Recent comments

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 2 days ago

    So Rick, did your grandma take yoy there when you where 40? As I have said, no matter the party, Presidents should stay out of NP unless they have done something Park worthy to be there.

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 2 days ago

    I was assigned to two presidential visits: President Nixon to Grand Teton and President Carter, to Yellowstone and the Tetons. My sense of it was that people were thrilled to see their Presidents in a national park and did not mind the inconvenience of slower traffic and swarms of Secret Service personnel and lots of rangers. I remember President Carter watching Old Faithful along with the crowds of people that normally congregate for an eruption. He shook a lot of hands. The security just is a sign of the times.

    Rick

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 2 days ago

    Oh, for pete's sake, partisan. On ALL issues.

    When he visited Yellowstone he was then chastised by partisans of your ilk for how few parks he had visited as President. That's the definition of partisan - blame him for a sunny day, blame him for a rainy day.

    And you were there forty years ago to see him "dragged", or is that again just your partisan phrasing. I didn't make it to Yellowstone until I was in my 40's for my first visit. Doesn't mean I wasn't interested, just means I hadn't been able to get there until then.

    Life is a matter of what color sunglasses you wear, and everything you say here is through your own partisan prism.

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago

    Kurt,

    No doubt I am partisan but not on this issue. The point is that the President - any president- has plenty of opportunities to visit the Park when he is not President and when it won't result in major sections of the Park being closed. Any such visit, expecially by one who has otherwise shown no interest in the Park, is pure political grandstanding - no matter the party. Such grandstanding which blocks access is far more annoying to me than commercial activities that may draw thousands of extra visitors.

    Oh, and being dragged to a Park by your grandmother at age 11 as part of a tour of the west and never returning doesn't count as "interest".

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago

    EC, your partisanship is showing. My guess is the president -- any president -- has more on his plate to deal with these days than traveling to and fawning over the parks.

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago

    Gee that sure verifies his long love for the Parks.

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago

    "As the first family strolled the boardwalk around Old Faithful, Duffy and Superintendent Lewis chatted with the President about other topics such as Obama’s visit to Yellowstone with his mother and grandmother when he was eleven years old..."

    http://www.ypf.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5255

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago


    But at least the rule would be clear and there would not be room for someone's subjective judgement about what is "appropriate" or "deserving."


    But that rule itself reflects subjective judgement. But that's OK if its YOUR selective judgement right?

    As to the President visiting the park. To the best of my knowledge he had never been to Yellowstone before and I am guessing he is unlikely to go again. In fact that may be true for any major Park that involves more than a drive through. He will be President for 8 years. He has had/will have 70+ years when he isn't President to visit. Presidential visits to Parks are pure political grandstanding, especially by those that have done nothing for them, and are even less appropriate than commercial activities.

  • Organizations Want Veto Power Over National Park Service At Colorado National Monument   2 weeks 3 days ago

    "BTW,where you here crying when parts of Yellowstone was shut down so the Obama family could visit? Or are political purposes OK - (as long as they are left leaning)?"

    That's called national security. And I think it's sad that the president of the United States -- ANY president of the U.S. -- cannot go to a national park or for that matter, the local Dunkin Donuts, without an armed guard. But that's how it's been for a long time, for Republicans and Democrats alike.

    Back to the subject: I think national parks would be better off by NOT allowing special events that use public lands, curtail normal visitors and park activities, whether they are for profit or not for profit. Would the park lose some possible income? Who knows. Would surrounding communities lose some potential business. Again, who knows. But at least the rule would be clear and there would not be room for someone's subjective judgement about what is "appropriate" or "deserving."

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 3 days ago

    We pay $80 a year for our annual parks pass. My husband laughs every time he gets to use it - he thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread. It expired today so we have to go to Shenandoah NP to get it renewed next weekend. I'm not going to complain...

  • Exploring The Parks: Andrew Johnson National Historic Site   2 weeks 3 days ago

    I just walked a section of the Appalachian Trail which passes Andrew Johnson Mountain, close to Greeneville, TN. It's not much of a mountain and the sign was down. Sad...

