Visitor Center
Copyright 2005-2013
National Park Advocates LLC
Follow the Traveler
Friends of the Traveler
Sign Up For Traveler's Weekly Newsletter
Recent comments
- ecbuck on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- Lee Dalton on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- ecbuck on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- ecbuck on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- mountainhiker on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- Jim Burnett on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- ecbuck on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- mountainhiker on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- ecbuck on Organizations Want Veto Power Over...
- Amarillobymorning on Visiting the Parks: Petroglyph National...
I'm glad to hear from the real hunters like Chris. Thank You. My wife's family had a fishing resort on the St. Mary's river in the UP so I've been very close to the hunters and fishermen and rarely did I run into the unscrupulous behavior as what the Alaska Board of Fish and Game is allowing to go on in Katmai National Preserve. I've read more dribble about seemingly scientific data that supposedly supports the thinning of the bear population on Katmai. Chris, like you stated, the issue is really pulling up to the wildlife and slaughtering them before they have even had a chance to finish eating; leaving only their dead carcass in the field to attract more bears for the skilled hunter to shoot!! This seems to be what only a handful of bear hunting advocates and outfitters are trying to convince everyone is good sound game management and this should be accepted by all!! Well' it's not going to be accepted by most and this issue will be resolved. I'd like to hear from more skilled and ethical hunters like yourself. Make sure you write your Congressman to stop this kind of hunting..mention GMU 9C 703.
National park visitation yo-yos up and down for hard-to-pin-down reasons. Just a year ago there were some in Congress so worried over declining visitation that they held hearings into the trends. Of course, those making the most noise were those who make a buck off the parks -- concessionaires, gateway towns, etc.
This year trends seem to be reversing, as we're hearing about increases in places like Yosemite, Yellowstone, Olympic and elsewhere. Still, in recent years there's been a general concern about national park visitation. For instance, in 2003, a report on forecasting visitation to national parks noted that, "Since 1987, NPS visitation has been flat or decreasing."
That said, I'm not terribly worried about the current state of visitation. I love it when I can go to Arches or Canyonlands and have the place to myself. Or when I can head into Yellowstone's backcountry and not see another party.
The problem, though, is that I'm smack dab in the middle of the Baby Boom generation, which many believe is the generation best connected with nature and thus national parks. Here's a snippet I wrote in March 2006 when reviewing Richard Louv's book, Last Child in the Woods:
And then there's Mr. Louv's own research. "This new, symbolic demarcation line suggests that Baby Boomers -- Americans born between 1946 and 1964 -- may constitute the last generation of Americans to share an intimate, familial attachment to the land and water," he writes (on page 19 if you want to look it up).
As urban areas continue to spread, as iPods and iPhones and Wiis continue to dominate the minds of youth, where will the next generation of guardians for nature come from?
At the Leadership Summit I just returned from, the conference was concluded with a panel discussion involving University of Texas students. Sadly, many of those kids don't fully appreciate or understand the national park system. To lure college-age students to the parks they suggested staging concerts in the parks and that there be days when entrance fees to the parks are waived (Gee, isn't that already done?). They also suggested creating iPod tours of the parks (Gee, isn't THAT already being done?).
My concern, Beamis, is not with current visitation trends. My concern is who will be advocates for the parks when my generation is gone? And frankly, I think it's a very valid question, one that is quite legitimate for a director of the National Park Service to ask.
Anonymous why do you automatically suppose that the only children at national parks are "privileged rich kids"? At Mammoth Cave I saw plenty of local Kentucky hill folk out for a weekend in the sun to picnic, hike and fish in the Green River. Luckily for them that park charges no entrance fee and it has many miles of scenic trails, back roads and river access besides the cave which they can enjoy.
With the ever rising prices to visit other parks the NPS experience is increasingly becoming a rich persons prerogative. Interestingly enough there IS something very tangible that the agency could do to encourage more of your so called "inner city" visitors: lower entrances prices!
