You are here

DOI Report: National Park Service Left Tens Of Millions Dollars On The Table In Potential Fees

Share

By failing six years ago to implement higher entrance fees across all 131 parks that charge them, the National Park Service left tens of millions of dollars on the table in potential revenues, a report from the Interior Department's Inspector General asserts.

While the Park Service now is trying to boost entrance fees across many of those parks, it could have been collecting an additional $28 million a year from 2008 on but failed to do so, in part because of the long and cumbersome process that must be navigated to gain approval for higher fees, the report pointed out. Former National Park Service Director Mary Bomar in 2008 lifted the moratorium on entrance fees increases, but parks were hesitant to seek permission to raise fees, the report noted.

* NPS froze entrance fees shortly after implementing a new fee model in 2006. Today only 24 out of 131 entrance-fee-charging park units charge fees according to the model. NPS could collect approximately $28 million more in fees each year just by fully implementing the current fee model.

* Park units can change their fees if a “compelling” reason exists, but our review of NPS memoranda showed that the NPS Director had not defined alignment with the fee model as a compelling reason to raise fees. Furthermore, NPS’ process for changing recreation fees can take well over a year, and the time and effort needed to go through the process had likely deterred park units from attempting to update their fees.

Millions more -- $4 million-$5 million per year -- were lost to the agency due to a failure to properly assess bus tours for park entrance, and because of the many discounted and free passes the Park Service hands out, the report noted. 

The lost revenues, theoretically, could have boosted the Park Service's coffers substantially. According to the report, recreation fees generated $82.5 million for the agency during Fiscal 2012. If parks acted after the moratorium was lifted in 2008 to bring their fees in line with the fee model approved in 2006, the uncollected fees could have boosted those FY12 revenues to nearly $115 million for that fiscal year. Had the fees been implemented, and adjusted annually for inflation, the total might have been greater, the report added.

But Kitty Benzar, president of the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition that opposes entrance fees on public lands, viewed the report as misguided.

"My observation is that it starts from a flawed premise, so everything else in it is irrelevant," she told the Traveler. "The flawed premise is that the NPS should have as a goal the maximizing of recreation-fee revenue. What ever happened to public lands providing a public good? Monetizing the parks has got to be 'America's Worst Idea.'"

The DOI report also noted the free or greatly discounted passes the Park Service distributes. For instance, in 2012 the agency sold more than 500,000 Senior Passes for $10. Those sales generated just $5 million, far below the $40 million that might have been collected had those passes been sold for the full $80 price. The total would go even higher if the passes had to be renewed annually. Under the current program, the $10 Senior Pass, available to U.S. residents age 62 and older, is good for the rest of holder's life. 

The Park Service during Fiscal 2012 also distributed, for free, more than 62,000 "Access Passes" to citizens and permanent residents with permanent disabilities.

But as the report noted, it would take an act of Congress to alter those fee schedules.

"The fact that changing the fees for these passes would require legislative intervention hampers agencies’ flexibility and their ability to make business decisions that would accommodate changing economic conditions and balance visitors’ needs with recreation management priorities," the report pointed out.

In response to the report, Park Service officials said they were not only proposing higher fees in the National Park System, but evaluating fees for commercial bus tours and commercial use authorizations for concessions, and waiting to see if Congress renews the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act before considering an increase in the current $80 America the Beautiful National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass.

Comments

There have been lots of opinions expressed on the Traveler about fees, many of them in opposition to those fees. As reported earlier on the Traveler, a few parks have decided to either cut back on plans to increase fees, and a few have dropped such fees completely.

The tone of the IG report described in the above story appears to be critical of the NPS for failing to maximize revenue. ("By failing six years ago to implement higher entrance fees across all 131 parks that charge them, the National Park Service left tens of millions of dollars on the table in potential revenues...").

Will park manager's feel added pressure to increase fees as a result of this report from higher up in the organization? It seems unlikely any report from the IG would be simply ignored, so the question is whether its implied recommendations to increase fee income will be challenged or implemented. 

 


Believe that 6 years ago time frame is the same as the big stimulous injection of cash to NPS ($600 Mil comes to mind),  Cash for Clunkers and a number of other programs.  The timing, including the economic crash, probably made the decision to raise fees politically not smart. 


Good observation about the situation 6 years ago. Wonder if the IG report acknowledged those factors.


 

"What ever happened to public lands providing a public good? Monetizing the parks has got to be 'America's Worst Idea.'"

Amen Mrs. Benzar.  Thanks for your service to American taxpayers. You are a hero.


Dittos Smokiesbackpacker, I agree, Kitty Benzar got to the crux of the issue. "Our parks should be nature centers, not profit centers", David Brower. 


It would be wonderful to have free parks.

But in a time when Congress refuses to fund them, what alternative is there?

How about showing us a way to drop fees and still operate and protect our parks?

Complaining about a problem is easy.  Solving it is usually isn't quite that simple.

 


Good point Lee, I am not opposed to all fees, entrance and camping fees seem appropriate if kept at reasonable levels. I do think many of the new fee increases are out of reach for many including sliding scale charges, ie the prime season costs more, charging for hiking and backpacking, the list goes on, sets economic barriers to many citizens. California State Parks are charging 50,00 a night for a prime campsite, that is where this NPS fee authority is headed.  Basically, the congress needs to fund the core operational needs of our public lands, I think that is Kitty Benzar's point. How that is to be done is a contentious political debate of this era, it is an interesting issue.  


Believe me, Ron, I would love to see free parks.  But as long as we have Tea Party influencing Congress, it's unlikely to happen.

I really wonder how many of those who push the Tea Party agenda also complain about fees.  Their goals are simply not realistic at all.


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.