You are here

Concessionaires Want More Investment, Business Opportunities, In National Parks

Share

National park concessionaires, deeply concerned over what they see as three decades of stagnant visitation to the National Park System, want Congress to authorize better marketing of the parks, longer "high" seasons in the parks they believe would generate more revenues for infrastructure improvements, and expanded concessionaire opportunities in the parks.

Those items were among a list of nine that Derrick Crandall, counselor of the National Park Hospitality Association, recently presented to a House appropriations subcommittee with responsibility for Interior, Environment and Related Agencies.

"Mr. Chairman and Members, I know you would agree that we need to get Americans back in touch with nature, engaged in physical activities and outdoor recreation, and connected to the magnificent culture, heritage and landscapes that are celebrated by our National Park System," Mr. Crandall said in remarks prepared for his appearance before the subcommittee on March 19.

"We need to reach out to youth to encourage them to share in the wonder and enjoyment of our National Parks and discourage the increasingly sedentary lifestyles that are contributing to our health care crisis. We need to expand park visitation to encourage minorities, disadvantaged communities, new Americans and urban residents to see their national parks for themselves and to build a broader constituency for America’s great outdoors. And, we need to find new and innovative ways to reinvest in the maintenance, restoration, and expansion of critical park infrastructure – much of which was built either by private investment when the national parks were first created, or in conjunction with the work of the Civilian Conservation Corps more than half a century ago."

While visitation to the National Park System reached a record 292.8 million in 2014, an increase of more than 19 million from 2013, NHPA officials say visitation has "actually declined if you discount new units added to the system."

The solution? According to NHPA, a range of initiatives should be implemented, including:

* Extend the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act for two years to allow the Park Service to continue to collect fees for entry into park units and a variety of recreational activities, including backcountry usage, campgrounds, and boat launches;

* "(C)ontinuation and expansion of the Centennial Challenge Program. Encouraging non-profits, corporations and individuals to contribute toward important national park programs and projects...";

* Creation of a "National Park Outreach and Promotion Fund," funded by a transfer of 10 percent of the concessionaire franchise fees to "support NPS outreach and marketing efforts in partnership with states, gateway communities and concessioners;"

* Expanding the seasons at national parks, a move that would lead to increase visitor spending and franchise fees for the Park Service. These revenues, coupled with "investment requirements under new concessions contracts and appropriate use of existing Leasehold Surrender Interest" should be used to improve infrastructure in the park system.

"There has been a loss of rooms, of restaurant capacity, of services and of retail space in national parks over two decades, producing a corresponding decline in overnight stays and in the average length of visitor stays," Mr. Crandall told the subcommittee.

* More national park campgrounds should be managed by concessionaires "to improve visitor services and reduce operating costs";

* Concessionaires should be allowed to qualify for "historic tax credits from investments in structures" in the parks, and;

* Programs such as Youth Conservation Corps utilized in Yellowstone and Shenandoah national parks should be expanded across the system to "undertake construction, reconstruction and maintenance projects," possibly at a savings for the Park Service.

During a conversation with the Traveler last week, Mr. Crandall said the concessionaires don't expect the Park Service to "dramatically" expand road systems in national parks, but would like to see facility improvements and additions and believe it can be done without posing a great competitive threat to lodging and dining options in gateway communities.

"We seem to be headed in just one direction (in the parks): No increase, reduce, reduce," he said. "While that may be appropriate for Yosemite Valley, while that may be appropriate for portions of Yellowstone, I think for the park system overall, that's not a wise tactic.

"... I think what we're really saying, there is still an opportunity to enhance the ability of visitors to enjoy their park experience in a small portion of the footprint of our National Park System, and by doing that, just have a more robust experience when they're in the parks," Mr. Crandall went on.

"We're not talking about adding dramatically to the road system of the national parks because people now by and large see the parks out of their windshields. The last thing I would ever say is that that's justification for building more roads. But I would say that when you look at Yosemite Valley, and you have 1,500 rooms, which is down dramatically from what we used to have, and only 800 of those have bathrooms, I'm not afraid to say at some point we should look at how we upgrade those rooms so that 1,500 rooms have 1,500 bathrooms."

How Congress responds to the concessionaires remains to be seen, but Mr. Crandall plans to continue discussions with the appropriate committee and subcommittee chairs and ranking members.

"I'd say we got an enthusiastic level of support from all of the members of Congress that we talked to," he said in reference to his recent appearance before the subcommittee. "And that includes even people on the minority side. They all agree that they want to continue a successful pattern of providing services for the visitors in the parks through private sector investment in things like lodges."

Comments

It is also due to more 18-24 year olds going to college: 12 million in 1988 vs. 21 million today.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/declining-labor-participation-rates/

We dropped out of the labor force on January 1, 2014 - when I was able to get health insurance without having to have a job. And I know quite a few people 45-64 that did the same thing. Our leaving the labor force allowed two people that needed jobs to get them.

 


when I was able to get health insurance without having to have a job.

You always could have health insurance without a job.

And I know quite a few people 45-64 tht did

Maybe you did, but that wasn't the majority.  In fact, the age of retirement has been rising.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168707/average-retirement-age-rises.aspx

It is also due to more 18-24 year olds going to college: 12 million in 1988 vs. 21 million today.

That nine million increase in students is far more than offset by a 75 million increase in population since 1988

 

 


The age of retiring may have a shifting playing field but it is relative. My son, at 41 today, will be allowed full retirement benefits at a later age than I was.


"You always could have health insurance without a job."

Tell that to my daughter who was forced into bankruptcy and lost her small business because she couldn't find AFFORDABLE health insurance due to chronic illness from an on-the-job injury.

Thanks goodness for ACA.

In the meantime, concessionaires are seeking more profits while others are whining about small fees for special services in our parks.

Is any of this supposed to make sense?


re: concessioners seeking more profits. Here are two possible examples from Mr. Crandall's statement above:

"More national park campgrounds should be managed by concessionaires 'to improve visitor services and reduce operating costs'";

"Concessionaires should be allowed to qualify for 'historic tax credits from investments in structures' in the parks..."

Both of those seem to be efforts to increase the bottom line for these companies. Whether concessioner operated campgrounds would "improve visitor services" is subject to question.


Lee - I am all for providing insurance coverage for "prior conditions" if someone was previously insured.  What I am not for is someone spending hundreds a month on cable tv and an Iphone and expecting me to pay for their healthcare insurance.  Or for someone that was running their own business and failed to adaquatly insure themself and now want us to pay for it.  The ACA is a disaster.

In the meantime, concessionaires are seeking more profits

Support that accusation


Both of those seem to be efforts to increase the bottom line

Or lower cost and improve services to the vistior.  But then there is nothing inconsistent or wrong with wanting to "improve the bottom line" and lower cost and improve services to the visitor. 


Nothing wrong with lowering costs or improving service, if that in fact occurred; you just asked for support of Lee's statement that "concessionaires are seeking more profits," so I provided some.


The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.