Word that a Texas-based company owned by concert promoter Live Nation is trying to gain greater access to national parks as venues should raise eyebrows across the country.
More needs to be known about the plans C3 Presents has in mind. But the fact that the company spent $15,000 during the third quarter alone to lobby Interior Department officials is concerning. Should El Capitan in Yosemite National Park be the backdrop for Justin Bieber, Blake Shelton or Rihanna? Should the National Mall be a venue for John Fogerty, Miley Cyrus, or Brad Paisley?
No doubt, the Park Service wouldn't open up any of the jewels of the National Park System, the Yosemites, Grand Canyons, Yellowstones and Glaciers, to concerts that would draw tens of thousands of fans. But what about the National Mall, or the Statue of Liberty, which Budweiser used as a backdrop earlier this year for a concert as part of its "partnership" with the National Park Foundation for the National Park Service Centennial. (Hopefully, Bud will start promoting the parks as part of the deal, as Subaru, also a partner, does heavily...)
Where in the park system would it be appropriate for a concert the likes of those Live Nation promotes and sells?
"We create, market and produce live experiences, concerts and events — just about anything that makes people stand up and cheer," crows C3 Presents on its website. "C3 is the force behind two of the country’s top music festivals — Austin City Limits Music Festival and Lollapalooza. Every year, each of these festivals attracts more than 200,000 people over a three-day weekend and is staged in beloved greenspaces in the urban heart of its host city."
Two-hundred-thousand people over three days. Which unit of the National Park System would be a good setting for such an event? Is there one?
The Washington Post raised that sort of question in the wake of a C3 Presents concert staged in September not far from the National Mall, on West Potomac Park that is part of the sprawling National Mall and Memorial Parks complex, to help raise money to restore the Mall's grounds. That event, featuring Drake and the Strokes, came with some hefty ticket prices: "$105 per day, $150 to $175 for the weekend, and far more for VIP and Platinum passes," the Post reported.
Activists and historians who monitor the Mall say the decision to charge admission to the music festival sets a troubling precedent that could signal an end to the days of free music in the national park, ushering in an era of pricey, multi-day festivals.
“We see the National Mall as a public treasure, and it’s supposed to be free and open to the public — the museums, the memorials and the events,” said Mark B. Bennett, executive director of the National Mall Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy group. “This festival violates the intent of public access, regardless of whatever cause they are supporting.”
A historian who wrote the book on the Mall agreed.
“The Mall is America’s front lawn,” said Peter R. Penczer, author of “The Washington National Mall.” “It’s a place where people go to protest, to see the monuments, to relax on the weekend. I don’t know how it can be America’s front lawn if you’re fencing it off for a paid event. It’s for a good cause, but they are setting a bad precedent.”
That point about setting a precedent shouldn't belittled. But then, the Park Service already is moving down the road of taking a more business-like approach towards managing the parks. The Budweiser deal is evidence of that, as is that September concert in Washington, D.C.
More business-like is one thing. Putting more and more price tags on the parks in the name of poverty -- "As interest in the parks grows and appropriations remain flat, public-private partnerships continue to be an appropriate strategy to help us protect the parks and meet the needs of our current visitors and attract diverse audiences,” says Park Service Director Jon Jarvis -- and staging events in discordant settings is another.
Should the national parks be sold off in the name of trying to make ends meet for the agency? Should we have somber settings that hold memorials to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Vietnam War, or World War II, iconic settings that reflect on troubling times, be thrown open to concerts "that make people stand up and cheer"?
According to the Post story, the previous superintendent of the National Mall and Memorial Parks rejected a request for a paid-admission concert. But his successor, Robert Vogel, viewed it as a way to make money for the Mall. The resulting contract called for 10 percent of the gross receipts to go to the Trust for the National Mall, a nonprofit working to see the Mall's grounds restored.
What shouldn't go unnoticed is that C3 Presents put on President-Elect Barack Obama’s election-night rally in Chicago, staged events in Washington, D.C., in connection with the 56th president's inauguration, and even played a role in the White House Easter Egg Roll. Or that a member of Live Nation's board of directors is the brother to Rahm Emanuel, once President Obama's chief of staff.
