Changes to National Park fees

mockturtle wrote:
They could increase the cost of the America the Beautiful Senior Pass to $50 and it would still be a great value for many of us.

They increased it to $80 last year. (Don't loose the one you have) :)

There's nothing wrong with increased fees. Everything has gone up over the years. As volunteers in national parks we see a huge backlog of repairs needing to be done.

I always get the multi-park annual pass. Sometimes I use it once, sometimes I use it a bunch. Either way I know it goes to a good cause.

They could increase the cost of the America the Beautiful Senior Pass to $50 and it would still be a great value for many of us.

kerrlakeRoo wrote:
Just saw an article from CNN claiming that the National Parks have announced the final fee increase decisions for this year.
Day use fees will increase by $%
Annual Passes for single parks will increase by $10
America the beautiful will increase by an additional $10

Happy motorin

Everything will work out fine then. CNN in the past said the Gov't was going to sell them off to highest bidder.

In addition, many state parks have that same type of mission. They are supposed to maintain and manage lands for the enjoyment of the people while at the same time conserving the land.

Unfortunately, those two parts can be very much in opposition. Is ATV riding all over sand dunes destroying the land? Or is it enjoying the land? At what point does it cross one to the other? Is everyone in agreement with that line in the sand (no pun intended)?

And when does one person's enjoyment of the land override another's?

I think most people will agree that reducing the number of people in the park will make it more enjoyable (seeing it as wild instead of occupied). But how many people will agree with plans to do that if it is THEY who are being kept out of the park? Will you sacrifice your ability to visit and explore an area so that your grandchildren can visit and explore it? What if you've never been there yourself?

I agree. And many of the stuff I may find unnecessary, may be absolutely necessary for someone else.

No bathrooms - is that convenience or health & safety? If there are no bathrooms, does that mean only people with porta potties in their vehicles can visit? Or is everyone just supposed to pee in the bushes?

No roads - guess no one with a mobility disability can visit because they can't access the view points, etc.

Unfortunately, the government is tasked with the impossible on a daily basis - spend money in a manner that makes everybody happy.

Such a bargain, I am amazed people fought back on this. Many of these same people have no issues spending $125 a day per person to got to Disneyland, but god forbid paying $75 a car to go to Yosemite. The cost going forward is $35 a day, is that correct? And most National Parks are still free.

westernrvparkowner wrote:

GordonThree wrote:
I'd be happy if they stopped trying to make the parks into tourist attractions. I thought the NPS charter is to preserve and protect land held in the public trust, not to exploit that land as a tourist attaction? More parks should be like Isle Royale, Wrangle St Elias and Gates of the Arctic. Very limited access, very little development for "tourist comfort."

Close the welcome centers, the gift shops, the bathrooms, and the extensive road networks. That will lighten the budget considerably.

How about they just make the rule that however YOU want to enjoy the park is the absolute maximum usage? Then again, maybe they make the rule that YOUR usage is too extreme and you are not allowed in.
The sign engraving on the Roosevelt arch at the original entrance to Yellowstone says "For the Benefit and Enjoyment of the People". Nowhere does does the mission of the National Park service say it was established to preserve and protect the land at the exclusion of the public.
Too many people think their way is the only way. The hikers think everyone else should stay away. Those traveling by horse or bicycle think cars should be forbidden. Car drivers think SUVs and Trucks are evil. The SUV drivers curse the RVs and so it goes. Good luck in enforcing your will on others.

nps.gov wrote:
This "Organic Act" states that "the Service thus established shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments and reservations…by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

specifically:
purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations

conserve, leave them unimpared ... that's pretty clear to me, it means don't turn the national park into a Disneyland, which is the way many would seem to prefer it?

GordonThree wrote:
I'd be happy if they stopped trying to make the parks into tourist attractions. I thought the NPS charter is to preserve and protect land held in the public trust, not to exploit that land as a tourist attaction? More parks should be like Isle Royale, Wrangle St Elias and Gates of the Arctic. Very limited access, very little development for "tourist comfort."

Close the welcome centers, the gift shops, the bathrooms, and the extensive road networks. That will lighten the budget considerably.

How about they just make the rule that however YOU want to enjoy the park is the absolute maximum usage? Then again, maybe they make the rule that YOUR usage is too extreme and you are not allowed in.
The sign engraving on the Roosevelt arch at the original entrance to Yellowstone says "For the Benefit and Enjoyment of the People". Nowhere does does the mission of the National Park service say it was established to preserve and protect the land at the exclusion of the public.
Too many people think their way is the only way. The hikers think everyone else should stay away. Those traveling by horse or bicycle think cars should be forbidden. Car drivers think SUVs and Trucks are evil. The SUV drivers curse the RVs and so it goes. Good luck in enforcing your will on others.

Except, Tyler, when I roll in to a national park I flash my senior pass. I'm not sure that's fair to young families paying $30 or $40 bucks to enter the park.

Mom and Dad were not rich but I never heard them complain about state or national park fees when I was a kid.