Recent comments

The reports I linked to show that, regardless of fees, sometimes park visitation goes up and sometimes it goes down. You can wish it were different all you want, but that doesn't make it true (all else being equal).

Supply and demand isn't in play when price has nothing to do with supply.

When prices go up demand goes down is generally true, but when other forms of recreation goes up in price the park service could follow suite and add or raise fees and still be competitive.

Smokies, that report was completed in 2007.

Here is a link to visitation since 2007: https://irma.nps.gov/Stats/SSRSReports/System%20Wide%20Reports/5%20Year%20Annual%20Report%20By%20Park

Here is a link to any kind of visitation you may want to calculate: https://irma.nps.gov/Stats/Reports/ReportList

I note your report argues that implementation of entrance fees causes visitation to go down, and then uses Smokey Mountain National Park to show it. Smokey Mountain National Park does not charge entrance fees. It shows that the visitation in Shenandoah went down in 2006 from 1997. Visitation was alot higher in Shenandoah in 1994 than in 1997. Why did it go down so much in 1997? In fact, in 1991 through 1999 park vistation went down almost every year. Is it possible that the fee had nothing do with declining park visitation, considering that it had been declining for years?

Your source specifically uses 1997 and 2006 as benchmark years. Did you know that visitation increased in some parks when comparing those dates? Zion, Yellowstone, and Glacier, for example.

Yeah Lee,

You are right again. Foolish me. I forgot to apply the NPS logic to your argument. Fees probably do not decrease visitation to parks. Thanks for clearing that up, former NPS employee but not retired NPS employee.

Wow! You have very productive Sundays. Thank you for putting all the work into this. I definitely prefer knowing who is pulling strings and trying to control our public lands.

Thank you very much for this, Barbara. We need a lot more people like you out there who are willing to try to stand up to the powerful monied interests of the Koch family and other plutocrats who would rob the rest of us.

Judging by what I've read elsewhere, there is still a majority of Americans with enough good sense to understand what those folks are trying to do. Let's work to keep that going. It's the only way we'll preserve precious places from pillage and rape by those who worship dollars.

Everyone reading this should go find a copy of "Who Stole the American Dream" by Hedrick Smith. Read it very carefully.

http://www.westernslopenofee.org/pdfuploads/Fee_Policy_White_Paper.pdf

"Entrance and park fees decrease park usage. That is well documented in studies."

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2013/06/memorial-day-weekend-brought-record-crowds-wind-cave-bryce-canyon-national-parks23402

Hmmm. I would like to see those studies. From everything I read, park visitation is up year over year.

We park users and park volunteers have a right to protest increasing fees in the NPS despite what you park employees think. The National Parks belong to the people and they are fed up with a bureaucracy that cannot live within their means like everyone else in the United States. Entrance and park fees decrease park usage. That is well documented in studies. To listen to you NPS folks, you would have us think that fees are the cure all for everything. You can spout all the NPS propoganda you want but in the end, the public, aka park users and non park employees, are tired of it. Jarvis was busted when he got caught telling his folks to "make the public' feel the pain of the sequester. That is the NPS culture with which taxpayers are fed up. These groups that are dependent upon the NPS for their bread and butter do no service to the general public either by serving as propogandists for this ever growing bureaucracy. When a park Superintendent makes half of what the president of the Unites States makes, something is wrong with the system.

Instead of arguing over potential impacts, we could have the race done once, and then measure whether it was a good or a bad thing for the park. It's not like having the race once will destroy the park.

It sure seems like the race impacts are overblown just to create a bit of FUD. I get the impression that race opponents are afraid that if the race happens, we may find out that there is no negative impact.

Rick,

who paid for Obama's transportation? Who paid for his food and hotels? Who paid his admission fee? Those are the expenses I am referring to. I dare guess more people were inconvenienced by his visit than would be by a bike race in CNMT.