Proposed National Park Fee Increase

America's Best Idea, with the least amount of funding.

I've had to focus my political ideals to just a few things, as to not be so overwhelmed as of late. I used to write my legislatures quarterly, but now it seams as though it's a weekly occurrence.

I don't think the NPS wants to see less visitors. As others have said, I think it's a political move, but the right one at the right time. They've suffered lowered funding for almost two decades, yet the majority of American's support the parks. Maybe this will shine a light on the problem. I'm certainly writing my legislators about this. I'll be specifically mention the need for increased funding for all federally owned lands, with a few specific cases that show that need.
 
I think it is a combination of many things. However I do think that the NPS budget as far as how much goes to staff and maintenance funding for our National Parks is a sad joke. Add to that how many people I see trashing the parks, not practicing LNT, etc. and it is a nightmare in the making in my opinion. I think all who want to visit should have the opportunity, but I also think somehow and someway we need to right amount of funding to insure these awesome places are taken care of for future generations. Perhaps a combination of things. I know a few parks the only way you get to the trailheads is via bus (Bandalier comes to mind). If they raise these costs (and the annual pass will be the next cost to go up... guaranteed), then somehow it needs to be some insurance these funds go only to upkeep and staffing. However, as someone said earlier... with yearly budget cuts, how would it be possible to maintain these effectively if you are getting cut in every other part of your budget.
 
Nick,

If you fell compelled to delete this so be it. I however hope that given the realities of this dilemna you do honor the true nature of an actual forum and let this stand.

@Wanderlust073,

I apologize if my response seems harsh or insulting but I've got to be blunt:

With all due respect when is the last time you worked for minimum wage? Think you can afford health insurance for you and any family members let alone entry to a National Park making less than $350 a week? If this was your life do you think you could afford to take an unpaid week off and shell out $70 bucks just for entrance fees let alone all the other costs of an actual vacation? Given these realities you still honestly believe in your implication there is a "benifit for all" when it comes to accessing our public lands when in fact people have to choose between groceries or that access to the public lands more than 300,000,000 of us already own in equal measure?

I hear lots of people with the inane, self serving audacity to call themselves "conservative" say something along the lines 'but there are free days and weekends at the parks." Yeah, how noble of us crowding all of the less fortunate of us into the parks at the same time so they can "enjoy" them with every other less fortunate person with an appreiation of our Parks.

In his farewell address Eisenhower said: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

Despite vanguishing the costliest adversary/enemy we have ever known 26 years after the end of the Soviet Union we CONTINUE to spend more on our "National Defense" than at least the next ten top spending nations combined if not as many as the next 17 top spending nations. Forgoeing one F22 Raptor would pay existing entry fees for all Americans for almost two full years.

As noted this will not put a dent in the maintenance backlog. Yellowstone alone has a more than $600,000,000 backlog. Right now entrance fees make up about 5% of the NPS budget. Doubling that is only going to disenfranchise the most vulnerable among us.

As I said it's about priorities. Why is it every time Republicans talk about giving the wealthiest among us huge breaks and significantly inflating the already bloated military budget at the same time they think it's OK to stick it to the little man? Yeah, this is political. Please forgive me for not being able to ignore that reality when "solutions" are more and more often deceitfully misrepresented by "patriots" that are livid with athletes taking a knee before the flag but don't care if they disgrace the reality of the Consttitution at the same time.

"Think! It's very Patriotic!" As long as it is done with critical honesty.

Peace,

John
 
$70 is a lot of money.

And not just from my wallet's perspective. $70 admission makes it economically advisable to capture any and all admission fees in a more aggressive fashion.
 
Very well said, John ... thank you.

I've lived 90 minutes from Yellowstone for over 3 decades, now, and over the years I've encountered many good, hard-working local families who couldn't find it in their budget to drive down to Mammoth for the day, simply because of the added burden of the (current) admission fee. If this increase goes through, the number of people unable to experience the joy of the park will only increase ... a piece of public land that's theirs as much as mine, and that unfettered visits could make them advocates for.

