JJHaulers: "The State and National Parks could not possibly be self sustaining charging the nominal fees that they charge."
Our national parks are funded from tax money to protect the wilderness and wildlife habitat and watershed. So, the parks never were designed to 'self-sustain' in that sense.
The rangers (some, not all) are multi-purpose and supervise as well as research and create sustainable resources. It was never the intent for these protective services to pay for themselves through camping fees, only to protect the lands.
The camping and RV facilities came later, and should become self-sustaining for the campgrounds part only. The campground never should and never could pay for all the park operations. It would be impractical to ask campers to pay for the campgrounds AND all the wilderness and watershed operations of the parks.
If the campground fees ONLY paid for the park employees that actually operate the park camping services and support the volunteers, the parks would never have to worry about closing or maintenance.
But, as budgets change and get diverted (remember the lottery in MA and CA, and the support that now is included as budget) the park revenue gets lost in the budget decisions that now suddenly begin to pay for the research and protection components too. That's where the complication enters - we should never lump the park services under one umbrella, because the don't fit and never will.
The problems occur when our budget starts believing the camping should pay for the entire wilderness operation, instead of the RV and camping component as its own entity.
