Dispersed Camping Restrictions Near Zion National Park

By Chuck Price | Last Updated: December 20, 2025

The Bureau of Land Management has released a Draft Environmental Assessment for the SR9 Campground Management Project that would fundamentally change how boondockers access free camping near Zion National Park. After 35 years of RV travel across federal lands, I’ve watched this pattern repeat: popular dispersed camping areas near major attractions get “managed” until they’re no longer dispersed or free.

Here’s what the proposal actually means for boondockers, backed by the numbers from BLM’s own documents.

What is the SR9 Campground Management Project?

The SR9 Campground Management Project is BLM’s proposed plan to restrict and manage dispersed camping across 15,087 acres of public land in southwestern Utah’s SR9 corridor. The project area spans from La Verkin to Zion National Park’s western boundary, including Gooseberry Mesa, Hurricane Cliffs, Smithsonian Butte Scenic Byway, and North Creek areas.

Under BLM’s preferred alternative (Alternative B, detailed in Section 2.2 of the Draft EA), dispersed camping would be limited to designated sites only across nearly 14,000 acres. I’ve camped this corridor multiple times over the past decade. The math here matters.

The Numbers Don’t Add Up

BLM currently maintains 56 designated dispersed sites in the Hurricane Cliffs Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), as documented in the existing resource management plan. Alternative B would restrict the entire 15,087-acre project area to a maximum of 30 designated dispersed sites while simultaneously closing and reclaiming existing user-created campsites.

*Draft EA Section 2.2.3 states campground development would occur “as funding becomes available” with no guaranteed timeline or construction commitment.

Translation: Fewer official sites covering more territory, with replacement capacity contingent on future appropriations. If you’ve ever tried to find an empty campsite near a national park on a Friday afternoon, you know this creates immediate capacity problems.

Demand vs. Supply: The Capacity Gap

Zion National Park recorded 4.6 million visitors in 2023, making it the third most-visited national park in the United States (NPS Visitor Use Statistics). The park’s three campgrounds (South and Watchman inside the park, plus Lava Point) offer approximately 200 total sites combined.

Here’s the capacity calculation that matters: If even 5% of Zion’s visitors camp overnight (a conservative estimate based on NPS overnight visitor data), that’s 230,000 camper-nights annually. With 200 park sites operating roughly 300 days per year, the park can accommodate approximately 60,000 camper-nights—leaving a 170,000+ camper-night deficit that disperses to surrounding BLM and Forest Service lands.

During peak season (March-November), Zion’s campgrounds fill by 6 AM—sometimes earlier. I’ve documented this firsthand in May 2023, September 2023, and April 2024 visits. The average developed campground near a national park charges $35-50 per night (based on my tracking of 89 public campground stays 2022-2025). Private RV parks near Zion run $60-85 per night (verified rates from 12 parks within 30 miles, current as of December 2025).

Free dispersed camping on BLM land represents a $420-595 savings over a week-long visit for the typical RV family. That’s not rhetoric—it’s arithmetic: 7 nights × $60-85 (private park average) = $420-595 vs. $0 for dispersed camping.

Specific Area Closures

Alternative B (Section 2.2.4 of the Draft EA) would prohibit camping entirely in:

• North Creek: Popular dispersed area north of Virgin, Utah—historically used as overflow when park campgrounds fill
• Mosquito Cove: Backcountry camping zone with established use history
• Smithsonian Butte: Scenic byway corridor with documented camping spanning 20+ years

These aren’t obscure locations. North Creek, in particular, has served as overflow camping for decades when the park fills up. The Draft EA (Table 2-1) identifies these areas as “closed to camping” without replacement sites designated in the immediate vicinity. Closing North Creek without replacement capacity guarantees more boondockers get pushed into increasingly limited options or forced into commercial campgrounds.

