As we wait for the incoming Trump administration to identify its nominee for Interior secretary, we can't help but envision what the outcome could be. Among those said to be under consideration, or jockeying for the job, are retiring U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, all Republicans who favor energy exploration over conservation.
We don't often take sides, but when we do, you can find our position here.
We are on the verge of moving from one of the most vibrant, exciting, and positive years for the National Park System and the National Park Service to the prospect of one of the darker chapters for the parks and their overseeing agency.
In outlining a zero tolerance policy for combatting sexual harassment across the National Park Service, Director Jon Jarvis and his National Leadership Council have laid down a roadmap to both support victims and punish those who prey on their coworkers. That they have so many hurdles to clear to succeed is unfortunate.
Zion National Park, one of the most crowded and congested units of the National Park System in summer, one where visitors can spend an hour or more simply waiting to get into iconic Zion Canyon, will temporarily close public access on August 1 to allow for a professional bike race. What is the National Park Service thinking?
Three months past the public notice that a sordid chapter of sexual harassment pervaded Grand Canyon National Park’s Inner Gorge, the National Park Service has largely been silent on exactly how it will address the issue.
If all goes well, you'll be able to pick up high-speed Internet in all national parks by 2018. Finding a water-filling station? Well, probably not.
When a single F-35 fighter for the Air Force -- just one -- costs in the neighborhood of $100 million, and when the helmet for the pilot of that fighter costs $400,000, is it too much to ask for better funding for America's greatest idea?
In taking three years to craft their blueprint for how public lands should be managed across a large portion of Utah, U.S. Reps. Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz have produced a smoke-and-mirrors view of conservation, one that uses the right language but disguises their true goals in obfuscation and fine print.
There are, in just about every nook and cranny of the National Park System, wonders to behold. From glacier-veiled mountains and sizzling mudpots to underground lakes and rare artifacts of the nation's founding history, the park system is an invaluable trove of U.S. history and prehistory set against majestic, soaring landscapes. These incalculable treasures are what most come to mind when the centennial of the National Park Service is broached.
Word that a Texas-based company owned by concert promoter Live Nation is trying to gain greater access to national parks as venues should raise eyebrows across the country.
U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop got it wrong when he titled his revision of the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund the ‘‘Protecting America’s Recreation and Conservation Act," which he notes could be called the "PARC Act" for short. Judging from its provisions -- fortunately still in draft -- it would be more accurate to title it "Drilling The Continental Shelf And Ignoring The Federal Domain Act."
Fewer than 12 months separate the National Park Service's 99th birthday and its 100th. What happens over the course of the next year will go a far way to determining if it will be a happy birthday or not.
There has been lots of discussion and debate on the Traveler in recent months over the size of the National Park System as well as the propriety of some of the units in that system. Most recently, a reader took issue with a piece looking at Fort Vancouver National Historic Site that questioned what the goal of the historic site really was.
Fewer than 100 miles separate Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida from Biscayne National Park, yet when it comes to views on preservation the two parks are light-years apart.bicy-donahue_wilderness_survey.pdf
Is that number, $2.5 million, accurate, Budweiser, or is there a zero missing? I mean, you get to be a proud partner of the world's most incredible national park system for two years, get to have your corporate logo on the same page as the National Park Service arrowhead, and all it costs you is $2.5 million?
On a day set aside to celebrate the Earth and the environmental movement, the Interior Department and National Park Service gave us dollars and cents.
There are at least 75 million reasons why the U.S. Senate should either fully fund the national park projects contained within the defense authorization bill, or strip them out.
Confusion, misspoken words, and fear mongering swept the public lands landscape this past week following word that the U.S. Forest Service was planning to squash your right to snap a photo in the woods if you didn't pony up $1,500 for a picture-taking permit. The uproar stemmed from a poorly worded Federal Register notice, and was fanned by media worried about their First Amendment rights and very possibly by federal government critics.
Traveler's View: National Park Service Logos Lack Creativity, Fail To Celebrate "America's Best Idea"
National parks, it's held up, are "America's best idea," but logos chosen for the National Park Service to celebrate its centennial and to use in other venues fail to reflect that belief. Indeed, they ignore the rich heritage and beauty of the National Park System in a curious attempt to "engage and connect with new audiences."
At Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks, the National Park Service should welcome a discussion into a form of backcountry travel that, if properly managed, need not alter the decades-long experience of visiting these two magnificent parks, but rather enhance it for a small number of wilderness travelers.