You are here

Congressman Proposes Overhaul To Fee Programs On National Parks, Other Public Lands

Share
Alternate Text
It could get more expensive to enjoy your public lands -- national parks, national forests, and BLM landscapes -- under legislation introduced to Congress/Lee Dalton

Legislation introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives could, if enacted as drafted, require the National Park Service to determine "a nationally consistent entrance fee policy and corresponding rate structure" for the 401 units of the National Park System, a potentially sweeping requirement that seemingly could generate tens of millions of additional dollars for the parks.

The legislation, sponsored by U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah and introduced to the House this past Friday, comes as the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act teeters on the brink of sunsetting. Congress last fall extended the Act, which governs recreational fees the federal government can charge on public lands, through the end of 2015.

Under the Act, the federal land-management agencies are permitted to sell the so-called America the Beautiful Pass that allows entry into lands that charge entrance fees, as well as charge fees for a growing range of activities. The Act has been criticized as a way for land managers to offset diminishing federal budget revenues with more and more fees on things like interpretive programs, backcountry fees, camping fees, and boating fees. It also has been reviled as a "pay to play" system for public lands, or a "rat tax"  -- recreation access tax.

At the same time, the Interior Department promotes the Act as enabling "federal land management agencies to provide quality recreation experiences for hundreds of millions of visitors every year to some of America'™s most scenic, iconic, awe-inspiring, historical, and culturally rich lands and resources."

Far and away, according to the Interior report, the National Park Service benefits most from the revenue stream, receiving $172.4 million in Fiscal Year 2011. The U.S. Forest Service stood second in revenues, with $64.9 million.

Currently, 133 of the 401 units of the park system have entrance fees. Rep. Bishop's legislation seemingly could change that by requiring the Interior secretary to develop a "nationally consistent entrance fee policy and corresponding rate structure..."

However, there was some uncertainty as to whether the legislation would indeed require entrance fees for all units of the National Park System. Emily Douce, a budget and appropriations specialist with the National Parks Conservation Association, said Sunday night that it was her understanding that the intent, despite the lack of guidance or restrictions in the legislation's language, was not to force entrance fees across the board but to ensure that parks with similar amenities -- campgrounds, restroom facilities, picnic areas, for example -- charged similar fees.

Ms. Douce, working with the National Parks Second Century Action Coalition, a group formed a year ago to promote the protection and operation of the parks, acknowledged, though, that the legislation on its face could be read to mean the Park Service would have to establish rates for all units of the system.

The Coalition is fully supportive of the legislation, applauding Rep. Bishop "for introduing important legislation that would allow national parks and other federal lands to continue to retain the fees they collect in order to enhance recreational opportunities for visitors."

"Congressman Bishop's legislation helps preserve a vital part of the funding stream for our national parks and other federal lands," Craig Obey, NPCA's senior vice president and chair of the Coalition, said in a prepared statement to be released Monday. "The Coalition will continue to work with Congress to make adjustments to the bill as it moves through the legislative process."

"I guess the Congress of 2014 has decided that public lands are nothing more than revenue generators for the agencies, not places where all Americans have access and feel welcome. It's the end of our federal public lands system (FS & BLM) as we have known it. Teddy Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot are rolling in their graves." -- Kitty Benzar.

The legislation calls for the price of the America the Beautiful Pass, currently $80 a year, to be recalculated every three years "to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers over the same period..." The $10 lifetime pass for senior citizens, the free pass given to permanently disabled citizens, and free passes for active U.S. military members, would remain under the current version of the legislation.

Rep. Bishop also would restrict sales of the America the Beautiful passes to U.S. citizens and permanent residents, a move that likely would prove unpopular with international travelers who come to the United States to see a number of national parks on one visit.

"I guess all those international visitors will be paying full freight. Wonder how that might affect visitation at parks where they make up a large percentage of visitors?" Kitty Benzar, president of the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition that long has fought fee creep on public lands, told the Traveler in an email Sunday. "But hey, they don't vote, so who cares about them?"

The bill also includes provisions that would make it more costly to visit national forests and Bureau of Land Management landscapes.

"The bill would remove all protections for Americans to have basic access to their National Forests and BLM lands," said Ms. Benzar. "The prohibitions currently in place against fees solely for parking, for general access, for camping outside of developed campgrounds, for scenic overlooks, all of that would be repealed. We would be back to the anything-goes days of unlimited fee authority that we had under Fee Demo, and against which the American public spoke up loud and clear, which is why the Congress in 2004 put those prohibitions in there.

"I guess the Congress of 2014 has decided that public lands are nothing more than revenue generators for the agencies, not places where all Americans have access and feel welcome. It's the end of our federal public lands system (FS & BLM) as we have known it. Teddy Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot are rolling in their graves."

The legislation would allow the Park Service to charge a fee for shuttle bus operations, such as those at Zion and Bryce Canyon national parks, though the cost would be capped at the amount charged for entrance to the park unit in question. While the legislation does permit fees for interpretive programs, it specifies that "before the Secretary may charge a fee for interpretive programs, the Secretary shall identify basic interpretive programs and services, including tours required to provide basic visitor access to a primary resource in a unit, that will be provided free of charge.'™'™

The measure also would allow the Park Service to charge fees for recreation on public lands and waters "when the Secretary determines that the visitor uses a specific or specialized facility, equipment, or service..."

Under Rep. Bishop's proposal, at least 90 percent of the collected fees, up from the current 80 percent benchmark, would remain with the unit of the park system where it was collected for use. However, before any new fees, or fee increases, could be instituted, this legislation would require Congress to approve them.