Documented Precedents: This Pattern Has Happened Before

I’ve tracked similar BLM dispersed camping restrictions at three other high-visitation areas over the past decade:

Case Study 1: Gemini Bridges / Labyrinth Rims, Moab, Utah (2018-2020)

BLM’s Moab Field Office implemented designated camping requirements across 35,000 acres near Gemini Bridges and Labyrinth Rims in 2019. Initial proposal promised 50 designated sites to replace unrestricted dispersed camping. As of December 2025, only 31 sites have been developed. Enforcement reports from BLM show a 300% increase in camping violations during the 18-month transition period as boondockers struggled to find legal alternatives.

Case Study 2: Capitol Reef / Beas Lewis Flat, Wayne County, Utah (2021-2023)

The Capitol Reef Travel Management Plan restricted dispersed camping on 12,000 acres of BLM land east of the park. BLM proposed 40 designated dispersed sites as replacements. Three years post-implementation, only 24 sites exist. During peak season (April-October), these sites fill by noon, pushing overflow to commercial campgrounds 45+ miles away in Torrey or Hanksville.

Case Study 3: Red Rock Canyon NCA, Las Vegas, Nevada (2016-2018)

BLM eliminated dispersed camping across the entire Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area (195,000 acres) in 2017, citing resource damage. The Red Rock Canyon NCA management plan promised developed campground expansion. Seven years later, camping capacity has increased by only 13 sites (from 70 to 83 sites). Las Vegas visitation to Red Rock increased 40% during this same period.

Pattern Analysis: Across these three precedents, BLM’s replacement site promises delivered an average of 61% of projected capacity, taking 3-7 years to implement. Meanwhile, restrictions happened within 6-18 months of final decisions. This isn’t speculation—it’s documented outcomes from projects with publicly available implementation records.

What BLM Says vs. What I’ve Observed

BLM’s stated justification (Draft EA Section 1.3, “Purpose and Need”) focuses on environmental impacts: soil compaction, vegetation loss, human waste, and litter at user-created sites. These are legitimate concerns I’ve witnessed firsthand. Gooseberry Mesa, in particular, has seen degradation from increased visitation—I documented 14 user-created sites with visible resource damage during a May 2024 field visit.

The disconnect: BLM’s proposed solution eliminates legal alternatives before creating replacement capacity. This approach doesn’t reduce camping pressure—it concentrates it. When you close 60 acres of dispersed sites and promise 255 campsites “if funded,” you haven’t solved the problem. You’ve created enforcement issues and pushed responsible boondockers into either paying for commercial sites or dispersing illegally.

I’ve measured this effect near other restricted areas (see precedent cases above). Closure announcements typically drive a 6-12 month spike in use as boondockers rush to visit “one last time,” accelerating the very degradation BLM aims to prevent. Moab Field Office enforcement data from 2019 showed this exact pattern: camping violations increased 300% during the transition period before eventually declining 18 months post-implementation.

Potential for Fees and Reduced Access

More concerning: the Draft EA (Section 2.2.5) explicitly preserves BLM’s discretion to implement fees at designated sites in the future. The document states: “BLM retains the authority to establish recreation fees consistent with the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.” Once camping is restricted to specific locations, fee implementation becomes administratively simple.

The progression I’ve documented at other BLM districts: free dispersed → designated dispersed (free) → designated dispersed (fee-based) → developed campground (higher fees). This happened at Sand Flats Recreation Area near Moab (free dispersed until 2005, now $20/night for designated sites), Lone Rock Beach at Glen Canyon NRA (free dispersed until 2010, now $20/night), and multiple Montana BLM campgrounds in the Missoula District.

This isn’t speculation. It’s documented pattern across BLM districts from Arizona to Montana over the past 15 years.

The Comment Period Timeline

The original scoping period ran from May 1 to June 2, 2025. BLM released the Draft Environmental Assessment in mid-December 2025 with a comment deadline of December 24, 2025—five days before Christmas, during a week when most people are traveling.

That timeline raises questions about meaningful public participation. The Draft EA itself runs 267 pages across the main document and appendices. Reading, analyzing, and preparing substantive comments on complex land use proposals in five days during Christmas week effectively limits detailed feedback to organizations with dedicated staff and established comment processes.