    Danny

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    rmackie:

    ypw, as a senior now going on 74, I have been used my 10.00 pass so many times I sometimes feel guilty about it. I agree with you, I would support a yearly pass for seniors, provided it is a reasonable fee. Being on a fixed income , and I am not complaining, I have a great pension and have been blessed with good health, but we must be careful about fees. Here in California we are looking at 50.00 campsites, that begins to hurt, and I am pretty well set for a lower middle income person.

    I was thinking maybe a $10 annual pass.

    There's still a 50% federal recreation amenities discount with the pass, and I don't see why it couldn't continue. I remember going on a cave tour with my mom, and she got half off. She won't go camping with us, so we can't get her to come along to save some bucks.

  • New Lodging Possibilities Coming To West Yellowstone For Yellowstone National Park Treks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    It will be interesting to see how the cabins impact the economy of the town. There is one error in the Press Release though - These are not the newest lodging since Yellowstone Park Hotel opened in 2007 as the new Three Bear Lodge (www.ThreeBearLodge.com) opened it's doors in July 2009.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    As we pointed out in March, there are many avenues that should be explored to improve the Park Service's fiscal health, and tinkering with the senior pass is just one of them (one we support, too!).

    It would seem that calling for higher fees -- whether they be higher entrance fees, per-person fees, fees in parks that don't charge entrance fees -- is a quick, easy solution in that it can be done without congressional approval. Going down the road towards better federal funding for the National Park System, in part by rooting out wasteful or unnecessary spending across the federal government, is much tougher when you need Congress to act.

    Rather than simply asking for the Park Service director to raise fees, it would seem wholly appropriate to ask/pressure Congress to be more fiscally responsible.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    ypw, as a senior now going on 74, I have been used my 10.00 pass so many times I sometimes feel guilty about it. I agree with you, I would support a yearly pass for seniors, provided it is a reasonable fee. Being on a fixed income , and I am not complaining, I have a great pension and have been blessed with good health, but we must be careful about fees. Here in California we are looking at 50.00 campsites, that begins to hurt, and I am pretty well set for a lower middle income person.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    Of course they do. It's not as if they actually want people to visit or enjoy our national parks unless they have money. Keep poor people out because they're, well, poor, and might trash these places. Yup.

    And I do agree with one of the comments that maybe the $10 lifetime pass for seniors should be reconsidered to at least a yearly pass. I've gone with my folks, and actually paid for their passes. Seemed like a tremendous deal, but I always felt like we were getting away with something when tagging along with them.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 4 days ago

    The issue of finding more ways to raise fees for parks and other public lands is open to debate. For example, pricing entrance fees to match peak visitor days, ie if its a nice summer weekend, double the fee (like to many hotels do), well that's just great. Could go on and on, but I suggest that these parks belong to all of us, they should be funded as such, not nickeled to death like the proposals from NPCA. I support reasonable entrance and camping fees, all the rest of this is a very slippery slope that will lead to everything from additional parking fees. hiking fees,( already happening), etc. In fact some parks, Yosemite for one, have a whole division of employees designated to do just that, its called the Division of Business Management and Revenue Enhancement.

  • Tennessee's House Of Representatives Opposes Backcountry Fee At Great Smoky Mountains National Park   2 weeks 4 days ago

    I think a nominal fee is appropriate. There is no fee to enter the park and they do charge fees for campgrounds. A small backcountry fee is a good idea, since it will help fund any SAR efforts and help maintain trails and campsites.

  • Bryce Canyon National Park's Annual Astronomy Festival Set For June 5-8   2 weeks 4 days ago

    RATS! I just came from Bryce Canyon and won't be able to go back for this. I think I'll spend the next half hour throwing a big tantrum . . . . .

    However, while at Bryce last weekend, I had the privilege of attending one of Kevin Poe's evening programs. It was entitled Climate Intervention and was an absolutely terrific interactive, audience participation discussion of facts and myths about global warming (or whatever you want to call it). Some material from this program shows up in Bryce's Junior Ranger book.

