You are here

Commentary: What Would An Economic Stimulus Package for the National Parks Buy Us?

Share
Mug House, Mesa Verde National Park, Kurt Repanshek photo.

Good investment? Mug House would be a great attraction at Mesa Verde National Park....if the National Park Service had the money to restore it and open it to the public. Kurt Repanshek photo.

Ever since the phrase "economic stimulus" was launched last year, there seems to have been more and more clamoring for these kinds of bailouts, or incentives, or infusions of capital, or whatever you want to call them.

Conservation groups haven't been silent in this arena, either.

Not long after Traveler reported back in November that various "green" groups had collaborated on a wish list for the environment, one that had plenty of suggestions involving the national parks, we began to hear that there was work under way to outline an economic stimulus package that would benefit the environment, including the national parks.

Later this week -- Wednesday to be specific -- the groups will hold a news conference to explain what they see as "an opportunity to invest in ready-to-go, job-creating projects that would restore America’s national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and fragile ecosystems as part of the nation’s economic recovery, as was done in the 1930s."

As an example, the National Parks Conservation Association notes that at Great Smoky Mountains National Park an investment of $4.2 million could bring all 94 of the park's restrooms into ADA compliance. At Valley Forge National Historical Park an investment of $927,615 would cover repairs and restoration of Stirling's Quarters, which was the headquarters of Maj. Gen. Lord Stirling and Major James Monroe. At Grand Canyon National Park a $15 million investment would provide badly needed employee housing in the form of eight, eight-plex multiple family housing units in an area now occupied by 10 trailers.

These are not bad things. But the NPCA's 12-page document highlighting the needs of the National Park System generates just a dollop of uneasiness.

One concern is the need to wrap the parks up as so many economic engines, that the reason they deserve an economic stimulus in part is to help kick-start pockets of the economy around the country. Indeed, in the NPCA's document subtitle after subtitle addressing proposed infusions is followed first by the words, "to create jobs," and then by the specific need, whether that be repairing a road or providing an ADA ramp to a restroom. That's all fine and good, but what happens when the economy turns around but national park funding does not? Then how might groups lobby for the parks' needs?

But then, the folks at NPCA well know that they have to sell this package to the incoming Obama administration and that in the economy's current state, well, jobs sell.

The second concern deserves to be delivered on a silver platter not just to the incoming administration but to every member of Congress: The National Park System is a key part of our national heritage, and it shouldn't have been allowed to tarnish so. Indeed, the NPCA drives that message home in its report:

These places tell the American story -- and our personal stories. These are the places where we forge family memories and in doing so, bond with our nation as a community.

Most importantly, national parks are our legacy to our children and grandchildren; protecting the national parks means that we are protecting our legacy for the future.

The National Park System is a poster child for years of insufficient investment in our nation's most significant assets.

For years, America's national parks have sustained chronic shortfalls in critical federal funding needed to adequately staff and maintain visitor centers, campgrounds, and museums, and keep parks safe and accessible for all visitors. National parks on average received only two-thirds of the needed federal funding annually -- a system-wide shortfall of $750 million every year.

If the green groups can garner an economic stimulus package for the parks, good for them. But let's not buttress that package on the notion that we should invest in the parks primarily for the economy's sake. True, the parks are indeed powerful economic engines. If you doubt that, just ask any chamber of commerce in a gateway town what would happen if their park went poof! the next day.

But national parks shouldn't need to be portrayed as economic saviors to gain our country's necessary and prudent investment. They should be properly kept up because they are central to our nation's heritage.

Now, if an economic package is approved for the parks, let's be careful with it. Let's focus on repairs and restorations and curatorial needs and not go on a spending spree of new facilities and roads.

And, if Congress deems such investment worthy, let's hope it also realizes the pitfalls of neglect and gets serious about properly funding -- not just adding to, but actually funding -- the National Park Service and seeing that our tax dollars are wisely spent. Let's hope that we one day soon no longer need to talk about the Park Service's staggering backlog or mention "Centennial Challenges" with hopes it will buy some polish for the system in time for the agency's centennial in 2016.

Rather, let's properly invest in the parks just because it's the right thing to do.

Comments

First, I would like to commend Kurt on his outstanding picture of Mesa Verde National Park. I've never been there, and the picture has convince me I should go.

I don't understand why we need a stimulus package to get ADA compliance for national park restrooms. Seems to me when the federal government passes rules, that they should budget compliance for all federal facilities including National Parks.


Jees, Frank, I pay my taxes, realizing that I get services for them. I don't regard that as forced extraction.

Rick Smith


I definitely think that stimulus package money put into National Parks would be an investment. It would be an investment in the people employed on stimulus package projects, who would not otherwise be employed. It would be an investment in the future availability and desirability of our parks. It would be an investment in quality of life for our children and grandchildren. All investments do not have to have a monetary return, though even there I am sure that many projects will cost less if done now, rather than put off to inevitably be done later.
Having said that, we should not spend money frivilously. Backlogged projects should be completed, maintenence brought up to date, before we even consider any new projects.


C'mon, Frank, not every cent (most perhaps, but not every) of taxes goes to waste...heck, if it weren't for Federal need-based student aid such as Pell Grants, I wouldn't be in college right now.


Frank never saw a government program he liked. It's useless to point positive things out to him.

Rick Smith


Come on, Bemis, how many real socialists are regular readers of NPT? And how many of us spell our country's name "Amerika"? The Pell deadbeats will protest your exaggerations.

Rick Smith


Back on topic -- one thing I do want to point out is a lot of NPS sites are also in areas that don't have much else in the way of economic development other than tourism, and tourism does suffer during economic downturns. So rehabilitation of parks could be a good thing for those areas, help keep some people employed, help keep some hotels, restaurants, bed-and-breakfasts, and the like from going under. And let's face it, most parks need a lot of work.

Honestly, agree with its value or not, Depression-era CCC projects are still standing in a lot of park sites, providing facilities for decades and decades and decades.

================================

My travels through the National Park System: americaincontext.com


By the same token Hitler's autobahns are still standing and have provided solid service to the German motoring public for decades and decades and decades. Ain't national socialism great?

Awesome non sequitur!!!

===========================================

My travels through the National Park System: americaincontext.com


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.