You are here

Op-Ed| The National Park System: Why It Should Continue To Grow

Share
Roosevelt Arch at Yellowstone/NPS

The U.S. needs to build its National Park System, not stand pat on it, according to the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks/NPS

Editor's note: The Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, previously known as the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, maintains the National Park System in its current form is too small, and that more effort should be made to expand it. In this article, the Coalition explains its rationale for such an effort.

I INTRODUCTION

In December of 2012, the National Park Advisory Board transmitted the report Planning for a Future National Park System to the director of the National Park Service. Their transmittal letter quoted the NPS ‘Call to Action.' Identify a national system of parks and protected sites that fully represents our natural resources and the national cultural experience. It called for the NPS to work with communities and partners to create a comprehensive National Park System plan that delineates the ecological regions, cultural themes, and stories of diverse communities that are not currently protected and interpreted.

II THE EXISTING SYSTEM

Placed against this expansive vision, the existing National Park System is incomplete. That judgment also applies to the units that comprise the current U.S. conservation estate; forests, refuges, monuments, state parks, land trusts, etc.

The international standard for conservation of terrestrial and inland waters is 17 percent. A recent estimate puts the current U.S. total at 7 percent. The maritime and coastal area standard of 10 percent is even further from being achieved.

Here are some characteristics of the current National Park System. It is 13 percent rock and ice, 3 percent wetlands (Svancarrra and Scott, Ecological Content and Context of the National Park System). It comprises 3.7 percent of the U.S. but only 1.7 percent of the contiguous 48 states. Ninety-one percent of the acreage is west of the 98th meridian, 73 percent without Alaska and Hawaii. Eight ecoregions have no representation in the system. Thirty-three states have less than 1 percent of their area in national parks, 18 of these are in the Mississippi River drainage.

Cultural areas show similar imbalances. Gender, diversity, migration, immigration, social movements, education, arts, science, the role of media are sparsely represented if included at all.

In short there is room for robust growth if the system is to serve as the cornerstone of a national system to protect and preserve our natural resources and fully represent our national experience.

III A NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH

Since national parks are created by Congress or proclaimed by the President, the latter only on existing federal land, what is the role of a strategic vision for a future system? Such a vision should influence the decision making at all levels. When additional areas are proposed, their role in filling gaps should be considered. The process of creation will not change but the strategic overview should influence the decision.

IV NEW KINDS OF PARKS

It is unlikely, if sad, that the future probably does not include the opportunity to create additional Yellowstones or Yosemites. New parks will probably be more like the Upper Mississippi or Boston Harbor Islands where management and ownership are shared and mixed. Heritage Areas seem to be Congress’ approach of choice in dealing with large landscapes. Access for urban dwellers -- 87 percent of us by 2030 -- will require innovative partnerships.

V THE COST OF GROWTH

There have been calls for a moratorium or an end to system growth based on the expense of new areas. An examination of the 2014 NPS budget at the park level shows that the recent growth has not unduly burdened the system financially. The ten parks with the highest budgets include none created after 1972. There are 67 parks with budgets of $5 million or more, the most recent on that list was created 30 years ago (2016 NPS Budget/ Green Book/ONPS Summary section).

VI A MATTER OF URGENCY

In the U.S. we are losing open space at the rate of 1.6 million acres a year (Salazar et al, America’s Great Outdoors, February 2011), Yellowstone every 18 months! Since 2000 the National Park System has grown by around 350,000 acres, most of that at Craters of the Moon in Idaho. That’s a rate of less than 25,000 acres per year. System growth then is not just a matter of filling gaps, it is also a race to prevent irreversible loss of our natural and cultural heritage. The original idea of the Land and Water Conservation Fund was to balance conservation additions to the rate of development. If that is still our national goal we have failed miserably (Galvin, Growing the System, March 2014).

REFERENCES

Except where otherwise noted the source of information is Planning for a Future National Park System: A Foundation for the 21st Century by the National Park System Advisory Board (2012). 

Featured Article

Comments

"The international standard for conservation of terrestrial and inland waters is 17 percent. A recent estimate puts the current U.S. total at 7 percent. The maritime and coastal area standard of 10 percent is even further from being achieved. "

Don't know where they are getting their numbers. According to the World Bank, the US has 13.8% of its lands nationally protected (does not include state and local parks) vs a world average of 14.3 percent and for maritime waters the number is 30.4% vs a world average of 12%.

http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.4

And of course there is the question of whether percent of land mass is even a meaningful statistic when it comes to national protection.


Everything said here is true, and unfortunately impossible to reverse. We are today a country of 325 million people, quickly headed for 125 million more. Do you think any national park park system can withstand that? Do you think better attention to "diversity" will make a difference?

The people making these kinds of recommendations are simply dreaming. The American Dream is based on limits, all of which have been discarded so the nation can be PC. At least the recommendation here gets one statistic right. We're losing 1.6 million acres of open space a year. Actually, it was nearly double that before the 2008 recession, which has temporarily (but only temporarily) slowed the rate.

You want global warming? Keep losing 1.6 million acres a year, and ask what the planet is losing. The Amazon rainforest alone is losing 10 times that--20,000 square miles (12.8 million acres) each and every year.

You want to expand your national park system? How about we get to save what we have? No, it doesn't represent every era of American history or every ethnic group. Nor should it. It is supposed to represent America the Melting Pot. The Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island are supposed to represent us all.