Overall, said Ms. Benzar, "There is nothing good in this bill for the public, only for the federal bureaucrats in the agencies. They got everything they wanted and then some. I will be doing everything in my power to stop this from passing."  

The House Natural Resources Committee is expected to review the bill Wednesday.

Featured Article

Comments

The entire F-35 fleet was grounded recently for the third or fourth time after Congress pushed the Pentagon to declare it was "operational" even though the Air Force, Navy, and Marines still say it is in a testing phase.

Several pilots have given up their careers rather than continue to fly the thing.  They maintain it is unsafe even if it's sitting on the ground.  (The most recent grounding came as a result of fire while one of them was on the ground.)

Lockheed Martin very cleverly made the aircraft a stealthy sneaker that faces no chance of being shot down by Congress by strategically placing manufacturing of subassemblies in as many different Congressional districts as possible.

In addition, the $400 billion number tossed around is far short of reality because of some clever accounting.  True cost per aircraft for those built so far is estimated to be in excess of $1.5 TRILLION.

Google F-35 and you'll find a flood of negative reviews and very few that offer positive pictures.  And those, if you look, are almost always from Lockheed Martin.

Golly whiz bang.  What could our parks do with $400 billion?

As for the idea that charging entry fees for our parks might drive potential visitors away, I wonder.  My daughter and her family just returned from Dizzy World in Florida where they paid a daily entry fee of $294 for mom, dad, and two kidlets in the 3 - 10 age range.  (That was at a discounted rate.  Without a discount it would have been $356.)

Our parks are a bargain.


I'd submit the above comments about the value to local economies of jobs tied to programs such as the F-35 are a key reason why the NPS feels the need to tout the value of parks to the economy.

As the F-35 and other defense contracts confirm, few if any congresspersons want to be open to criticism local jobs were lost because they cut funding a federal project or program. That said, we shouldn't be too hard on the NPS for trying that same strategy to gain support for funding parks, by touting parks as "economic engines."

On the original subject, if park fees bring in about $125 million a year, would Congress ante up that much in appropriated dollars if all fees were eliminated? Seems unlikely in today's world.


I may be misreading the info, but it appears from page RecFee-3 of the FY13 NPS Budget Justification (a.k.a. the "Greenbook") that estimated receipts from fees for FY11, 12 and 13 were about $172 million. 

Whether the correct amount is $100 million or $200 million, on my meter, it's a hefty chunk of money.


Well here is a simple fact. Public lands entrance fees decrease access to public lands. Period.

Yeah the $25 or whatever to access Yosemite and Yellowstone are totally turning those places into ghost towns.  </sarcasm>


The ten most visited national parks are, according to NPCA:

  1.Golden Gate National Recreation Area (CA)

14,289,121

 

2.Blue Ridge Parkway (NC, VA)

12,877,368

 

3.Great Smoky Mountains National Park (TN, NC)

9,354,695

 

4.George Washington Memorial Parkway (MD, VA, DC)

7,360,392

 

5.Lincoln Memorial (DC)

6,546,518

 

6.Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV, AZ)

6,344,714

 

7.Gateway National Recreation Area (NY, NJ)

6,191,246

 

8.Natchez Trace Parkway (MS, AL, TN)

6,012,740

 

9.Chesapeake & Ohio Canal NHP  (DC, MD, WV)

4,941,367

 

10.Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area (PA, NJ)4,843,350

I'm not sure about #'s 6, 8, 9, and 10 on this list, but I'm pretty sure none of the others charge an entrance fee (due to enabling legislation). 

Assuming that entrance fees would not affect visitation, a mere $1.00 per visit would mean that there is currently $78.8 million dollars per year in uncollected fees from these top ten NPS units alone.  If an entrance fee of $10.00 per person per visit would be considered for only the top ten visited sites, this would amount to approximately $0.8 billion. 

However, I believe that entrance fees most definitely will have an effect on park visitation.  The mere perception of a loss of park visitation will cause local gateway communities to vigorously oppose any legislative proposal that would change their park's current no-fee status. 


Frankly, the proposed legislation doesn't show much imagination. Why not increase the fee for seniors? $10 for a lifetime? While this might draw the ire of AARP, someone driving a $300,000 RV surely can afford a bit more, even if it's only $25/year.

And if the NPS is worried about luring younger generations to the parks, why charge kids in college, or just out while they're trying to get a job and settle down, $80?

As for the list Owen shared, it shouldn't/wouldn't be too hard to install entrance gates to Blue Ridge Parkway and Natchez Trace Parkway, and I wouldn't think a $10 entrance fee would generate much ire from the locals. 

Those international tourists? If you're not going to allow them to get an $80 America the Beautiful Pass, create a separate international pass, say $50, that's valid for two weeks or even a month. And market it.

 


Kurt--I agree that the legislative proposal is sorely lacking in imagination, but then when have those buffoons inside the Beltway show much creativity, constructive thinking, or competence?  The sometimes stultifying infexibility and incompetence we see in top bureaucrats in the NPS and a myriad of other federal agencies is in no small measure a reflection of our national leadership. If that sounds pessimistic, it is meant to do so. I think we are more poorly governed on the national level, and in bigger trouble as a nation, than at any time in my life. The situation with the parks and the NPS is a mere microcosm.

 

Jim Casada


Unfortunately, Jim is 110% correct.

Yet we still vote these clowns back into office time and time again.

Donna McAleer, a West Point graduate and former Army officer, is running against Rob Bishop and might even have a slim chance of winning despite the dollars that will flow to him thanks to PACs and Citizens United and the obscene gerrymandering of 2010. 

I love her slogan:  Not Right.  Not Left.  Just Forward.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.