    And as for dark skies . . . . I can certainly attest to that. I spent several days and nights not far from Bryce out on Grand Staircase. Full moon, so the skies weren't really dark all night. Darned moon made it hard to sleep without covering the eyes. But at sunset, there was a triangular treat in the western sky as Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter were in conjunction just above the horizon. And on nights following the full moon when the moon rose later, the scramble of stars up there made it hard to give up and go to sleep. For those of us who now live in a city, it's easy to forget how many of those little lights are really out there.

    So, if you're anywhere within a couple hundred miles of Bryce this next weekend, by all means get over there.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 5 days ago

    WOW. Your headline just does not accurately reflect our proposal. Glad you at least included the full submission so that your readers can see that for themselves. Where is a reference to pricing designed to move visitation away from peak periods? Where is a reference to reducing fee collection costs -- now 20+% of revenues? Where is a reference to making fees fairer -- so that a family coming for an afternoon doesn't pay the same as a couple coming and staying for a week? Where is a reference to use of new technology to collect fees conveniently and efficiently at some parks which now have no fees because of too many entry sites?

    But -- thanks for at least raising the opportunity to discuss the role of fees when park operating budgets are in deep trouble ... and getting worse.

  • Photography In The Parks: Grand Teton National Park's Queen, Grizzly No. 399   2 weeks 5 days ago

    Debbie, great article. Enjoyed it a lot. I'm heading to Yellowstone in early June. Might have to take a little detour . Would love to see the "family". Won't scare them off -- I have a long lens.

  • Congressman From North Carolina Wants To Overturn Cape Hatteras National Seashore Access Regs   2 weeks 5 days ago

    S. 486, to authorize pedestrian and motorized vehicular access in Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area, and for other purposes.

    The description of this bill is misleading. This bill is about establishing ORVs as the primary means of access to CHNS. The bill was written by the local congressman with the help of local pro ORV politicians.

    If the bill passes it would:

    * eliminate the new ORV vehicle safety regulations formed under the current ORV rule

    * increase ORV and pedestrian recreational conflicts in CHNS

    * reduce the amount of vehicle free beach that can be reasonably accessed by foot now available under the current rule

    * increase the seasonal amount of ORV access in front of the villages, creating a safety issue for pedestrians

    * leave the Park without a written defensible ORV management plan


    Before the final rule CHNS did not have an ORV plan and park mangers were inconsistent in how ORVs were managed. There were no designated year round designated vehicle free areas in the Park. Vehicle free areas were available for visitors only at the discretion of local Park mangers, not permanently designated and subject to change. ORV organizations continue to lobby for less vehicle free areas and more ORV areas in the Park. S. 486 would revert the management of ORVs in the Park to the Interim Protected Species Management Plan, referred to as the "Interim Plan" in the bill. This plan is not an ORV plan, was formed with minimal public input and designed to temporarily addresses ORV management with respect to the Park's protected species until the final ORV rule could be established. It does not in any way manage recreational conflicts or safety concerns between ORVs and pedestrians or address the profound changes the Seashore has undergone in the last 40 years. .

    S. 486 disregards the testimony gathered from public comments under strict NEPA guidelines that were submitted, considered and implemented by the NPS for the current ORV rule concerning pedestrian issues as they pertain to ORV management.

    If the authors of S. 486 were interested in improving access for all they would have written a bill that addressed just that and let the Park's final rule deal with other issues. Unfortunately this poorly written bill which is still in National Parks Subcommittee has a good chance of making it to the Senate floor.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 5 days ago

    Agreed, Lee.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 5 days ago

    Lee, absolutely. It isn't just for teenagers anymore.

  • NPCA, NPHA Want National Park Service To Raise Entrance Fees To Parks   2 weeks 5 days ago


    Does anyone else see the Great American Entitlement Mentality at work in some posts here?


    Nope

    "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride