Oh, for a Little Peace and Quiet

The Grand Canyon’s majestic north rim opens to summer visitors today, and as in seasons past the hum of excited tourists will be drowned out in many spots by the drone of airplane engines. Earlier this month, new federal regulations designed to cut the noise of sightseeing planes over the canyon took effect. Today’s visitors should be forgiven if they remark, “This is quiet?”

The new rules came in response to pressure first from Congress and then from President Clinton, both seeking to make a trip to the wondrous canyon more enjoyable and natural. It was more than a decade ago that Congress first directed the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Park Service to enact rules to produce “substantial restoration of the natural quiet and experience” in the national parks. That solitude and quiet, a major draw of all national parks, had been largely shattered in parts of the Grand Canyon and many other parks by a steady stream of tourist helicopters and planes swooping in for a close look. In 1994, about 95,000 air tours flew 800,000 passengers over the canyon. In some remote areas, there has been one flight every two minutes. Hardly solitude.

This lack of progress toward Congress’ goal prompted Clinton to issue an executive order requiring the agencies to act by last December. Rules finally were implemented this month, but they are unsatisfactory. The excessive noise remains; it is perhaps most acute at the Grand Canyon, but the problem is growing throughout the 27 national parks and monuments along the Colorado River plateau.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) sees an answer in shifting the balance of power between the Interior Department and the FAA. His bill, the proposed National Parks Overflight Act, would give the secretary of the Interior primary responsibility to preserve quiet within national parks, tilting to the recreational needs of the larger number of visitors on the ground over those in the air. The bill, a fair and sensible resolution, is awaiting hearings in the Senate Commerce Committee.

The choice is not between no flights and no limits on flights; rather, it must be directed toward a better balancing of interests.