I agree with Rick that this story has very short legs and will fade in a few days. I have commented on the Yellowstone fiasco as well and hope more of you National Park Travelers will speak up on this much more important issue concerning the politics and mismanagement going on in our oldest park.
These things will save people - they are a good thing.
I agree there will need to be action taken to discourage misuse. I will pay at least $100 if I ever fat finger the alarm on my home - and a police visit is somewhat less risky and costly than a mt. rescue.
Are there areas of the Grand Canyon where a gps can not see enough satellites to calculate an accurate location?
I am going to agree with Beamis on one point. It is the Director's main job to defend and protect the parks and programs of the National Park Service. She needs to make sure that parks have sufficient resources to 1. preserve and protect resources; 2. provide high quality visitor services; and 3. maintain productive relationships with park interest groups. She also needs to assure that the Park Service's rsponsiblities for recreation and historic preservation outside the boundaries of the parks are effectively carried out.
That said, I don't think she should be constrained from publicly commenting on issues that she believes may potentially affect these parks and programs. I consider her language about "struggling for the hearts and minds of people seduced by the dark side of video games" to be over-the-top. But I too wonder about what the future holds for the National Park System, not so much in terms of fluctuating visitor counts, but in terms of the political support for preserving and protecting the parks. During my years with the NPS, its most fanatical supporters were those who visited the sites and experienced what they had to offer. If we don't connect with people who vote or will vote, we will risk losing that support that has always been so important.
So, let's cut the Director some slack. Maybe her speech writer had an off day,. I'm a lot more worried about her decision to support snowmobiles in Yellowstone than I am about her speech in Austin. After all, who will remember it 5 months from now? I guarantee you we will be hearing snowmobiles in Yellowstone and the Tetons for longer than that. And that's really from the dark side.
Rick Smith
Beamis: your quote, "but Iv'e seen plenty of kids enjoying the national parks". What kids!? Privileged rich kids who have access to the parks. Most inner city folks are too busy working two or three jobs to maintain a family, and with less time to shuttle their kids to the National Parks. Maybe a helping hand from the NPS could give more insight on this topic...at least take a big step towards this direction. The National Parks are meant to educate and not to be stifled by such comments like yours.
I was at Mammoth Cave this past weekend and judging from the lines that I stood in there wasn't a shortage of visitors or young people. The same could be said of my trip to Zion, Yellowstone and Grand Teton in June or to Cape Canaveral National Seashore in April. I don't know what parks you've been visiting but I've seen plenty of kids enjoying the national parks. The ones on my cave tour were well mannered and asked good questions.
If the numbers are dropping some isn't that a good thing? I remember when I was a ranger back in the 1990's and the high-pitched whining screech constantly heard emanating from NPS management was that the public was "loving the parks to death". This was practically a mantra.
Why does the NPS always seem to see-saw back and forth from one crisis mode to another? I thought less visitation was good for the sake of the resource.
Go figure.
I think you're reading too much into Director Bomar's rhetoric. Remember whom she was addressing. I didn't interpret her as saying the NPS needs to add one more duty to its roster, but rather that we as a society have to recognize a responsibility to, if you will, lead the youth of America into the woods and show them the wonderment that resides there.
Will "visitors surely come" if the NPS simply maintains the integrity of the park system? I wouldn't be so sure. Someone needs to tell the world what that system holds. In these days, maintaining a park is no guarantee that someone will come to visit.
It is the legislated responsibility of the NPS to preserve and protect federally owned natural and historic areas that have been officially designated as such by Congress. The idea that this same agency is somehow duty bound to help wean young people from their "tight focus on everything electronic" is not, nor should it be, part of its mission. This is not the proper function of government.
The idea that a director of a federal agency is "doing battle" to win over young people is ludicrous. Just pick up the trash, lead the cave tours and burn out the underbrush when it gets dangerously thick. The free market will decide who comes to visit. This is not a social welfare agency responsible for individual moral uplift. That is the personal choice of each person in the free market place of ideas and products.
If the kids of today prefer a Gameboy to to a hike in the woods that is none of Ms. Bomar's business. All she needs to concern herself with is maintaining the integrity of the parks in her charge and the visitors will surely come. The Organic Act says nothing about doing battle to win hearts and minds, but only to provide for the enjoyment of whomever happens to come through the park entrance regardless of who they may happen to be.
Damn Kurt, your so right! I see kids in the inner cities just starving for someone to thrown them into the woods. I mean that literally! I advocate more leadership academies for such a purpose. However, in the long run I don't endorse any of Bush's environmental, economic or war policies.
I am totally against a legal bear hunt be allowed in Katmai National Preserve. Thank you for bringing this to the attention of some of us unawares.
I think it's wholly appropriate for the director of the National Park Service to be concerned about the youth of America in regard to the national parks. Frankly, I think all of us should be concerned about the younger generations and their tight focus on everything electronic and cartoons of mockery and disrespect.
I could understand castigating someone for endorsing such behavior, but why criticize a public official for their concern over younger generations growing more and more detached from the natural world around them? What's wrong with someone in Washington taking a stance on the importance of getting the younger generations away from their electronics and into nature, if only for a while?
After all, where there are no park advocates, there is no park system.
"Our children have been seduced by the dark side of video games," Park Service Director Mary Bomar said at one point. "Is there anyone surprised that more Americans know Homer Simpson's home town than Abraham Lincoln's? Yes, Springfield (Ill.).
"... We are locked in battle to make sure that we get the hearts and minds of Americans back, to re-engage the American public with their national parks."
Since when is it the job of the NPS director to be "locked in battle" over the hearts and minds of anyone? Why doesn't she stick to the more mundane task of preserving and managing the resources under her agency's purview and leave the task of attracting visitors to the free market?
I also don't think it is Mary Bomar's role to fight the "dark" forces that are supposedly seducing America's young away from a wholesome frolic in Yosemite and resulting in more awareness of Homer Simpson than Abe Lincoln. If you want to point fingers Mary you might want to start with our wonderful government run schools.
I urge Ms. Bomar to refocus her energies on the less glamorous job of making sure that park roads are free of potholes, that hungry bears and raccoons are staying out of garbage dumps and that the toilets are clean and flushing properly along the Blue Ridge Parkway. You need to leave the winning of hearts and minds to someone else.
Mary, from where I sit it seems that you've got more than enough on your plate to keep you plenty busy. Before you start reaching into realms you have no business posturing on why don't you get your own house in order first!
Of all meat sources, buffalo is by far the healthiest. Per gram, or ounce for the metrically challenged, it ranks as lowest in fat, highest in protein and is very tasty. But I'll continue to obtain mine as I have for years, from private buffalo farms well beyond the borders of the park service, thank you very much. They're still free-range animals on the farm, and require such treatment to maintain their limited content of fat. Good genetics don't hurt either, which is why cattle can't compare.
Congradulations Katmai bear hunters, you have replaced my previous perception of an un-talanted, un-educated, and un-ethical hunter. In the Upper Penninsula of Michigan, where I currently reside, deer hunters had once held the dubious honor due to their relentless "baiting" tactics, which in many cases take place no more than 50 yards from thier heated blinds where coffee pots steam and hunting videos play on their portable televisions. I used to think this was un-ethical, at least many of these hunters use the meat to feed their families. These so-called hunters in Katmai just want a trophy prize without actually haveing to earn a trophy animal. I am a hunter, but I believe I hun the right way. Hunting should be hard, the more difficult the hunt, the more rewarding. Buying a license, having a guide company fly you in, eating breakfast, and then shooting an eating bear no more than 50 yards or less away that has grown accustomed to people all summer long is not sport...and your kidding yourself if you think it is... So once again CONGRADULATIONS on your dubious accomplishment.