What Boondockers Can Do Now

If you’ve relied on dispersed camping near Zion, here’s the practical reality:

Short-Term (Next 6-12 Months)

• Existing dispersed camping remains legal until BLM issues a final decision and implements restrictions (estimated timeline: early-to-mid 2026 based on typical NEPA processes)
• Monitor BLM’s ePlanning page for implementation timeline and final decision
• If commenting on the Draft EA, document current campsite conditions with photos, GPS coordinates, and usage observations—specific field data strengthens public record

Alternative Locations to Research

• Kolob Terrace Road (north): Currently outside the restricted zone, though historically subject to seasonal closures (winter). Dispersed camping allowed on Forest Service land along the upper sections (above Lava Point). Verify current status via Dixie National Forest before travel.
• Dixie National Forest (east): Forest Service land with different regulations than BLM. Check current forest orders for motor vehicle use maps and camping restrictions. Kolob Reservoir area has historically allowed dispersed camping 100+ feet from water sources.
• Arizona Strip (west): BLM land 60-90 miles from Zion, less convenient but more open. Areas near Mt. Trumbull and Toroweap still allow unrestricted dispersed camping as of December 2025. Verify via Arizona Strip District Office.
• Sand Hollow State Park: Developed sites, fees apply ($35-40/night), but reliable availability outside peak season (December-February). Reserve via Recreation.gov or Utah State Parks.

Long-Term Strategy

This proposal represents a broader trend I’ve documented: popular dispersed camping areas near national parks face increasing restrictions as visitation grows. Zion, Moab, Sedona, and Estes Park have all followed similar trajectories over the past decade.

Boondockers who depend on free camping near major attractions need backup plans—plural. I maintain a minimum of three alternative locations for any destination in my route planning specifically because of this pattern. When one area gets restricted, you need options researched in advance, not scrambling for alternatives when you arrive.

The Bigger Picture

I’ve spent 35 years advocating for responsible boondocking. That includes acknowledging legitimate environmental concerns and supporting reasonable regulations. Resource damage at high-use dispersed sites is real, and concentrated impacts at popular areas like Gooseberry Mesa warrant management attention.

But “reasonable” requires replacement capacity before implementing restrictions.

BLM’s proposal offers promises instead of certainty: maybe 150 sites at Flagstone Quarry, possibly 80 at Gooseberry Mesa, if funding materializes, sometime in the future. The Draft EA (Section 2.2.3) provides no construction timeline, no funding commitment, and no performance metrics for replacement site development. Meanwhile, the closures and restrictions happen immediately upon final decision.

That’s a fundamentally problematic approach to public land management. Four million annual visitors to Zion don’t suddenly need less camping—they need more. Restricting supply while demand increases doesn’t improve environmental outcomes. It creates enforcement challenges, pushes users into illegal camping, and undermines the public trust BLM is supposed to serve.

Based on the three precedent cases documented above, this approach is likely to reduce legal dispersed capacity before replacement sites exist, pushing demand into fewer remaining areas or commercial parks—exactly the pattern I’ve observed at Moab, Capitol Reef, and Red Rock Canyon over the past decade.

Frequently Asked Questions

Resources

Official BLM Documents:

• SR9 Campground Management Project (BLM ePlanning) – Draft EA, maps, and comment submission
• Color Country District Office Contact Information – (435) 865-3000
• BLM Camping and Permits – General dispersed camping regulations

National Park Service Data:

• Zion National Park Visitor Use Statistics – Official visitation data
• Zion Campground Information – Park campground capacity and reservations

Alternative Camping Options:

• Dixie National Forest Recreation Areas – Forest Service dispersed camping regulations
• Sand Hollow State Park – Developed camping alternative
• Recreation.gov – Federal campground reservations
• Arizona Strip District Office – Western alternative dispersed camping areas

About the Author

Chuck Price has documented dispersed camping regulations, costs, and access across federal lands for over three decades. He operates BoondockOrBust.com, providing evidence-based analysis for RV boondockers navigating changing land use policies. Cost data and field observations in this article derive from documented camping experiences across 47 states from March 2022 through November 2025.