Honestly, I think that if we were an honorable nation, this issue wouldn't even come up ... because our political leaders would recognize that our National Parks and Monuments and wildlands are sacred places, in the same way that the folks here do. Sacred places deserve to be cared for and respected, not turned into political pawns, and they should be on a high enough pedestal that no one would even dream of making an ideological point by trying to make them more revenue neutral.

But that's not the way of the world right now, and it's pretty sad.
 
Nick,

If you fell compelled to delete this so be it. I however hope that given the realities of this dilemna you do honor the true nature of an actual forum and let this stand.

No worries, John. I can probably count the deletes we've made here on my hands. Relevant and part of a healthy discussion.
 
This is the 150th year celebration for Canada's national parks. Anyone that wanted one could apply for and get a free pass that's good for a year to any park in Canada. You don't even have to be Canadian. I have one in my pack that I hope to still be able to use before the year is up. Contrast this with the way our politicians view our national parks.
 
Shower thought

If the NPS shut down every park and sent everyone home, diverting every bit of their budget to the maintenance backlog, it would take four years to fix everything up. Keep in mind this is maintenance so a lot of those 50-150 year old buildings will still be the way.

If every bit of the predicted additional earnings from this fee increase proposal were used for maintenance it would take 161 years to fix everything up. This while people are using things, breaking things down, storms are flooding structures, fires are burning buildings, etc.

Hmm.....
 
Honestly, I think that if we were an honorable nation, this issue wouldn't even come up ... because our political leaders would recognize that our National Parks and Monuments and wildlands are sacred places, in the same way that the folks here do. Sacred places deserve to be cared for and respected, not turned into political pawns, and they should be on a high enough pedestal that no one would even dream of making an ideological point by trying to make them more revenue neutral.

But that's not the way of the world right now, and it's pretty sad.

Well said.
 
I apologize if my response seems harsh or insulting but I've got to be blunt:

I had been ignoring this thread so I'm sorry it took a while to reply. To be honest if the board is turning in to yet another Internet outlet for venting political frustrations about whatever issues piss people off from week to week, I'll just show myself out.

Regarding your apparent issue with me or my point of view...

I grew up dirt poor. Mac 'n Cheese made with government provided powdered milk was dinner for weekS at a stretch. Living with family friends/church people because next stop was a cardboard box on the street.

Making nonsensical statements about someone being forced to choose between feeding their family or visiting a national park, as if both choices have equal value in a person's hierarchy of needs, shows either an incredible lack of understanding of what 'poor' is or else utter disregard for peoples' actual struggle to put food on the table beyond callously using it to make a

dishonest
manipulative
hyperbolic
baseless

statement that attempts to dress the issue being discussed in emotional terms rather than factual arguments because, hey, welcome to American discourse and debate 2017.

Setting all that aside:

I'm not alone in thinking it is an attempt to reduce visitation: http://theknow.denverpost.com/2017/10/24/gate-fee-rocky-mountain-national-park-increase/163290/

I do not believe this is an artifact of the current political regime. GAO was chastising NPS for (among other things) not conducting periodic rates/fees reviews and increases to assist in funding themselves before the current administration:

http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/674187.pdf
 
Some more words from the park ranger trying to gauge how everyone values the places he works:

The is definitely no doubt that someone scraping by to put food on the table and meet basic needs will choose food over parks. Survival trumps fun. Go play in nature with a stick and mud. This makes the fabled visit to National Parks all the more special for those in these circumstances since it will likely not happen often through their childhood. This is the basis for field trips and the "Every Child in a Park" 4th grade pass campaign. Where I think there is a disconnect in some of the opposing discussions here is that some/many do not see that this should be the case. As the current pay structure sits people are priced out of visiting our nation's wild treasures, heck, when I had a junior ranger event at my park school teachers I approached balked at the $15 fee... The the increased prices there will an increased number of people displaced, we only have so much discretionary income after all. Lots of valid points on both sides. I can't count the number of people I met working in the forest service who said they were recreating on the forest because the parks were too pricey. Right around the same number cited crowding as well.

From there it is a question of fairness. Let's remember, this is NOT advertised as a move to attack over crowding, it is supposed to benefit the maintenance problem. The only opinions I have seen for this proposal are based on how it will effect visitation, which is not the purpose. There are also much more "fair" ways to tackle visitation, albeit more aggravating to everyone. Seeing the paltry returns this will make towards the backlog, I can't help but feel this is a move against visitation, which INFURIATES me. These are our treasures, operated by our government, and they will be BLATANTLY lying to us. Because to believe this is awful I see all the prose about the attack on overcrowding moot. That isn't what this is for.

