National Park Fees Increase

Perhaps when they arrive by the bus load they all had to pay the $70 each not a hugely discounted busload price? I just hope the increased revenue funds projects in the park not management raises and retirement. Yeah and the Tooth Fairy exists too.
Without any doubt they are wonderful and unique and should be protected and preserved for generations to enjoy and not turned into gaudy amusement parks.
 
Last edited:
woody said:
I just hope the increased revenue funds projects in the park not management raises and retirement.
Click to expand...

See, I don't mind paying a bit more to access any of these parks in the hopes that the money raised actually went to improving and protecting the Parks. $70 is cheaper than taking a family of four out to dinner. After seeing how over crowded and how inadequate aging infrastructure was in Acadia NP to meet overflowing demands, I can see the need. But with the way any government agency works I fear that it will just go to continued budget bloat and social engineering programs.
 
RoamingRobertsons said:
Exactly. When I was a college student, I went to parks fairly often. I’m sure inflation would provide an interesting discussion but at that rate I probably would have not gone nearly as much. It’s great that we have so many foreigners who use our parks. I’d be fine having them pay and make it free for citizens.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
I would hope that there is some type of oversight to see where the increased revenue goes.If handled properly this could be a good thing for the parks?
 
woody said:
I would hope that there is some type of oversight to see where the increased revenue goes.If handled properly this could be a good thing for the parks?
Click to expand...

One would hope so but who here puts any faith in politicos doing what's right for managing the park ahead of personal agendas.
 
RoamingRobertsons said:
<snip> It’s great that we have so many foreigners who use our parks. I’d be fine having them pay and make it free for citizens.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting concept. I wonder if that same logic is applied overseas? My experience in that domain is limited since it was generally travel sponsored by the government and accompanied by a minimum of a Marine rifle platoon for security.

Since @Jonathan Hanson favors that strategy and has a significant number of locations that he's traveled internationally I have a question for him and any others with travel outside the USA... do those countries charge a fee to use their equivalent parks and wild-lands?
 
woody said:
I would hope that there is some type of oversight to see where the increased revenue goes.If handled properly this could be a good thing for the parks?
Click to expand...

Kind of like California Green Sticker fees for non-street legal OHV vehicles in CA. Those fees were supposed to go to OHV area improvements...they ended up in the general fund.
 
Utah, in particular, has been advertising heavily in Europe for encourage people to visit their Parks. I spoke with both a NP and BLM ranger in September and Zion and Bryce had had several million visitors -- by June!! The Europeans typically come after Labor Day.
 
I have been to a few state parks that were free or had cheaper rates for citizens of that state, but had higher rates for out of staters. This is very common practice for hunting and fishing licenses.
 
I am okay paying for access to a National Park. I think the people that complain about paying to access the Federal Parks are some of the 50% of the country that does not even pay Federal Income Tax (citizens and illegal aliens.) Not everything is free, someone has to pay.

I know I paid extra to access some of Egypt's National Sites as a non-resident & non-muslim visitor.
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Hanson said:
Call me a communist, but I think our national parks should be fully funded at the federal level through, yes, taxes. Look at the highest budgets the parks ever had and it was minuscule in the overall economy. The lowest-income citizens of our country should have the same right to enjoy the parks as the richest.
Click to expand...
I agree 101%. Whats a shame is the funding for these are low & of the unimportance at a federal level. IMO the moneys spent on foolish spending by our government would help our national parks. I am willing to pay more to see what was made possible by one president legacy. I bet Theodore Roosevelt shaking that big stick @ our government today.
 
Jonathan Hanson said:
Call me a communist, but I think our national parks should be fully funded at the federal level through, yes, taxes. Look at the highest budgets the parks ever had and it was minuscule in the overall economy. The lowest-income citizens of our country should have the same right to enjoy the parks as the richest.
Click to expand...

All in on that.

National Parks Conservation Association
Support Increased National Park Funding Ask your members of Congress to reject the president's proposed budget for fiscal year 2018 and instead help parks recover from years of underfunding.

https://www.npca.org/advocacy/21-support-increased-national-park-funding
 
Datapoint: Cape Hatteras National Seashore & Rec Area instituted a first time ever fee for vehicle beach access 5 or 6 years ago. Guvmint said that 75% (or was it 80%) would stay local to fund cost of the program and improvements. While there has been some debate about the specific actions taken under that split, there have been real improvements made to access that were long needed and have now been accomplished thanks to that funding.
Datapoint: As others have mentioned, some states have multi-tiered pricing based on in-state/out-of-state residency. Montana (Bannack) and Nebraska (Rock Creek Station) are two examples I've seen.
Disclaimer: I generally visit National Parks riding on the coat tails of my wife's Senior Pass which was $10 when we got it rather than the $15 it would have cost us to enter Olympic NP so the admission price is seldom of personal consequence to me.
I understand the concept of supply and demand and how peak attendance periods can probably collect higher fees. It also says that higher prices will affect attendance counts though.
There's a big part of me that believes the owners of the National Parks (American citizens) should get maximum access to our/their land. Admissions have been charged at some of the Parks since 1953 so its really a matter of how much is "right".
There's some worthwhile reading on the history of park fees at https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/mackintosh3/fees2.htm
I suspect that the periods of peak attendance are determined as much by vacation availability (school schedules, work time peaks, etc) more than prime enjoyment periods for the park.
I think I'd be more likely to support a higher fee for a given park with a firm commitment that the overwhelming majority stays in that park and if the fee was even throughout the year instead of peak-period pricing.
 
price.jpg
 
Jonathan Hanson said:
Call me a communist, but I think our national parks should be fully funded at the federal level through, yes, taxes. Look at the highest budgets the parks ever had and it was minuscule in the overall economy. The lowest-income citizens of our country should have the same right to enjoy the parks as the richest.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Just for discussion Comrades - Ivan, Yuri, et al... we have a federal budget.

The collective believes that the central government should fully fund our National Parks for every citizen to enjoy. Some have suggested raising taxes to do this. If so, how much are you willing to levy upon every citizen, including the, "lowest-income citizens of our country".

If raising taxes is an unpopular notion, keeping in mind that there is a budget that our legislators should keep to, what are you in favor of cutting out of the budget to realign to Park Service funding to achieve unfettered access to every citizen?

Spasiba tovarich!
 
TangoBlue said:
Just for discussion Comrades - Ivan, Yuri, et al... we have a federal budget.

The collective believes that the central government should fully fund our National Parks for every citizen to enjoy. Some have suggested raising taxes to do this. If so, how much are you willing to levy upon every citizen, including the, "lowest-income citizens of our country".

If raising taxes is an unpopular notion, keeping in mind that there is a budget that our legislators should keep to, what are you in favor of cutting out of the budget to realign to Park Service funding to achieve unfettered access to every citizen?

Spasiba tovarich!
Click to expand...

I would start with the "slush fund" kept to pay for settlements for misdeeds, and I am being kind here guys, of our members in congress. In reality there is no short or easy solution to an issue that has festered so long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom