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
- Bob Janiskee on Creature Feature: The Banana Slug is...
- Megaera on Wilderness Hike This Weekend At...
- Susan Blake on Creature Feature: The Banana Slug is...
- justinh on Wilderness Hike This Weekend At...
- justinh on Democratic Congressman Laments Impact...
- Jim Burnett on Wildfire Skirts Scotty's Castle At...
- ecbuck on Democratic Congressman Laments Impact...
- ecbuck on Democratic Congressman Laments Impact...
- Rick Smith on Democratic Congressman Laments Impact...
- Kurt Repanshek on Democratic Congressman Laments Impact...
What irks me, we the middle class sacrifice so much for this great nation: The excessive burden of taxes, the blood for Bush's war in Iraq, and the heavy laden of labor that moves this great country of ours. Are goverment rewards us with a National Parks system that's dilapidated with huge needs for infrastructure repairs, a short professional staff to maintain it, and a budget that's a pittance that bares shame...if not sever ridicule! If we the people care enough about our National Parks, let are voices be heard and vote green in the next election in 2008. We all deserve better than are present do nothing administration.
1. Tell us what you think are the most important stories, ideas, and concepts that visitors should experience in the park?
a. The biodiversity and uniqueness of the area
b. The park's relationship to human activity upstream
c. Mistakes we've made and successes at restoration of the ecosystem
d. The deactivated missile site and its role in the Cuban Missile Crisis
2. What should visitors hear, see, or read that would help them to understand and care for this park and its unique features?
a. The damage propellers can do to the back of a manatee.
b. The damage power boats can do to the ecosystem when not kept in check.
c. Wading through an alligator hole (just kidding!) Gotta keep your sense of humor...
d. Kids should hear and read what other kids have written or said about their experience at the park -- what it meant to them and how it's affected their lives once they've grown up.
3. How do you feel that Everglades National Park is a part of our national heritage?
There is absolutely nothing else like it anywhere on the planet. If we can't bend over backwards and make sacrifices to keep this ecosystem intact, how will we treat other "not-so-unique" places?
-- Jon Merryman
Was there with my daughter in late May and they were closed when we arrived in the morning and later when I asked about it that same day, the ferries were operating (according to the gent at the Visitor Center desk). Seems rather odd since there was not a drop of rain the entire week we visited Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, and Ohio parks.
-- Jon Merryman
We live in different parts of the country and I'm probably expressing my disgust with the locals here. Regardless of income level, they still have cell phones, they still drive fancy cars, and I could probably pick out a half dozen other major things they waste their money on.
I would hope people who are better off would be willing to pay their fair share in taxes to support our national parks and indirectly support those who can't afford an entrance fee for whatever reason. People are generally lousy money managers. Agreed, some people are so far down on the totem pole they have nothing to cut back on, but I'd bet those same people are more worried about putting food on the table and keeping their kids in school than making a trip to the Everglades.
I see people coming into this country with absolutely nothing - don't speak the language -- a total disadvantage. Yet after a single generation their kids are attending college and doing well. Then there are others that grew up here -- speak English -- are given plenty of opportunities to make something of themselves, yet get sucked into the abyss of culture over common sense. It's completely exasperating. Yes I believe that in this country we are all in charge of our own destinies. Many are admittedly trapped or severly handicapped, while still many others opt to remain trapped by their own choices.
I've made plenty of sacrifices to be able to travel to as many parks as I want with my wife and children before they grow up too fast. A smaller house closer to work, a much smaller car, a job that's not my passion but pays the bills, no cable tv, I don't buy music - I listen to the radio, I referee high school sports to make additional income. Still think if it's important to you - you can make it happen.
-- Jon Merryman
I wrote to the NPS Director and already got a response (merely an acknowledgement, but very quick nonetheless). I'll forward whatever future responses I get here... (I sent a similar note to Nancy Pelosi, for what it's worth)
My note:
<><><><><>
Ms. Bomar, I was recently made aware that Alcatraz Island, as you know one of our National Park administered areas, recently allowed Scion (the foreign-owned car company) complete access to Alcatraz Island to host some sort of party (ExpreScion'07). Whether it was a celebration, an advertising gimmick, or anything else, I was rather disturbed to see the "Moulin Rouge"-like atmosphere that was allowed to transpire in a place that should be reserved for nothing but the most dignified purposes. And to see that National Park Service employees, in uniform, also participated in the event, is even more of an insult to those of us who hold our country's national treasures near and dear to our hearts.
