The idea that places of beauty might be privately owned and privately exploited was anathema to certain people in the government. Why should a place like Yosemite or the Grand Canyon be in the hands of only a few? Shouldn't ALL the people have access? And so the government set aside millions of acres so that ALL the people would be able to visit.
And then they limited the number of campers to 11,500 a year.
If a private company owned camping rights to the Canyon, a heck of a lot more than 11,500 people would have the pleasure. But the do-gooders efforts at making this something for ALL the people is a primary reason why it is available to so few.
Much of our country is empty. Why? Well, that's not a lot you can do with some of it. Opening up those lands to the public will NOT result in 5 million people camping in the Grand Canyon next Tueaday.
I see the National Parks as an exclusionary effort whereby the rabble are blocked and the elite get privileges. It's an indication of a feudal society. [/rant]
Reminds me of the scene from the movie “Into the Wild”, where Alex asks about where he should launch his kayak into the river and the park ranger informs him that he needs a permit and and by the way, the next available permit is in 8 years.
hearing this, Alex just takes his kayak, atop a shopping cart, and launches without permission and evades the “River Police” all the way down to Mexico.