Which doesn't mean we should discount the significant negative side effect of this maintenance quashing campaign. We run the risk of pricing more people out of parks than we already do. I personally don't see that happening right away because the annual pass is staying at the same price, but that is the next step.

And back up to my park to clean some nice crappers!
 
I commented at the link provided.

I don't really give a damn about over crowding. I don't go during the busy times I can't stand the people. My tolerance level for idots in nature is low. They have a right to go...go. I will find other place to recreate. Same reason I don't go to amusement parks.

I get irritated with the back log of things that need to be fixed and hearing through this discussion that the overall budget for taking care of this back log is going to be cut and the fee increase won't even cover this budget cut. That makes zero financial sense, perfect way to cripple the parks even more.

Seems to me if things need to be fixed and budget is slim they need to get creative. Volunteer programs? Come help maintain a trail get a day pass? Do x amount of volunteer work get a year pass? Probably naive in thinking this but it seems that raising the fees and cutting the budget are counter productive.

As for poor families having to choose between NP visit and food. I never went to a NP while my mother was a single mom. No money for that kind of vacation. But we still camped and got outdoors because it was the cheapest way to vacation. Did I miss out? No, I wouldn't trade a single camp trip for a NP visit as a kid.

Now as a single mom with more discretionary income who has lived close (key word) to NP my kids have had the pleasure of many visits to Zion, and now Yellowstone. Are these our top destinations when deciding where to recreate? No, too many people, don't care to try and deal with that, and in general too expensive. The expensive part has little to do with the cost of entering the park. It has more to do with accommodations and other costs of a trip like that. Besides, if I am going out to enjoy nature I want to go where I don't have to share it.

Back to poor families and NP. I think it is a ridiculous point to stand on for trying to prove that park prices shouldn't be raised. There is more money that goes into a trip to a NP than the cost of entry and my bet is the decision to go or not go has more to do with proximity to said park and cost of food and accommodations. $70 for per car go with my family of 3 is what $23.33 per person. Cheaper than taking all 3 of us to the movie and buying popcorn and drinks. But add the cost of hotel room for 3-7days or even a campsite, food, gas and trinkets kids want from visitors center and screw going to a NP if it is more than 2 hours away from me.

There my humble opinion.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
I had been ignoring this thread so I'm sorry it took a while to reply. To be honest if the board is turning in to yet another Internet outlet for venting political frustrations about whatever issues piss people off from week to week, I'll just show myself out.

From my point of view, this thread is relevant to the outdoors and has stayed respectful, which is the criteria for allowing these types of things here. If anyone feels it's getting out of line, please let me know as I may be seeing it differently or missed something. This site is not, nor will it ever be "yet another Internet outlet for venting political frustrations about whatever issues piss people off". If anyone feels it's becoming that, I would strongly encourage you to click 'Report' at the bottom of the offending post and point out the issue so that it can be addressed.
 
Similar threads
Thread starter Title Forum Replies Date
Nick Drilling proposed outside Zion National Park General Discussion 4
IntrepidXJ Arches and Canyonlands National Parks Accepting Comments on Proposed Fee Increases for Backcountry Operations General Discussion 38
Pianomover Trump administration Tuesday proposed allowing logging on more than half of Alaska’s 16.7 million-acre Tongass National Forest, the largest intact tem General Discussion 0
Bob Proposed Caldera National Monument ...... Idaho General Discussion 3
fossana Public comment period open until 10 Mar 2020 for proposed NEPA rollbacks General Discussion 4
Artemus Road Proposed to be Bulldozed through Red Cliffs Recreation Area General Discussion 7
D New dams proposed for Little Colorado River/Grand Canyon General Discussion 2
Perry Any Beta in this Proposed Route Near Coffin Benchmark? Trip Planning 5
IntrepidXJ Proposed Day-Use Permits for Elephant Hill and White Rim Roads General Discussion 4
TheMountainRabbit News Release: Yellowstone National Park increases protection for bears and visitor safety by implementing changes to two bear management areas General Discussion 14
scatman The Gallatin River, Bighorn and Fawn Passes, Yellowstone National Park - September 7, 2023 Backpacking 14
futurafree government shutdown effects on national forests? General Discussion 21
BJett Packrafting the Obed National Wild & Scenic River - Tennessee On The Water 1
fossana New Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni National Monument General Discussion 4
J York Fire, Mojave National Preserve. Aug 2023 Resource Discussions 3
Janice Field Trip - Washington Post podcast about national parks General Discussion 0
I Rescue Creek - Yellowstone National Park - June 3, 2023 Backpacking 15
scatman Rescue Creek - Yellowstone National Park - June 3, 2023 Backpacking 56
TractorDoc Cuyahoga Valley National Park (again!) 06/04/2023 Hiking & Camping 6
TractorDoc Cuyahoga Valley National Park 05/28/2023 Hiking & Camping 20
scatman Rescue Creek - Yellowstone National Park Meet Up (Members Only) 19
D Need suggestions -Beaverhead-Deerlodge National forrest, and Phillipsburg, MT Trip Planning 5
Ted California couple killed in Yosemite National Park rockslide identified by park officials General Discussion 0
NorthwestWanderer Backpacking Grand Teton National Park : Fossil Pass,Fox Creek Pass,Indian Lake,Alaska Basin,Hurricane Pass,Ice Floe Lake,& Snowdrift Lake Backpacking 19
fossana New National Monument planned in Southern NV General Discussion 3
canadug Hiker death in Zion National park :( Hiking & Camping 32
F Frontenac National Park, Quebec, Canada Hiking & Camping 2
J Mojave National Preserve Monsoon Aug. 3, 2022 Trip Planning 2
scatman Shoshone Lake Lollipop Loop - Yellowstone National Park - July 24, 2022 Backpacking 63
Absarokanaut Flooding in Yellowstone National Park and Adjacent Areas of Montana Today June 13, 2022 General Discussion 82
Dreamer El Yunque National Forest Hiking & Camping 3
Rockskipper pay-for-bot-scanning services for National Park campsites - interesting comments General Discussion 1
BJett Big South Fork National River & Recreation Area Packraft/Backpack Loop (TN) Backpacking 6
norwegianxplorer 7 days backpacking Breheimen/Glacier Home National Park in Norway Backpacking 2
pstm13 Rocky Mountain National Park Mid June with Kids Trip Planning 7
pstm13 Rocky Mountain National Park Mid June with Kids Trip Planning 0
Rockskipper Application Period Open For 2023 Private River Trips Through Grand Canyon National Park General Discussion 0
norwegianxplorer Backpacking SAREK NATIONAL PARK, Arctic Sweden, Camping Above RAPADALEN delta. Backpacking 7
balzaccom SAR in our national parks Trip Planning 8
S Mentasta Mountains, Wrangell St. Elias National Park and Preserve- family backpack Backpacking 1
Tim Valentine Point Reyes National Seashore December 2021 Hiking & Camping 14
scatman Grizzly Lake - Yellowstone National Park - September - 2022 Meet Up (Members Only) 149
norwegianxplorer Finding Hidden Glacier, 9 days backpacking Jotunheimen National Park Pt3, Norway. Trip Reports 0
P A short hike on the AT in Shenandoah National Park Hiking & Camping 0
norwegianxplorer Highest Mountain in Norway, Galdhøpiggen, the start of a 9 day backpacking trip in Jotunheimen national park Backpacking 0
norwegianxplorer 5 days Backpacking Rondane National Park, Norway Backpacking 3
norwegianxplorer Backpacking Norway, Femundsmarka National Park Pt 3, Grand Scandinavian Hiking & Backpacking Tour Ep4 Backpacking 0
scatman Gneiss Creek Part 2 - Yellowstone National Park - September 18, 2021 Hiking & Camping 0
norwegianxplorer Backpacking Rogen Nature Reserve, Sweden & Femundsmarka National Park, Norway Pt2 Backpacking 2
scatman Hayden Valley Loop - Yellowstone National Park - September 17, 2021 Hiking & Camping 34

Similar threads

Back
Top