National Parks Suffering From Lack of Funds

The Washington Post ^ | 04/14/2002 | Eric Pianin

[cogitator]

During the 2000 campaign, Bush said the national park system was in "worse shape than ever" and vowed to erase a huge, $4.9 billion backlog of maintenance and road qimprovement projects within five years. So far, the administration has managed to make only a tiny dent in that backlog, while many of the nation's most prominent parks continue to suffer from years of budget parsimony.

[cogitator]

I live in the middle of a National Forest.

National Forests are admnistered by the Department of Agriculture, not Interior, which is responsible for National Parks, Monuments, and a couple of other designations that I don't remember offhand.

USDA Forest Service

[.38sw]

You are correct that the national monuments cost less than national parks to administer and maintain, and they were converted from primarily BLM lands. However, national monuments usually have visitor centers, which cost money to build and staff, and there is usually an increased visitor load after designation as a monument (not that i'm advocating keeping people away from their public lands). There are also puchases going on with other federal agencies, like the Forest Service, to consolidate lands that are mixed ownership, and for other things. In fact, I have recently read about the Forest Service buying a couple of ranches adjacent to the forests on the Central California coast to convert to recreational uses. That is taking private lands out of production and off the tax rolls. It all costs mo money. Just gives me the heebee jeebies.

[kemathen7]

Your comment is false. Amazingly enough, they aren't very top-heavy. My dad is an engineer for them. They outsource a ton of work. I think they lose money from constructing projects that need to follow the wacky laws that congress has passed. I think there are a lot of conservatives in the NPS. Unfortunately they work for congress, not the parks.

[cogitator]

Thanks for the answer. I didn't think that land acquisition was taking a big bite out of the NPS budget, but I'm sure that it has some cost. And I know that new facilities at new NM will also cost money. However, I think that the real problem being faced by the National Parks is maintenance of existing infrastructure, which is becoming a problem due both to aging facilities and increased usage. That's why I think that they should raise user fees a bit at popular parks (without pricing people out of them -- in most cases they could probably double gate admission and still be about 25-50% of a Disneyworld ticket) and spread these fees around the NPS.

[Thebaddog]

I think that you've got to get the BS detector out for anything out of the park service and especially the forest and wildlife service. Remember when the press discovered the half million dollar outhouse in an eastern park. And I think they have already been raising their rates. I think a rate increase won't hurt, but I would like an honest audit of the books.

[RightWhale]

Close the parks.

[ladyinred]

They raised the price of entering the national parks by tons already! In fact, some families can't even afford to take their kids! We pay enough in taxes to pay for the parks, it is the fact that they spend so much money on environmental issues that are ridiculous that keeps them below the budget!
Living by Yosemite Nat'l Park my entire life and watching the tree huggers ruin the place for us makes this a sore subject with me!
They have spent a fortune keeping us out, while screaming at the same time that they are losing money because we don't come!

[jackbill]

Bingo - what you said.

Look at the U.S. Postal Service. They lose money (and pay hundreds of millions of dollars in "bonuses) and what do they talk about? Getting rid of junk mail? Oh, no. They talk about getting rid of Saturday delivery.

[Calculus_of_Consent]

They raised the price of entering the national parks by tons already! In fact, some families can't even afford to take their kids!

I am only familiar with one National Park so I can only speak about Mammoth Cave National Park.

It is clean and well maintained. It is free to enter the park and hike the trails. It does cost to camp $15 per night. Cave tours also cost. Depending on which tour you take it will cost anywhere from $5 to $35.

I don't think that is outrageous.

[cogitator]

Close the parks.

Somehow I just don't think that's the way to go...

[countrydummy]

Just as an example I will use our situtation. I live near Hinton, WV along the New River. The NPS is trying very hard to gain all the lands in what was made the New River Gorge National River Area-----land owned by the NPS in the area is managed by the NPS.....yet now they want all the land, mine included. 70,000 acres more for the NPS and they can't take care of what they have already. Now this is just my area of WV, this is happening all over WV in different areas, as well as all across the US.....

