You are here

NPCA Launches "Parks In Peril" Campaign To Get Obama Administration To Protect National Parks

Share
Parks in Peril

A National Parks Conservation Association campaign launching today is designed to rally public support against threats facing such iconic national parks as Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Grand Canyon with hopes the Obama administration will step up and use the tools and authority it has to protect the parks.

"The public knows that there are problems in the parks, but it does take an advocacy group sometimes to elevate the dialogue," said Kristen Brengel, NPCA's senior director of legislation and policy. “Our effort is to make sure we’re amplifying these issues and engaging the public.”

At 9 a.m. EST today the park advocacy group was launching a social media campaign on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other channels to raise the profile of threats facing parks from coast to coast:

* In Florida the campaign zeroes in on Biscayne National Park and efforts by the National Park Service to create a marine reserve zone in a bid to improve the health of fisheries and the only tropical coral reef system in the continental United States.

* At Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona the group points to the prospect of a mega-development just south of the park's boundary, a development some fear could disrupt the park's groundwater flows.

* In Wyoming, Yellowstone National Park's bison herds need a sound management plan that will "(E)nd the senseless slaughter of bison and provide these living symbols of wild America with more room to roam..."

* In Utah energy development on public lands threatens the viewshed and natural sound at Arches National Park.

There are other parks threatened by development and resource issues, such as Acadia National Park with large crowds brought to the park by cruise ships, Bryce Canyon National Park with a surface coal mine not far from its borders, and national parks and preserves in Alaska where state wildlife regulations often impinge on natural predator populations in those parks.

By focusing this campaign on parks such as Yosemite National Park and its issues with air pollution, Grand Teton National Park with inholding issues, Glacier National Park with nearby energy development, and even Colonial National Historical Park in Virginia confronting the prospect of a massive electrical transmission line strung across the landscape, NPCA hopes to leverage public concern specifically for these places and also raise the national conversation about protection for national parks.

“The reason we think this campaign will strike a cord with the public is these are mostly iconic park units," said Ms. Brengel during a phone call Tuesday.

Interior Department officials have the requisite authority and tools at hand to take steps to protect the parks, the advocacy group maintains:

* At Biscayne they could speed the adoption of regulations for the marine reserve zone;

* at Yellowstone the federal agencies involved in wildlife issues could press for quicker resolution of the bison management conundrum;

* at Grand Teton it could possibly get the National Park Foundation to work to raise private funds, much as it did to finance repairs to the Washington Monument, to close the gap in purchasing private inholdings within the park from the state;

* at Colonial the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could be directed to conduct a full-blown environmental impact statement before deciding on the proposed transmission corridor;

* at the Grand Canyon, the Forest Service doesn't need to issue the permits and rights-of-way to allow a project on the scale of the one now proposed;

* at Mojave National Preserve in California the administration could deny the permit being sought for a 2,000-acre solar farm nearby and require that it be relocated;

* for clean air and vistas at Yosemite and other parks, the Obama administration could "close loopholes and strengthen park clean air protections so polluters aren’t let off the hook," and;

* at Glacier National Park the administration should cancel energy exploration leases for the Badger Two-Medicine area outside the park, rather than allow exploration.

In the case of Glacier, the U.S. Forest Service already is on record opposing the leases.

"This administration can do something to get us closer to protecting these national parks. They don’t need a court, they don’t need Congress, they can do it themselves," Ms. Brengel said.

NPCA officials are counting on the social media campaign will convince the adminstration to do just that.

“If action isn’t taken by the Obama Administration now, park visitors could see a mega-mall outside Grand Canyon and energy development in sensitive wildlife habitat right next to Mojave. Fortunately this administration has the opportunity to make decisions now that will protect and enhance these iconic national parks for future generations," said Mar Wenzler, NPCA's vice president of conservation programs, in a release. "Through our Parks in Peril initiative, National Parks Conservation Association will mobilize our more than one million supporters across the country to encourage the administration to seize its unique opportunity to protect our incredible national parks.” 

Comments

The really scary thing is that this list is nowhere near complete.


All of these parks face serious threats. However, the best way to protect Bryce Canyon, Yellowstone, Glacier, Grand Canyon, and Arches National Parks and Mojave National Preserve is to expand the parks to encompass adjacent or nearby lands that are under development pressure.