Oh, I just forgot. We gave those to Budweiser. However, I have not forgotten where I was in 1968 when the world population estimate was 3 billion people--200 million in the U.S. Now the world is 7 billion plus, and again, we're 125 million past the number when the Park Service celebrated Mission 66. You could talk about expanding the national park system then, because again, the numbers made that possible. By no stretch of the imagination is it possible any longer, unless everyone on the National Park Advisory Board is sniffing glue.

Yes, it's so nice to be bounded by two oceans, both of which have been virtually fished out. When did that suddenly become global warming instead of overpopulation? Meanwhile, where are the people with the technological fix willing to stop the rogue trawlers with their 45-mile wide nets finishing off the Arctic and Antarctic seas? At least THE NEW YORK TIMES reported it without screaming global warming.

Think where the world was 50 years ago, and why the world is not there now. Think what those millions of refugees pouring into Europe mean. We blew it. We did not get serious about the most serious problem the world has ever faced. Expand the National Park System to be more "diverse" and "inclusive" of our natural and cultural history? If only it were that simple, and yes, if only we had listened 50 years ago.


We are dreamers, Dr. Runte. I doubt we would have saved what we have now if dreamers such as Marjorie
Stoneman Douglas, for example, had not dared to dream the Everglades. I am not ready to give up the idea of growing the System as you appear to be. There's still some good places that need to be added to preserve and protect our natural and cultural heritage. I am sorry you can't dream with us. We need as many allies as possible.


There is much to do. Consider the case of the Marin Headlands and Golden Gate NRA. Google "Thomas Frouge" and "Marincello" sometime. Those people who were committed to right a wrong well underway, instead of "simply dreaming", saved something worth saving. There are initiatives worthy of macroeffort, and ones worth our microefforts. It is not an "either / or" proposition, Dr. Runte.


We all want to be dreamers but sometimes it is necessary to face reality. I believe the NPS should continue to grow but in a SLOW and thoughtful manner. We do not need a park of the week or a park to mark every minor event in American History. The NPS is too large and cannot be managed with the funds and staff we now have. Asking Congress for more money will not work. Creative management needs to find more innovative and better solutions.

My recommendation, as I had stated before is to shed marginal parks that have few visitors or duplicate existing units. For example, do we need more that 70 parks to mark the Civil War or 30 parks to celebrate the Presidents? I think not. This will be hard but it must be done.

Once we slim down the system we need to look at the Washington and Regional Offices and stop every program that does not contribute to the welfare of the parks. This is also called zero based budgeting. How many programs, people and resources do we have that contribute zero to the health of the National Park Service.

Finally, I would say that our management, starting with Jon Jarvis, needs to get out of their isolated bubbles and talk to the men and women who man the front desks, do the maintenance and plan for our parks. A good manager does not ignore his work force or all of those people who support our National Parks. A good manage opens lines of communication with his supporters and does not ignore them.. Never send an email to the Director or anyone on his staff. You will die of old age waiting for a reply.


When Marjory Stoneman Douglas dared to dream Everglades National Park, the population of Florida was 1 million. Now what is it? 20 million. When John Muir dared to dream Yosemite National Park, the population of the state was 1 million. Now what is it? 38 million. This is to explain why the national parks are generally high country--or dry country. And why there are so few parks in the East. It wasn't high and dry, nor was it public land that Congress could designate for "free."

I am all for dreaming, Rick. Let's just get those dreams straight. Every acre we save now is going to cost a bundle--and be even more controversial than the public lands.

At some point, the whole country will have to step up and protect the landscape, whether or not it is set aside in "parks." I write about that in ALLIES OF THE EARTH, but the environmental community isn't buying it, because that would mean nothing for them to "do."

It is the same with all of these committees shaking their fingers at us about the parks. Shame on you, Alfred, for not believing that minorities still feel "unwelcome."

I believe it; I just won't enable it. There comes a point when feeling "welcome" is up to you. Nor is it written anywhere that my dream has to be your dream, and if it is not that my dream is illegitimate.

But that is not what these "committees" are saying, is it? They are rather saying that the American Dream is guilty of everything. Expand the national park system to address that "problem?" No, thank you, because the problem is contrived. We know we can't "solve" it; we just hope to milk it, at which point a new "problem" will be found. As I've said before, it's the age of the non-issue issue. How about we solve the real issue and take care of what we have "in such manner and by such means as will leave it unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations?"


Alfred--As Bob Dylan sang, "I'll let you be in my dream if I can be in yours."

Harry--Who's in charge of the slimming down process? The historians? The biologists? The Regional Directors? Mitch McConnell? And the NPS has been through zero-based budgeting. Did it help the first time?


I retired in 2011 after more than 35 years in the National Park Service. I enjoyed all of my 13 assignments, ranging from seasonal park aid to park superintendent. However, the most interesting year was 1999 when I was the 10th Bevinetto Congressional Fellow assigned to the U.S. Senate Energy and National Resources Committee, National Parks Subcommittee. I was able to objectively view the National Park System and Service with "outside eyes". A weakness of many current and former NPS employees is a lack of that ability or even interest in doing so. Thank you Kurt, and others, for addressing the need for such objectivity. Randy Turner


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.