Please look into this event and hold those responsible for approving it accountable. In a world where our national parklands are becoming more and more beholden to corporate for-profit interests, this is one place where we need to draw a line in the sand and say "no more."
<><><><><>
Her initial response, less than two hours later:
<><><><><>
Thank you for your email Jon concerning an event at Alcatraz........I want to acknowledge receipt of same and advise you that my Chief of Staff Sue Masica will be investigating this issue and will come back to you. Thanks for supporting our National Parks......Mary
--------------------------
Mary A. Bomar
Director
National Park Service
Phone: (202) 208-3818
<><><><><>
We're now experiencing the Republican way -- lower those taxes but raise the fees. The Democrat way, at least in the past, is to lower the fees and raise the taxes. Everything costs money to maintain. People want to enjoy the parks but don't want to make the hard choices necessary to keep them up. Let's see, entrance fee for Yosemite or that Barry Bonds replica jersey? Gasoline to pay for the drive to Yellowstone, or a year's supply of cigarettes? Should I drop that soda can on the ground and let the NPS maintenance guy pick it up, or should I shove it back in my bag and leave no trace? Sadly, most people choose in favor of short-term gratification or convenience and don't think long-term or globally. We are a nation of short-sighted materialistic opportunists who for the most part don't care enough about the world that our great-grandkids will inherit. That's what we're up against, our own self-centeredness. People need to care first before they'll act.
The parks are up against a myriad of businesses, services (and scams) that Americans are made to believe they must have: cell phones (and now i-phones), text messaging, internet connections with online shopping, cable tv, sports cars, Hummers, satellite radio, a tv and pc in every room, a guest room in the house, more bathrooms than people living in the house, a riding mower because yard work is tiring and a gym membership because there's no time for exercise elsewhere, chemicals to kill clover because we've been brainwashed into believing it's a weed... the list goes on, and on, and on. This is why people don't have money to visit a park once in a while -- their wallets are being bombarded on a daily basis with convenient ways to empty them out. We're not savers, we enjoy spending. We can't say "no". We have no self control.
-- Jon Merryman
Jon,
The problem with your argument is that you are making a generalization about all people who don't have means to enter the Park. From the fact that some people don't spend their money wisely, you come to the generalization that park fees might be afforded by all people if they only made different consumer choices. At least that's how I'm reading your argument...That's first of all not true of all people. Secondly, even if it were, it would still be an equity issue since people with means would still be afforded the right to make the same stupid consumer choices and afford the price and subsequent user fees for the parks. No matter what, there is an equity issue. That's why I asked you whether you believed your willingness to pay for a shortfall through user fees was a justification for everyone.
I think the user fee issue when it comes to parks is relatively lightweight because the parks have long squeezed out lower class people (except of a certain type - and they are forced into working in the parks to get in - an ironically good deal, but still a forced choice; people of means can either work or not work). When it comes to transportation costs (for instance, public transportation), health care, utilities fees (heat for instance on the Pine Ridge Reservation costs more in the winter than the entire per capita income of Lakota Indians), user fees of various kinds are already creating vast inequity discrepancies among values most people hold to be values in common. What's happening in parks, which applies more to the middle class, is squeezing people there, and we only push the inequities further when people who can afford to pay the fees do so because they can and are happy to do so. My point is that's not the only issue here, and it's not sound reasoning to raise the spending choices of some poorer people as though we are all born with equal opportunities or as though those choices always apply and are always relevant.
Finally, for those concerned about privatization, it's not at all hard to see why this is a step toward privatization, not simply because underfunding produces the impetus to say that public control isn't working, but because the park consumer has been re-defined to mean those having the means to consume. That creates a profit motive, which is best exploited by private enterprise. While that proves an efficient mechanism for those most able to afford the new reality, a lot of people are entirely left out, often through no fault and certainly no choice of their own.
(By the way, on another matter, the Yellowstone Newspaper feeds are live for anyone interested).
Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World
It's easy to not be bothered by increases in fees when you can pay them. Many Americans can't. There was a time (not all that long ago) when the parks were havens for overworked, underpaid families who were allowed a bit of nature to refresh and heal. Now they can't afford it. The middle class are getting squeezed out of the parks and lower income people?... forget it. This is a travesty considering that the National Parks should reflect the democratic ideal of being "public parks."
This is why the discussion of fees matters. We aren't talking about people not being able to afford entering Tahoe or Aspen, we're talking about the nation's parks which belong to the people.
