You are here

National Park Service Cracks Open Door To Fundraising Tied To Alcoholic Beverages


When the National Park Service's centennial rolls around in three years, will you be able to sidle up to the bar and order a Park Service-approved drink? That's one concern tied to the agency's decision to, in one case so far, waive its prohibition against fundraising campaigns involving alcholic beverages.

Earlier this year we reported on the agreement the National Park Foundation made with Adler Fells Winery to market a national park-branded collection of wines, with $2 of every sale going to the Foundation for its work in the parks.

As we noted at the time, this is just a trial balloon, as normally the Foundation doesn't get into deals involving alcoholic beverages, and it needed an exception to the norm to run this pilot fund-raiser.

However, in approving the exemption, Park Service officials seem to have cracked open the door a bit for more waivers when it comes to alcoholic beverage companies partnering with the parks.

In the waiver request (attached below), which was approved by Park Service Director Jon Jarvis, the assistant director for partnerships and civic engagement noted that the agreement with Adler Fells would "allow the National Park Service to evaluate how this type of program is received by the public, our partners, and employees; provide invaluable first-hand knowledge as we contemplate potential updates to Director's Order 21, and; demonstrate our willingness to reconsider the prohibition based on the success of partnerships with wine, beer, and spirits companies that are increasingly common for organizations from The Arbor Day Foundation, to the Alzheimer's Association, to Project Red, to charities benefitting wounded warriers."

Questioning this decision is Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which obtained the waiver document via a Freedom of Information requestion.

"The deal would run through the 2016 NPS Centennial. So, we might soon see such sumptuous offerings as Death Valley Pinot, Petrified Forest Port, Everglades Zin and Dry Tortugas Chardonnay," he told the Traveler. "Part of the offered rationale for this waiver is to allow NPS to explore 'partnerships with wine, beer and spirits companies.' Future promiscuous corporate partnering may have us on the lookout for Big Bend Lager, Voyageurs Vodka, Great Smoky Mountain Bourbon.

"These products would surely liven up any park visitor center and make nature walks a bit more, shall we say, exploratory," said Mr. Ruch. "This also suggests that the (Park Service) Centennial will be an unprecedented corporate partnership-palooza."

The move down this road is an interesting contrast to the decision made earlier this year by Mammoth Cave National Park officials to end the sale of beer and wine at the Caver's Campstore in the park because of "a dramatic increase in alcohol-related law enforcement incidents."

Traveler footnote: How successful the arrangement with Adler Fells has been to date is uncertain. Foundation officials couldn't immediately say Wednesday how much they've realized from the deal.


Why not? And in some states, they could add marijuana. Heck, I can think of a whole list of other personal recreation products that might help make the celebration even better.

No problem with a little good wine in the Parks--- but Lee, a Death Valley Doobee not such a good idea....

Not really a big surprise that the substance-abusing (taxpayer dollars) government would find this slippery slope attractive. The 'spirits' companies love these sorts of chances to improve their image. I seriously doubt they give a rodent's rump about the parks or the other charities mentioned. IMO, these "promiscuous" so-called partnerships degrade the parks, bit by bit, and show how badly NPS management has lost its way.

The 'Glacier Room' at the Paradise Inn (Joni Mitchell's "swingin' hot spot") was converted to accessible rooms a couple years ago. I'm sure the poor overworked road patrol rangers heartily approve of fewer callouts in the wee hours for drunken accidents.

Gutz and Tahoma, I wonder if all of it is NPS management and how much might be Congressional pressure to keep their favorite contributors happy.

Either way, it's a melancholy situation.

Does the NPS allow partnering with other companies with different products?

From this statement, "As we noted at the time, this is just a trial balloon, as normally the Foundation doesn't get into deals involving alcoholic beverages, and it needed an exception to the norm to run this pilot fund-raiser.," I am guessing the answer is yes.

So I'm guessing that the reaction here is due to the product being alcohol, rather than the partnering aspect. If the NPS partners with other companies promoting other products, does the NPS always sell them on park property?

NPS management likes to keep a certain plausible deniability by working through it's fellow-traveler, the NPF. Here are a couple past partnerships not involving alcohol that raised more than a few eyebrows. No doubt there were others that weren't so 'transparent'.

Coke/plastic bottles:


Monster Meadow Masher:


NPCA (National Parks Conservation Association) and National Parks Foundation are two separate organizations that are quite different in their purposes and methods of operation.

Thanks, Lee. I've corrected that mistake.

Add comment


This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

National Parks Traveler's Essential Park Guide