Formerly a proud ALaskan, I now live in the Upper Penninsula of Michigan where deer hunting takes precedence over virtually all aspects of life at the end of October and throughtout November. While I do hunt, I am against all forms of baiting (unless you depend of the deer meat to feed your family which many people do in this area). I have heard stories from other so-called hunters who shoot deer from the comfort of thier blinds, sipping on a cup of coffee seconds before and after they pull the trigger. This is not hunting! I hunt for the pure enjoyment of being out of doors and interacting with nature, rarely do I shoot anything, if ever. Hunting these bear in Katmai is less of a challenge than shooting a deer that has been baited for months over the summer and fall. I used to think this type of hunter was weak, cowardly, lazy, and not a true sportsman. NOW I BELIVE THOSE WHO HUNT GRIZZLY BEAR IN KATMAI HAVE DEFINED THEMSELEVS AS UNAPPRECIATIVE, UN-SPORTSMAN LIKE, AND UNABLE TO HUNT LIKE REAL MEN....CONGRADULATIONS KATMAI HUNTERS...
I 'googled' this site after a confrontation I had yesterday at a Social Security office in Iowa. Going to the office to report my mother's death I was immediately met in the 10x10 waiting room by an armed SS guard (Dept of Social Security was on his badge). After my wife presented her driver's license I questioned the guard why this was necessary. He abrubtly stated it was a requirement at all federal facilities and because there was a sign posted at the entrance. Before reacting (or over-reacting) I decided to research this violation of my freedoms to walk into a public facility (non-fee). Here are my conclusions: (Btw: This relates to the NPS system blog at the bottom)
1.) EVERY instance needs to be challenged despite the convienance (or lack of) instead of trying to organize on a large scale. Organization on large scales are important but individual refusal to accept totalitarianism is fundamental. Doing right is always more important than doing what is easy (in this case doing nothing).
2.) The recent case of the woman riding a public bus to work, and her subsequent arrest, through a federal facilty will provide some light on how serious this will be as the DHS is going to start needing 'case-laws' for future violators of this 'law'.
3.) If you think this is about the war on terror, then you are an idiot. The war on terror is a fabricated enemy to keep us in fear and the need for a strong government with its surveilance, policing, and intelligence agencies. How will we know when we've won? Seriously people, instead of viewing porn on your internet, research ALL the inconsistencies of the 9/11 'attack'. If it was by terrorists, why hasn't anything happened since then? Are our security measures SO amazing that we've eliminated every single possible majot/minor terrorist action since 2001? Possibly research the recent transfer of armed nuclear weapons from Minot AFB, ND to Louisiana LEAK that resulted in every single person involved inthe leak dying of mysterious deaths since Aug 30, 2007 (leak date) (ie, car accidents, plance accidents, heathly people dying of cancer, etc). Point: SOME people are speculating that the low-grade weapons were not intended for Iran but to secretly be detonated on OUR soil to give the war on terror new 'life'.
4.) To the person that said they don't mind because the government already has our information, wants them to know what parks are getting the traffic, and .. since the corporations have already been collecting personal data on us for year ... that it is okay. Repsonse: OMG!! You have serious trust and/or lack of discernment issues. You are, or also probably surround yourself with, victims that are constantly being 'enabled' and never cured.
5.) Lastly, you all are concerned about the welfare of the NPS but it is just microscopic compared to the bigger things that are going on. Below are to google video sites that should be viewed. Once you see eith of these you will stand up against EVEN the idea of an encroachment of our freedoms ... in any area.
Directors cut (AWESOME): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173
15 minute PROMO (Very Good): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4035648463442185390
I look forward to your replies: I dare you to watch the/a above video(s) and see what your think about the Real ID Card in our 'national' park system.
