There was a disconcerting column in the Utne Reader the other day, one that dubbed those who tried to visit all 58 national parks "elitist." "Determined," is one adjective that comes immediately to mind when talk turns to visiting all 58, but "elitist"?
Under the title, Don't Be a National Park Bagger, writer Keith Goetzman claims that those who set out to visit all 58 of the "national parks" do so so fleetingly that they can't possibly come to truly, and intimately, appreciate the 58. Plus, he points out, you'd leave a huge carbon footprint with all the driving and flying necessary to accomplish the task.
"Face it", writes Mr. Goetzman, "only the wealthiest and luckiest among us has the vacation time, the money, and the means to have a chance at ticking off all 58 parks, and even announcing your achievement to the world can come perilously close to bragging about what an amazingly fortunate life you lead—not the sort of message parks advocates should be sending."
Hopefully the folks who are members of the National Park Travelers Club don't catch wind of his column. This group celebrates travelers who look at visiting as many of the 391 units of the National Park System not as something that's elitist but rather something that's both a challenge and a great way to celebrate and appreciate the national parks movement in the United States.
And really, how elitist is it? Where I live in Utah, seven national parks are within a half-day's drive. Stretch that to a full day on the road and I can add another six. With some rather typical vacation planning, anyone in the country could knock off anywhere between three and five national parks during a two-week vacation, or a series of four-day weekends scattered throughout the year. Would it really be that "elitist," if you were so determined, to visit the 58 national parks over a period of a decade or so? True, for those on the East Coast getting to Alaska could be an expensive endeavor, just as it would be for those in Alaska determined to visit Everglades or Virgin Islands national parks. But over the course of your adult lifetime, it wouldn't necessarily be impossible if you were determined to visit the parks.
Concerned about your carbon footprint? There are mass transit options that can be combined with park shuttle systems, as well as other ways to offset your carbon footprint.
The other point Mr. Goetzman raises is whether those who set out to tour the 58 could come away with more than a superficial, fawning glance.
...the “collect ’em all” mentality goes against a better, nobler impulse, which is to get to know the land intimately. Better that we should acquaint ourselves with one, two, or a few parks very well than attempt to superficially survey them all in baseball-card-collector fashion. Several years ago, I worked for the summer in Alaska’s Wrangell-St. Elias National Park, driving a tourist shuttle van between the tiny gateway community of McCarthy and the mining relic town of Kennicott. Among my passengers I met a few park baggers, most memorably a man and his teenage son. They “explored” the park in an afternoon, which meant strolling among Kennicott’s dilapidated buildings, looking up at the stupendous glaciers around them, and then riding my van back down to resume their journey. Never mind that Wrangell-St. Elias is the nation’s largest park at 13 million acres, and that even someone who’s there for months, as I was, can barely claim to have scratched the surface of its vast wonder. The man told me that they were off next to the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, which they would fly over in a bush plane—not even setting foot on the tundra. They added both parks to their all-important list, yet they didn’t have a true wilderness experience in either place.
Indeed, if all you seek to attain is a National Park Passport stamp, then yes, "park bagging" is over-rated and denies those involved in such an endeavor a tremendous opportunity to see fantastic landscapes and get at least an introduction to different ways of life and cultures. But let's be fair to those who visit Wrangell-St. Elias. The park, spanning more than 13 million acres, has two gravel roads that make forays of a combined 101 miles into the park's 20,580 square miles. Even if you knew how to live off the land and had the available time, it likely would take more than a lifetime to "know the land intimately."
Many people do fall in love with a small handful of parks, and visit them time and time and time again, which can be a wonderfully rewarding experience. But let's not be so self-righteous as to ridicule those who want to see as many of these magnificent landscapes and soak up the rewards they offer.
Comments
The idea that people don't get into nature enough or travel enough is close to my heart, so I I was disturbed by the article referenced here enough to write to Mr. Goetzman, and now we've exchanged thoughtful and enlightening emails.
