You are here

UPDATED: Brace For A Big Jump In National Park Entrance Fees

Share

Editor's note: This updates with reaction from National Parks Conservation Association and U.S. Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke moved Tuesday to find a way to boost funding to address the National Park Service's maintenance backlog, proposing to substantially increase park entrance fees during the "high season" for vacations. It's a move that seemingly would do little to address the backlog, estimated at roughly $12 billion, while hitting families with school students hardest.

“Secretary Zinke would rather take money directly out of the pockets of hardworking Americans instead of coming up with a serious budget proposal for the National Park System,” said Rep. Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat. “More than doubling the vehicle entrance fee at Grand Canyon, as this proposal would do, or any other park is not a sustainable funding strategy. We should be encouraging more people to get outdoors and enjoy our great natural wonders instead of discouraging them by raising park entrance fees. Whether it’s healthcare, tax cuts, or now access to our national parks, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress just don’t seem to care about everyday American families.”

Under the fee proposal laid out in a press release, "entrance fees would be established at 17 national parks. The peak season for each park would be defined as its busiest contiguous five-month period of visitation."

During the peak season, the release explained, a seven-day-long "entrance fee would be $70 per private, non-commercial vehicle, $50 per motorcycle, and $30 per person on bike or foot. A park-specific annual pass for any of the 17 parks would be available for $75."

Parks to be affected by these rates, if approved, are "Arches, Bryce Canyon, Canyonlands, Denali, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, Olympic, Sequoia and Kings Canyon, Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Zion national parks with peak season starting on May 1, 2018; in Acadia, Mount Rainier, Rocky Mountain, and Shenandoah National Parks with peak season starting on June 1, 2018; and in Joshua Tree National Park as soon as practicable in 2018."

“We should not increase fees to such a degree as to make these places – protected for all Americans to experience – unaffordable for some families to visit," said Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association. "The solution to our parks’ repair needs cannot and should not be largely shouldered by its visitors.

“The administration just proposed a major cut to the National Park Service budget even as parks struggle with billions of dollars in needed repairs," she added. "If the administration wants to support national parks, it needs to walk the walk and work with Congress to address the maintenance backlog."

If implemented, Interior officials said, the higher fees could be expected to raise $70 million a year. Eighty percent of the revenues raised would remain in the parks where they are collected, with the remainder to be distributed elsewhere in the National Park System.

Not mentioned in the release was how the proposed entrance fees were calculated, or how significant of an impact the additional revenues would have on the maintenance backlog.

“I think the proposal speaks for itself. I don’t think we’re going to speculate on what is a good amount of money, or what is enough," said Park Service spokesman Jeff Olson.

Public comment on the proposal will be open from October 24 to November 23. You can find details on the proposal and leave your comments at this site.

The proposal comes in the wake of the Trump administration's desire to cut the National Park Service budget by roughly $400 million and its staff by about 1,200. It also comes as Interior is raising hundreds of millions of dollars from off-shore oil and gas lease auctions, a source of revenues Mr. Zinke earlier this year said could be used to address the park system's maintenance woes.

But the Interior secretary almost from the start of his tenure at Interior has said entrance fees need to be adjusted upward.

"About half the parks don't charge. Which is interesting," he said during a media call in May. "We have a tier system (for entrance fees). A number of parks chose not even to follow the tier system. So, we're concentrating on where are revenues, and shore it up."

The tiered approach to fees, if enacted, likely would hit hardest families whose vacations are governed largely by school schedules, as school vacations typically coincide with the high seasons outlined by the release. 

This past summer senior citizens, not the appropriations system, were looked to by Congress to raise more money for the Park Service. On August 27 the price for a lifetime senior pass to the parks, which had been just $10 for years, jumped to $80. Park Service officials could not say Tuesday how much revenues were generated by that increase.

Yet to come is a proposal to adjust entrance and permit fees for commercial tour operators. "The proposal would increase entrance fees for commercial operators and standardize commercial use authorization (CUA) requirements for road-based commercial tours, including application and management fees," the Park Service release said. "All CUA fees stay within the collecting park and would fund rehabilitation projects for buildings, facilities, parking lots, roads, and wayside exhibits that would enhance the visitor experience. The fees will also cover the administrative costs of receiving, reviewing, and processing CUA applications and required reports."