Anonymous, thanks for mentioning that information and thank You for your great comment. Katmai Lover, I am very familiar that region and where the hunting camps are set up is very close to where the bears have been feeding on salmon for the last 4 months. remember that it wasn't that long ago the Alaska Board of Fish and Game moved the bear hunting season up from the middle of October to October one. This no doubt left the bears stuck at the end of their feeding season in larger concentrations for obvious reasons. very easy pickens for bear hunters indeed!!! I agree totally with the comment just above, this is nothing more than a duck pond shoot! I do think the Alaska Board of Fish and Game will come around and do the right thing in Katmai National Preserve and limit or eliminate the easy slaughter of bears in this region. I do understand why the hunting outfitters love this because it's very easy money for them and easy prey for their clients, but I think it's time for us to have a shred of dignity and humanity and do what's right! Alaska Board of Fish and Game, please concider moving the bear hunt out of GMU 9C 703? Thank You!
Gunner Jack: Ever hear of a Polish rifle? The barrel is bent towards the hunter...use it on this hunt. Just joking! Seriously, in all candor, this a issue where the forestry range managers should work in dire effort to expand the rangeland for the buffalo...beautiful animal! The question is, how do we appease and convince the Montana rhinestone cowboys to give up some of there prime rangeland to enhance the health of the buffalo. Who came first...cowboy or buffalo? This is nothing more then a turkey shoot for the fabulous 38. Enjoy the easy pickens!
Katmai Lover, the Craighead Wilderness Institute in Montana whom specializes in wildlife studies would be a great source of help. Highly praised for their work in bear and animal research in Northern America. But, I doubt the Alaskan Board of Game, or the National Park Service would allow them to look at their sloppy book keeping and data (privilege information?) on the bear population in Katmai. This is a sensationalized story that should of been sought out sooner. I applaud the NPT and the media for bringing this story forth. Again, this actually is what this story implies: a unethhical bear hunt that amounts to nothing more "then easy pickens"! Now for the Buffalo fiasco in Yellowstone National Park...another unethical duck pond hunt!
I agree with Frank--difficult to choose just one. Most recently, I remember that a Park Service Law Enforcement Ranger found me and a friend staring slack-jawed at the base of a cliff, playing an amateur game of guess-the-petroglyph. Apparently, he decided our water bottles, tank tops, and sneakers made us unlikely pothunters, and spent the next hour leading us on an unofficial, on-the-trail, but not-in-the-guidebook, tour of New Mexico’s mysterious Chaco Culture National Historical Park. We saw oyster shells embedded in desert rocks, and discovered ancient etchings of small men, snakes, and mountain lions. Later, as the sun set, we examined a pile of rocks next to the Pueblo Bonito ruins. How many other visitors had walked past these same red-orange rocks and not noticed that the curvature of the rock pile echoed the rolling mountain peaks in the distance? He urged us to stay for the night sky program (trust me--you’ve never seen so many stars as you see at Chaco!) and then climbed in his truck and drove off. We counted the jackrabbits darting across the road, and then counted our lucky stars. Thanks, Ranger John.
Thanks for the info on what sounds like a great hunting opportunity. Bison meat is good meat, low in fat.
Here's my rifle:
http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/bigbore/444.aspx
What do y'all carry?
"Flight connection?" Don't jets cause global warming?
But I guess you don't fly in your own private jet like Algore. lol....
Chris Day wrote "Overflying the area before landing we observed nine hunting camps. Every camp without exception had bears within 200 yards of their tents ". Doesn't that sound like A LOT of bears in one area? Maybe too many? I don't buy the argument stated Oct. 17 by Anonymous that "big money" is the reason we don't have any numbers on the Katmai bear population. I don't see a big effort by the authors of this article to find out about bear population trends in Katmai, and that is disappointing. There is a way to get people interested in proper management and conservation, and THIS IS NOT IT. Conservation groups are a good idea and I'm glad groups like the NPCA exist, but NPCA should support their cause with sound data, not sensationalized articles. If this bear hunt is cruel and unethical, then it is also cruel and unethical for wind turbines to kill birds.
"...to compromise the scenery and the natural and historic objects and to harrass the wildlife therein and to impede the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them forever impaired solely for the eternal amusement of a handful of knuckleheads in annoying fart machines."