If I interpret him correctly, what he wanted to express was a distaste for "collecting" the parks just to reach a number and do some chest-thumping upon attaining it. He's not denying that the educational, emotional, or perhaps spiritual value for some people may make the carbon expense worthwhile. He says everyone has to look at their activities and decide for themselves if it's worth it. I think he'd be less critical if someone was celebrating the education of the journey (ala imtnbke above) rather than the magical number of 58.
I told him I thought is was his obligation, as a skilled writer, to visit these places and tell their story. He said he always tries to tell nature's story and will continue to do so.
He also argued that despite my contention that you can visit National Parks on the cheap, American Samoa is reserved for those with a bit of extra cash. I checked plane fare, and will have to concede that point to Mr. Goetzman!
Just thought I'd share that, as we are all brutalizing him here, and he seems like a good guy whose point would have been better expressed with an extra 2,000 words in the original article.
Having enjoyed most of the National Parks and Monuments along with numerous State, County and Local remarkable, historical and natural wonders I have yet to purchase some book that is meant to defined my experiences to a single journal.
It is amazing having these experiences yet having to think about purchasing a book for $9 or using that same money to actually enjoy the park by offsetting my camping fee was always a quick decision. No offense to those that enjoy that experience. We all find our riches in the things we enjoy but remember that book does not define the endless amount of experiences our Nation has available to you and your family.
I encourage everyone to become an elitist and start by taking a walk around a local park then making a day hike to saving up enough money to camp outdoors for a night. You will be surprised how easy it is when you set your priorities in life and do not worry if you missed a stamp or forgot to buy a postcard. Our parks are not a shopping mall. (Although maybe one day I will spend a year and revisit all the parks to get a stamp but what will that do for me in the end?)
AMEN BROTHER!
While it might not be elitist to visit all National Parks, those who can manage it are certainly fortunate. I spent four years in Alaska and I couldn't afford to visit more than a handful. I had to balance trips in state with the need to travel to the outside (medical needs, visiting aging parents, sibling's wedding, etc.). You can't get to some of those parks hitchhiking or in fuel efficient vehicle. I may have missed several and I'm not likely to go back, but I feel so fortunate to see the ones I did visit.
As someone above mentioned, not all of us are physically fit enough to visit the parks as Mr. Goetzman seems to have indicated we should. My husband and I have visited over 20 of the parks and many more of the sites, driving as much as we could and walking as much as we could. But at 65 and 85, there isn't much walking going on. We still love the parks and will continue to visit as many as we can, elitist or not. (As an aside, we are also looking for the 50+ Wispering Giants carved by Peter Toth in the 70's and 80's. Now there's someithng to atain. )
My husband and I always loved visiting our National Parks. One day he counted how many we had been to over the years and it was 35. We then decided to "do" them all, and did. We definitely did not make windshield visits. Some hiking at most places. We have been to Yosemite many times and Death Valley several times. Utah's parks have also been repeats, as was Denali. The eight in Alaska were the most difficult. Actually, the only really difficult ones were Kobuk and Gates of the Artic. During a lot of our trips we were living on a modest retirement income, not exactly elitiest. And we did it from our home in Hawaii. We had some wonderful experiences and lots of good memories. I highly recommend seeing our beautiful country this way.
Just stumbling onto this article now! Visiting all the US National Parks is on my bucketlist and i've been doing research for future park trips. I'm 22 and I don't come from a wealthy background. I know it will likely take me decades to get to all of the parks and i'm totally ok with that! I plan to try and plan my trips in regions, ect. all the Oregon parks in one big trip. I figure if I do one big trip like that every other year or a closer/smaller park once a year I can accomplish my goal. As I plan my trips I can't help but wonder what parks will be established during my quest?
It is elitist to say that your way of visiting the parks is the best way of visiting the parks, there is not an elitist way to visit the parks. Kieth Goetzman was being blatantly (and hypocritically) elitist when he complained that there are people who are visiting the parks the "wrong" way, i.e. not HIS way. His article was textbook elitism.