White House's Budget Proposal Would Be "Catastrophic" For National Park Service

President Donald Trump's fiscal 2027 budget proposal for the National Park Service raises more questions than delivers answers for the agency, which is heading into a potentially combustible summer in the overly dry and arid West.

The so-called "skinny budget," which gets its name from a lack of details, calls for a  $736 million, or more than 25 percent, reduction to park operations, the National Parks Conservation Association said after the document was released Friday. The proposal also would cut the Park Service's construction budget to less than $50 million, leaving it with 72 percent less funding to address repairs compared to 2025, the group said.

“A cut this massive would be catastrophic. After a year of deep staffing cuts, dwindling resources, and attacks on history and science, park staff are already at the brink," said John Garder, NPCA's senior director for budget and appropriations. "Park maintenance needs are growing, protections are eroding, and visitor experience is declining. This proposal would only accelerate the damage, putting our national parks at even greater risk and further cutting the park staff needed to care for our national treasures."

At the Center for Western Priorities, Deputy Director Aaron Weiss said the "White House budget is missing key details, but even in broad strokes it paints a bleak picture for America’s parks, wildlife, and everyone who hunts, fishes, hikes, or simply enjoys the outdoors. ... National parks are already short-staffed heading into summer. 2026 is shaping up to be one of the driest and most dangerous years for Western communities. This budget tells the people who do that work and live in the West that things are only going to get worse."

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum did not immediately issue a release with his take on the numbers.

A year ago the Trump administration proposed a staggering $1 billion cut to the Park Service's budget, an amount equal to about one-third of the agency's annual funding and one that seemed in line with the administration's belief that most of the 433 units of the National Park System didn't belong there.

Congress ignored that proposal, however.

Garder said NPCA was "encouraged that the administration continues to recognize the importance of addressing maintenance needs in our national parks and extending the Legacy Restoration Fund [which funds maintenance backlogs across the parks]. Our national parks face more than $23 billion in needed repairs across the system. Addressing these needs is essential to ensure future generations can experience these places as we have."

But NPCA questioned a $10 billion number ascribed to a "vague set of new construction projects across Washington, D.C."

The money, the group said, is proposed to be used to “coordinate, plan, and execute targeted, priority construction and beautification projects in and around Washington, D.C.”

But the budget documents "don’t clarify how much would address D.C.’s $1.5 billion deferred maintenance backlog, cover routine upkeep across NPS sites, or fund new construction," said NPCA. "This $10 billion represents nearly half of the park system’s total deferred maintenance backlog, yet it’s unclear why new construction is prioritized, especially without a plan for maintaining new infrastructure."

Both NPCA and the Center for Western Priorities also criticized the administration's proposal to block Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars from being used to acquire land for parks.

"While the administration is prioritizing fixing our parks, the budget ignores strong bipartisan support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund [by] eliminating funding for federal land acquisitions that would leave national parks vulnerable to development within their own borders," said the NPCA official.

"Voters in red and blue states alike have consistently backed LWCF because it is the single best tool for increasing access to public lands, especially for hunters and anglers," added Weiss.

He also noted that "[D]ays after convening the ‘God Squad’ to greenlight the extinction of an entire species of whale, the White House is now proposing to strip [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] of its role protecting ocean wildlife and hand that authority entirely to an Interior department that has shown it’s in the business of ending species, not saving them."

Garder at NPCA also noted that the administration since taking office in January 2025 has worked to downsize the Park Service workforce, an effort that has raised grave concerns that the agency will be short of scientists, researchers, and other personnel that manage and take care of natural, cultural, and historic resources in the parks while most park staff are placed in "visitor-facing" positions.

That fear gained substance on Thursday when Burgum said a reorganization of the Park Service was coming that would direct the agency to be more focused on interacting with visitors. "This initiative reflects a commitment to delivering faster, more reliable service to the public, reducing administrative burdens and ensuring that Interior’s work provides meaningful benefits to taxpayers, communities, territories, states and tribal nations," the secretary wrote in an email sent to all Interior Department employees, including those at the Park Service.

Garder took exception to that message.

"Since January 2025, the agency has already lost nearly a quarter of its workforce, leading to fewer ranger programs, weaker resource protection, mounting maintenance delays and diminished visitor experiences," he said. "The administration must now deliver a robust budget that restores staffing and equips our parks with the resources they need to carry out their mission.”

NPCA said the budget proposal would also cut "the National Heritage Area program by approximately 87 percent, undermining the bipartisan investment Congress just made to this critical program that supports community driven efforts to protect historic resources," and slash "the Historic Preservation Fund by 95 percent, eliminating opportunities for communities and tribes to protect historically and culturally irreplaceable resources throughout the country."