Anonymous (why anonymous?),
Point taken.
I guess there are so many articles about fees is because it's an issue that's sweeping the entire national park system and it represents, as some believe, a price escalation that is moving the parks out of the truly public sector.
How great of a threat is it? Compared to the upward-spiraling costs of reserving a room in a park lodge it's tiny. But I would argue it remains a threat.
As for non-fee articles, I look forward to writing more of them and even have a few in mind.
"as they drink bottled water and don't take the time to recycle that plastic bottle but instead send it to the landfill"
If it is recycled, chances are it'll be shipped (using fossil fuel) to China where it will be incinerated and send back to America as particulate matter via the jet stream. Almost better to bury it. Best not to buy plastic at all. Right.
Oh yeah, and paying to enjoy the parks: this blog seems fixated at the least and obsessed at the worst on park fees. Search for "fee" and you'll get over 100 results including:
Fee Creep In the Parks
Entrance Fee Hikes: Time to Say No?
Entrance Fee Trivia
Poll: $80 ATB Fee is Too High
How Much Will it Cost to Attend A Campfire Talk?
Zion NP Raising Entrance Fees
Placing An Economic Value on National Parks
Your National Parks Pass Doesn't Always Cover Your Entrance Fee
Fee Creep Reaches Olympic National Park
Entrance Fees and National Park Attendance
That's just the first ten. And they all say the same thing: fees are bad. Ok. Point taken. This latest article is a regurgitation of other fee articles on this site. I look forward to reading more articles NOT about fees.
For something that's important to me, sure. If I feel the government isn't doing its job I try to step up through things like volunteering to plant apple trees on historic battlefields, picking up garbage along the C&O Canal towpath, or dropping a few extra bucks in the box at the small parks with no entrance fees. There are many ways to make a difference. Changing legislation and federal funding is just one of them. Writing to your elected representatives or chaining yourself to a redwood tree are others. My two children are hopefully becoming staunch advocates of our national treasures. The first step in saving our parks is getting people to appreciate them (and stop trashing them) in the first place. If we can accomplish that, I believe the rest will take care of itself. I see the parks primarily as a responsibility, not just a right.
What's fair is that everyone has the right to their opinions and the right express themselves. I see people wasting money on a daily basis on unnecessary things -- cigarettes, alcohol and drugs, toenail polish, i-pods, tanning salons, cell phones, exercise gyms, perfume, gold necklaces, cable television, body piercing (and the attendant jewelry to plug up the holes they just made), professional sports events and the team clothing they feel is necessary to buy, gas guzzling behemoths, Hyundais with fancy hubcaps and foglights, 4-person families in 5-bedroom, 3-bath McMansions pumping thousands of cubic feet of air conditioning all summer long, sprinkling perfectly good drinking water on their lawns and driving their lawn tractors around as they drink bottled water and don't take the time to recycle that plastic bottle but instead send it to the landfill. If people get their priorities in line, the vast majority of them can afford a trip to the park.
As a homeschool parent who pays thousands of dollars to the public school system each year but wants nothing to do with it, I feel your pain. It also annoys me that for-profit entities are grabbing up pieces of our national heritage. Bad bad bad.
So, is it your responsibility to fund parks that are underfunded?
Is it fair to those who would like to see multiple parks but cannot afford the fee (on top of the other costs of travel) to pay, even if you are happy to pay?
Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World
As a way to avoid the "this park only" fees, which by themselves are rather steep, I happily pay. Of course I'm visiting 15-20 parks every year, whereas most famlies are visiting one or two, if that, so for them I'm sure it seems unreasonable for some parks. Then again, some parks still have no entrance fee at all.
Frequent park visitors should get a price break (or there should be a point at which you stop paying additional fees once you reach that annual total). If the annual fee is currently $80, you shouldn't have to pay $25 + $20 + $10 + $25 +$5 + $10 + etc. if you saved your receipts. You should be able to turn them in after you reach the $80 total and get an annual pass for the remainder of the year.
The way I look at it, the parks are underfunded so I give them more than they're asking for. Every park and monument I visit with the plexiglas donation box gets an extra $5 from my kids. I make a point of handing them the money and have them put it in the box. Future park stewards in the making.
I'm curious. Should others have to pay those fees? Or, is your being happy to pay them sufficient to make it reasonable?
Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World
I own 3.5 acres adjacent to CHOH (I can literally spit into the canal prism from the property line), also close to Antietam Battlefield and really hope the towpath gets repaired so that cyclists and equestrians can go from Georgetown to Cumberland once again. Between miles 80 and 90, towpath goers are forced to detour from the towpath and follow public roads which are much more dangerous. Would also be nice if there were connecting trails from the towpath to nearby parks such as Antietam.
I happiily pay the Annual Pass fee yet there are still parks that don't honor the pass for various reasons. Cave parks rarely honor the pass, and those with museums or historic homes as the focal point of the visit also often have separate or additional fees. I want a single fee card, whatever the price is, that will let me in everywhere. I wonder what the National Park Service would charge for such a card. $150? I'd happily pay that much, especially if it also includes all the federal lands like National Forests and BLM lands.
One more example of the current administration's push to put everything under the control of business. If you think the government-run parks are messy, you should try it when corporations - who you can't vote out and have no motives but profit - get in control. The NPS is not a place for business interests... it's bad enough we have to wrangle with concessions to do what's good for the parks.
The selling of Alcatraz for... wait, what was the gain here?... for... no, really, I can't think of a single benefit to the park or the people. It blurs the whole idea of protection and preservation and mocks a century of purpose.
Shame on the administrators who approved this!
Back to the point, there is a fine line (as has been repeated over and over) between protecting the resource and providing access to people. I'm not sure if these things can be decided on a blanket, general basis. It seems that diverting Kautz Creek may be a frustration response by park officials who have sought to tame that road crossing for the last 50 years. Between lahars and floods, they've pumped a lot of money and time into that crossing.
I also think that the NPS has become kind of trigger-happy when it comes to flood repair. The Yosemite situation has made them that way. After the 100-year flood of 1997, Yosemite sought to look at long-term responses rather than just "fixing what's broke." As good an idea as this was, it's 10 years later and things are still just getting started, due primarily to litigation.
I think, as frustrating as the process of looking at the long-term may be (i.e. asking "do we really need a road here?") it is vital we do so. More and more, Rainier is becoming an island in a sea of development. If we can't retain wilderness in Rainier, where can we?
Jr. Ranger:
Read some great books written by Edward Abbey (former NPS ranger and now deceased). May those books inspire you to stick your values!
I wouldn't worry about it. First, you probably wouldn't want to apply to work for people who "remember nastygram"s, and you certainly don't want to stop speaking your mind because someone might remember. Fear is a powerful tool used to keep people in line (see Washington Post 4-part series this week on Cheney as evidence). The best way to get Congress or authority to listen begins with refusing to be afraid and learning to organize to deal with the consequences. Any job where you are forced to tow the line on things important enough to you in order to keep it is definitely not worth it--no matter how influential it is or how close it is to your dreams. If you can't get that park job you dreamed about as a result of your beliefs, it's time to change a world that makes that happen. In the meantime, keep agitating.
Keep speaking out; I don't recommend to Congress necessarily, but speak out, let those chips fall as they may, and see what can be done with that - but don't sell out just to be part of a world where you will be punished for speaking truth with conviction, no matter how nasty that truth is.
Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World
I wrote letters to my Senators and Congressman - wonder what sort of reply I'll get. I wanted to write the super, but if I applied for a job there after school and someone remembered my nastygram, that wouldn't be too good...
---
jr_ranger
http://tntrailhead.blogspot.com
http://picasaweb.google.com/north.cascades
http://zinch.com/jr_ranger
President, CHS SPEAK (CHS Students Promoting Environmental Action & Knowledge)
Founder and President, CHS Campus Greens
Jim,
I'll have to double-check, but I believe current regs require ships to swap their ballast at sea before coming down the St. Lawrence Seaway. But I've been wrong before....;-)
Kurt
When I was on Lake Erie last week, I heard a lot from an Ohio State University scientist about the need for shipping ballast regulation. In looking at what's happening in the Great Lakes and other coastal areas, have you come across any legislation on this issue? I would think that would be a touchy one in Great Lakes states that depend on trade and yet are wary of the trade imbalance. Invasive species from Russia via China coming on trading boats doesn't go over well in the industrial areas. I was just wondering given how passionately he was pressing the need for this kind of regulation because of the ecological damage being caused.
Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World
Great new interface. Big Congrats.
all good for your and this blog
from Portugal,
fernando_vilarinho
Be concerned. Golden Gate NRA is the park that other NPS superintendents, looking for income-generating ideas, hold up as THE paragon of private-public partnerships. And those superintendents that do watch Golden Gate, do not have their park's best interests in mind.