[countrydummy]

I guess what I am really trying to say is be it National Monuments, National Historic Sites, National Parks, Forests, Oceans, etc., all of these designations recieve funding from tax payers. Now, not all of the NPS' funding comes under all of these officies, either under the Department of the Interior, but also Agriculture.....yet the NPS still has it's own funding and would have been more than sufficient a few years ago (when they first started running up their deficites)but would be so even now! IF they had not spent that funding on acquiring more lands instead of taking care of the lands they already own or CONTROL!

Of course once the NPS owns lands or control lands, then the local area tax base goes to Hell, and the NPS is in itself , way behind in PLIT Payments (payments in lieu of taxes-----property taxes). So that issue alone, is part of the reason for this article in the first place! The NPS is begging to get out of a huge financial mess they created in the first place at the expense of who? Of course us! You and Me! The tax payers! They want us to get them out of the mess they made! Why? Because they used our monies to buy more land that they can't take care of because they have a $12 million dollar defeict in taking care of the lands they alreay own/control and in paying their PLIT Payments!

So I said all that to say this, stop further land acquirements of any kind for any reason, until these lands that are supposed to be owned by the public, and as such, public (tax payers monies)should be used to address and fix the back log of maintainence and infrastructure care, and the payment of PILT payments! Take the funds that have been allocated specifically for "land acquisition" for the NPS alone, and put into the "maintainence" fund!

To raise user fees will decrease users!

[MarthaNOStewart]

Doesn't it make you wonder that if "ONE" park like Mammoth Cave can keep their park clean and neat on the "SAME" amount doled out to each park in their size category, that MANAGEMENT, OR MISMANAGEMENT may be the real issue and NOT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY. YES, WE ARE BEHIND in maintenance, but couldn't that be because of previous mismanagement making it a snowball effect now? I think we should pay a ONE-TIME TAX to clean up the NATIONAL PARKS and RESTORE them to pristine condition and FIRE Any Manager who doesn't manage properly after that, IMHO.

[MarthaNOStewart]

AMEN! If they can't maintain what they have, why get more? GREED...They don't want anyone else to have it. I disagree on higher user fees...the public parks are for those who can't afford the higher cost of private parks like DISNEYWORLD. It isn't the "single mom and two kids" who are the problem...its the beaurocrats who hire the "bozos" who are Game Wardens or forestry enviros (some are great so don't get in uproar) that want to close everything because they are "afraid" to do their duties as a "policeperson" and only want to deal with fishermen/women and drive the vehicle around. If there is party or loud disturbance they close the camping areas...that isn't managing, that's controlling and preventing public from using park. They don't understand how to handle crime and its prevention so they want to have roadless areas, campsites no one will use so they don't have to put out too much effort.

[MarthaNOStewart]

I disagree with you about who is abusing. Ninety percent of families using National Parks are clean and neat, and aren't abusing anything. Its that 10 percent the forestry employees are afraid to challenge that are the problem. I don't want higher tax revenues, but maybe a one-time tax to clean up what the "slacker" of the management of Parks has caused, so we can keep it open to children of this country who can't afford EXPENSIVE VACATIONS.

[MarthaNOStewart]

I agree that volunteers are necessary, and its a good place for community service hours. If the rest of money was used properly then the volunteer hours would give us "pristine conditions" without all that "land-grabbing" the enviros are pushing...IMHO

[MarthaNOStewart]

Those Park Rangers, Game Wardens and Forestry men/women do have sense of "owning" the park...and yet they were meant to be for the very PUBLIC WHO PAYS THEIR SALARIES...IRONIC isn't it?

[MarthaNOStewart]

YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD! They want to push people out with higher user fees, it means less work for the lazy enviros. We need to make them accountable for the money they are using from taxpayers, imho