea’s Emerging Tourism Industry,”

The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 2 (April 1994), p. 84.

(5) R.W.Butler, ‘The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution; Implications for Management of Resources,” The Canadian Geographer, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Spring 1980), pp. 5—12.

(6) See: Michael A. Leven, “The Hotel Life Cycle,” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 4 (February 1985), pp. 9—10.

(7)Leven, p. 10.

(8) Dexter J.L. Choy, Life Cycle Models for Pacific Island Destinations,” Journal of Travel Research,

Winter 1992, pp. 26—31.

(9) A. da Rosa Pires and C.M.M. Costa, Tourism Devek~pinen~ along Beaches and Waterfronts: The Portuguese Situation, in Progress in Tourism, Recreation, and Hospital­ity Management, Vol. 4, ed. C.P. Cooper and A. Lockwood (London: Beihaven Press, 1992). pp. 103—112.

(10) Stephen Woodley, Tourism and Sustainable Development in Parks and Protected Areas, in Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R. Butler, and G. Wall

(Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo Press, 1993), pp. 83—96

(11) LA. Mitchell, “Tourism Surge Buoys Sedona,” Arizona Business Gazette, Vol. 113. No. 39 (September 23, 1993), p. 21.

(12) lbid.

(13) See: Suzanne Clemenz, ~‘Schneb1y Hill Road: Red Rock Country’s Scenic Shortcut,” Arizona Highways, March 1987, p. 23.

(14) Pink Jeep Tours is one of the oldest jeep-tour operators in the United States. At its start in 1962, it offered off-road thrill rides. The business has refocused in the past ten years, offering informational tours on established roads.

Copyright Cornell University. Used by permission. All rights reserved.