In addition to the threats listed above, Biscayne National Park should be expanded to include more of Biscayne Bay and Virginia Key, which are imperiled by misplaced development. Denali, which is listed above but apparently not in the final NPCA report, should be expanded onto adjacent state lands, where wolves that leave the national park are being slaughtered by trophy hunters and trappers.

Numerous other National Park System units are also threatened by adjacent development and need to be expanded. Prime candidates include, Olympic, North Cascades, Crater Lake, Golden Gate, Great Basin, Dinosaur, Glen Canyon, Canyonlands, Mesa Verde, Chaco Culture, Rocky Mountain, Badlands, Theodore Roosevelt, Mammoth Cave, Delaware Water Gap, Ocmulgee, Great Smoky Mountains, and Shenandoah.

Most of these lands and waters are already owned by the public, but are being mismanaged by another "multiple-use" oriented agency, such as the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Mangagement, or states. They could be transferred to the National Park Service with little or no land acquisition cost. 

We urgently need to expand threatened existing National Park System areas and add new areas that are endangered by resource extraction and industrial development. NPCA should go beyond important but limited defensive efforts, such as this, and launch a major campaign to expand the National Park System.


Michael - are you going to pay for it?  Are you going to make up for the lost resources?  If these parks are expanded won't that just create more "nearby lands" that will have exactly the same issues?


How ya doing, Eric? Having a nice hump day?

 

1. Nope - we all should. We pay too little to protect the parks as it is.

 

2. Moving away from dollarizing wilderness is a healthy thing, unless - as some do - 'profit' is their primary paraphilia.

 

3. In some cases yes, in some cases no. Life to the rest of us is all in the shades of gray, not your polarized black and white.

 

Have a smurfy day.


Hi EC,

Most of the adjacent lands are already public, so they would just need to be transferred to the National Park Service. In some cases, such as phasing out subsidized livestock grazing, the taxpayers would save money. In other cases, such as banning fracking and mining, the taxpayers would save a huge amount of money avoiding the costs of cleaning up the mess, mitigating air and water pollution, and restoring the industrial sites after the development interests leave town.

Also, the exploitation and development around the parks may well discourage some people from visiting in the future. That would have negative impacts on local communities. That has been pointed out in the case of the proposal to delist the grizzly bear, which a study indicated could cost millions of dollars per year in reduced tourism. The same may well be the case with the killing of Denali wolves and the ugly and dirty fracking happening around Theodore Roosevelt.

In terms of recources being "lost," I think everyone agrees that there are places so special that they should not be developed. Areas critical to the integrity of a national park come under this category. Moreover, some of these resources, such as dirty coal that would be minded near Bryce Canyon, should stay in the ground to help to mitigate impacts on climate change. In other cases, such as the mega-development near Grand Canyon, this is a place that is inappropriae for any development and there are alternative places that are available. In the case of Yellowstone bison (and grizzly bears), they are being killed because they supposedly conflict with livestock grazing. Phasing out livestock grazing in the Greater Yellowstone region would have a huge positive impact on wildlife populations and an infinitesimal impact on livestock production.

Expansion would theortically create other "nearby lands," but in many cases lands farther afield do not have exploitable resources, they already have some level of proteciton, they are not visible from or in the watersheds or airsheds of national parks, or they are not an integral part of park ecosystems.

Of course, there would be strong political opposition from entrenched special interests, but that has always been the case for new or expanded national parks. I think if the American people knew the problems and opportunities at stake, they would support expanding these parks.


 not your polarized black and white.

Sorry Rick, my view is much more balanced.  I recognize there are costs and trade offs that have to be made with any decision.  For you and Michael (et al) its all or nothing - full steam ahead and damn the cost or how it is going to be paid for.  Heck, you guys make NCPA look middle of the road.  


Michael, you are both dreaming and terribly misinformed.  Adding lands that need to be managed and reducing income from grazing and resource exploitation will hardly save money.  And the cost of "cleaning up the mess", to the extent it exists on those lands, in today's world is total bourne by the lessor.  Further, these activities bring far more dollars to the communities than they chase away from adjacent parks.  I won't even start with your "dirty coal" climate change nonsens. 


Eric, I sort of agree with you, insofar as My view is more balanced, which is what you said. Just a different subjective viewpoint.

 

That's the thing - no one ever sees themselves as the bad guy, everyone thinks they are in the middle average everyone should agree with me middle. You do realize, of course, that making statements like " For you and Michael (et al)..." puts you off on a little island separate from et al [sic].


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.