Unlike entrance fees for park visitors, any proposed increases in CUAs would take effect following an 18-month implementation window, the Park Service said.

Comments

Well, somebody has to pay for Zinke's private jet trips.  C'mon. 


$70 for a week for an entire family is more than affordable and appropriate. It costs more than $100 per day per person for a Disney visit. If NPS keeps the revenue, this is a fantastic idea. If we care about our parks we need to financially support our parks. Trails and roads don't fix themselves, and NPS employees need to be paid. Heck, you could triple the annual pass fees and I think it would still be by far the best value in America!


Bill. You are obviously unaware that taxes pay for these lands.  The NPS isn't disneyworld, a private, for profit enterprise.  Take off the Mickey Mouse Ears and get off the small world ride. It is neither affordable nor appropriate. Should we pay for a library book every time we check it out or a road every time we drive on it or the police whenever they work an accident? 


That $70 is an entry fee only.  You still have to pay for a camp site!  Good way to make sure families can't afford to get their kids out in nature!

 


entirely reasonable approach, might alleviate overcrowding a bit during the summer months.  much more preferable than a reservation/ quota system which would inevitably lead to corruption.  suspect an annual pass might go to $125/ 150, still a bargain. yes, taxes paid for the preservation of the parks, but not necessarily your annual visits: a good rule of thumb is that people will pay for what they truly value!


This is a bit inside-baseball, but I think that the bigger issue wth this proposal is whether Congress will change the law on what RecFee (entrance fee) income can be spent on.  The current law is only projects (not ongoing operations), only projects with direct impact on visitors (no long-term resource management for future generations), no permanent federal positions (although permanent subject-to-furlough employees can be paid for projects during their otherwise unpaid furlough pay periods), no spending in advance nor carrying over more than 20% of annual income (so no big projects that require multiple years of receipts for that park).  

$70M/yr isn't much against $4-5B of non-highway deferred maintenence, but it is almost irrelevant under the current restrictions on hwo it can be spent.  At the least, can they get Congress to allow any amount of RecFee receipts to be spent on "maintenence backlog", including either saving up for large projects or "borrowing" from other parks against future income, so that large projects are possible with this funding?  If not, that $70M will do even less.

Also, Zinke doesn't know about Everglades?!  Or Acadia?  Those are the 2 most obvious Eastern "destination parks" for his market-based admission fees that he didn't include.  By law Great Smoky Mountains NP can't charge admission (although, as SmokiesBackpacker emphasizes, they can and do charge for back-country camping permits and other add-ons).

And maybe the smaller cultural National Monuments like Brown v Board of Education, Gettysburg, etc., aren't on Zinke's radar?  There's a reason those aren't on their "tier" entrance fees.  Zinke should visit Chiricahua NM in Arizona.  He'd enjoy it (on his horse with his boots & hat), and the Superintendent can explain why the cost of collection wasn't worth the entrance fee receipts, so the tier entrance fee was abolished.  

2 more things:

1) Do both!  Submit comments on the NPS planning website AND contact your representative & senator!

2) "Foreigners" visiting parks for a day or less tend to be on commercial organized tours that pay a flat fee per big bus (Grand Canyon, Zion, Yosemite, even Yellowstone)..  This proposal doesn't affect such commercial entrance fees.  It _would_ affect the foreign visitors who cmoe to spend multiple days in 1 or 2 parks on their own.  And it does affect many residents who do the classic summer vacation of visiting grandparents & seeing 1 or 2 National Parks on the same roadtrip.


For whatever it may or may not be worth, KSL News in Salt Lake just reported on this proposal and said that one of Utah's Congressional delegation, Mia Love, has come out in opposition to this.


Thanks to tomp2 for all your posts!  The restrictions outlined above on fee spending would almost seem to be designed to increase, not decrease, the NPS multi-billion maintenance backlog,     If Zinke's fee money can't be used to clean restrooms (operations at its most basic), but only build new ones, for example, then those  'visitor improvements'  sound like more development in lieu of maintenance, in addition to proposed cuts in staffing..


Add comment

CAPTCHA

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

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.