A fine idea, Harryb. Before the day is over I will have mailed a paper letter to Director Jarvis. On Monday I'll be at the door of Senator Hatch's local office with a letter to him. Let's try to start a movement here. What might happen if there was a deluge of letters to people who might be in positions to act?
Sorry Jim, can't buy the $224 billion number. "lost productivity'? Well then, I guess laziness cost the economy $1 trillion. Let's outlaw laziness. And of course that number isn't net of the contribution that alcohol makes to the economy in the form of sales, jobs, taxes etc. BTW - how does the government pay for "lost productivity'? Are these mostly government workers?
Director Jarvis. I think we would like to hear from you on this issue. Do you still think associating the Park Service with Budweiser represents a positive message to young generations of Americans. Do you really want this to be part of your legacy as Director?
Let's reduce the advertising phrase "introduce a new generation of beer drinkers to the national parks" to its real meaning. What it really means is "to entice a new generation into the world of alcoholic irresponsibility and potential addiction."All in the name of money.
I agree Alfred (thank you again), the numbers are quite compelling and take up a huge amount of time for the park protection staff. Not only tragic accidents, severe disruptions to other visitors, time consuming litigation and court time, it is the single most time consuming duty I had on the night shift in Yosemite.
Some will shrug off 88,000 deaths a yearAssuming that number is true it is less than 1/2 of 1 percent of the population. Tragic for them - yes. But are we to base national policy on that? PS Do you have a source for "$224 billion as a result of alcohol misuse"?
Some will shrug off 88,000 deaths a year and an estimated annual cost to the nation's economy of $224 billion as a result of alcohol misuse as "minor," ... but others of us put a different value on those individual lives that were wasted.
Does someone commenting here have large stockholdings in Budweiser?I don't know Lee. Who would you suggest? Do you have any knowledge that someone posting here as a large holding in AB? Or, is this just one of your typical unsubstantiated ad hominen attacks?
Mr. Dan Wenk First of all let me say that I think many of us who support and are concerned about the future and wellbeing of our National Parks do appreciate that you took the time to respond to the growing chorus of criticism concerning the partnership between the Park Service and Budweiser.
Not to be overly argumentative, EC, but your stating that it is a minor portion of the population doesn't make it so. Some of us who have had to sweep up after the parade, so to speak, would offer a different opinion, based on hard won experience.
Actually, EC, all of the statistics here are very compelling. An estimated one half of all automobile fatalities are due to drugs and alcohol. For young people under age 24, the primary cause of death is auto accident. So, where does that leave us in the parks? As I recall the Walt Disney movie, Pollyanna fell out of a tree.
Thank you Dr. Runte. Right on. Interesting enough, people are taking notice, received a call from the local newspaper on this issue, other friends have as well. Alfred, I would like to see your post in letter form.
Smokies Backpacker - my very sincere wish is that no female relative or friend of yours experiences the very real tragedy of rape, which is such a different reality from your use of the word to describe policies you disagree with that there is really no comparison. Don't let your passion for your issues belittle by comparison what women experience in these crimes.
Not too disagree with Dr. Runte's fine post, but be aware that delays of several weeks or even months are common before letters reach Congress-critters in DC. This is a hangover from the anthrax attacks years ago. This article suggests that if you must, write to the official's office in your state:
I enjoy venting as much as the next person, but the deeper issue still remains: This is our culture. This is what we have become. If you don't want your Park Service "selling out," how might you better--and far more effectively --get your message across?
If rape is too offensive then you may want to cover your ears. Because that is precisely what Jarvis is doing with public lands. Whoring them out to the highest bidder. Morals are great, unless they apply to the beloved NPS. Hypocrites.
"the perfect beer for removing ‘no’ from your vocabulary for the night.” You find that a ridiculous accusation? Seriously? It so blatantly encourages rape and drunk driving. Those are not serious issues to you? What are? Denying climate change? Giving kids assault weapons? Tax breaks for polluters? You are truly unbelievable and breathtakingly clueless.
Speaking as a former nurse who has had to care for rape victims, I don't find calling an alcohol campaign that promises to ignore no to be 'encouraging a culture of rape' to be a 'rediculous' [sic] 'aqusation' [sic].
"A risqué Bud Light campaign that critics said encouraged a culture of rape "It is hard for me to get past rediculous aqusations like this and while it may serve the purpose of getting a headline, it distracts from the real issues and for me greatly diminishes any arguments used after that.
Thank you for your reporting Traveler and thank you Lee, I could not agree more. I attended a function where the issue of the Bud advertising slogan on this National Park F a oundation campaign was raised, very negative reaction to it. "PEER" laid it out very well.
I'm afraid we are already sliding rapidly down that infamous slippery slope of lubricated money. When dollars take priority over other values, we all lose.Removing "NO" from the vocabulary for the night doesn't only include rape. There's drunk driving among just a few thousand other possible bits of alcohol enhanced stupidity.
Budweiser has been losing market share to Keystone Light and Pabst Blue Ribbon because so many of the young Park beer drinkers drink those brands. So it makes good sense for Budweiser to try to recover some market share and sponsor the NP. The NPS may be encouraging drinking because the drunks are too hungover to hike much or do anything but sleep it off and leave less human footprints.
Thank you, Ron. I'll look up Professor Scott's article. Meanwhile, some excellent points above. I think we're all starting to get to the heart of the matter--commercializing the national parks is a slippery slope. In 1931, Coca Cola did a major series of ads on the national parks, one of which I frequently show in my lectures.
Thank you Alfred, but it is not just the NPS, it is a mindset well established in our nations political leadership and their faith in the economic theories of Hydak, Freidman, Greenspan, others, in my own perhaps uniformed opinion.
I think that drawing fine distinctions about what products are appropriate or inappropriate for sponsorship is a rabbit hole worth avoiding. Alcohol and tobacco are prohibited, but (theoretically) pharmaceuticals and fast food chains are OK? We'd need a phone book sized document to spell out what's "appropriate" and what isn't.
Exactly, Ron. The point is to get us thinking, which sometimes requires the writer to write tongue-in-cheek. I did say the Park Service was selling its soul. My point is to remind us when corporations did NOT force us to do that. They respected the culture, too. Is the Park Service that out of touch with its past? You bet it is, and therein lies the problem.
I'm going to post this comment in an attempt to draw attention to what I think is an extreme threat to an American treasure. Arguing about beer logos seems to be diverting us from what could be an even more critical issue.What can be done to stop this?