Not only was the decision to allow C3 Presents' paid-admission concert counter to Park Service policies stating that "all activities must be free and open to the public," noted the Post story, but it was made by top Park Service staff in the Washington office who overruled underlings.
Shouldn't units of the National Park System be more than a commodity marketed to the highest, or best-connected, bidder?
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
I agree that concerts would not be appropriate for places like Yellowstone or Yosemite but the National Mall has been holding concerts for decades. Why does charging for them (to the benefit of the NPS) make it bad? I believe NPT has been suportive of fee increases across the rest of the system why is a "fee" implementation in non-fee areas less acceptable. Because some corporation is going to make money too?
I can't imagine why it would be inappropriate to charge admission to an event held on the mall. ESPECIALLY if the main benefctor is the parks service. Nothing is free. It costs a lot to maintain those "beloved greenspaces". It may come as a surprise to some but when events are held in "beloved greenspaces" the promoters pay a large deposit to repair any damage done by having the event. grass is damaged it gets resodded. tree branches are broken... tree either gets replaced or the fee is paid. The net result is that the park is always left better off as a result...either by having more money in their coffers or by having new turf etc...
We have sports stadiums for holding live concerts and/or visits by the Pope. Why not hold these events on the National Mall? Because yes, they are destructive. Even if the sod is replaced, that is not what the park is for. You don't go about repairing a park like a car. Every repair is an aadmission of defeat that you have failed the principal purpose of that park--which is nature and open space, and not, in Frederick Law Olmsted's words, some frivolous means of personal display.
In New York City, Olmsted's Central Park is constantly besieged by frivolities, as if the park as a park is not enough. I like outdoor concerts, but I would not hold any concert inside a public park. To do that I would be displacing its natural values--and why should anyone be allowed that displacement? In a shopping mall, I displace nothing. Why not hold the concert there?
Ah, because the asphalt is hot and uninviting, while the grass is cool and green. Exactly. Now, make your city more liveable before asking me for my park. Always left better off? Hardly. That is a promoter's argument, and narrowly intended just to get the promoter's way.
"Where in the park system would it be appropriate for a concert the likes of those Live Nation promotes and sells?"
Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts is the obvious answer. Chamizal National Memorial www.nps.gov/cham is another park explicitly meant for concerts. I think parts of the Presidio in Golden Gate are appropriate, Governors Island (not sure about the NPS v non-NPS geography there), at least the affiliated venues for New Orleans Jazz (not sure what NPS owns other than the visitor's center), and there are likely others appropriate parks I am not aware of. I'm not too offended by events at West Potomac Park: it's a polo field and 8 baseball diamonds, so not very natural, and not in the way of other visitors to the Mall, although loud amplification aimed the wrong direction could seriously impact both the MLK & Lincoln Memorials or Arlington across the river. Al & I agree much more than we disagree; he & I may draw the boundary of "natural" on opposite sides of maintained lawns (although the Mall isn't exactly a manicured lawn), but once there are trees and birds the resources and values are very different.
I disagree with natX: parks don't always come out ahead, they're rarely the "primary benefactor" (10% isn't my definition of "primary"), deposits or bonds aren't always put up, and sometimes the resource damage is more than the bond or income. [I know someone in danger of being fired over resource damage from an outside event.] It takes a lot of time & care & contract-writing expertise to make sure that an event leaves the park at least as well off. I'm not an absolutist: in some cases it is worth the effort and the park will benefit, but that requires careful consideration on a case by case basis.
My personal view is that I'm ok with large, ticketed festivals & events at appropriate parks, and where there is a nexus of that event with that park. I can't afford a night in the Ahwahnee, and I couldn't afford an expensive ticket to Wolf Trap. In that I agree with ecbuck: if there's a reason for the event to be in the park, E3 making money is no different than Xanterra, Delaware North, or YP&C making money. Like concessions, perhaps the prices should be considered in writing the contract. I would set a very high bar for expensive ticketed events on the Mall, in terms of how much of the Mall would be closed off for how long (including setup and cleanup), why the mall is a great fit for that particular event, and whether the proceeds would support the volleyball courts down by the Potomac (just kidding on the last one). To me the Mall is part of a citizen's trip/pilgramage to D.C., so closing it off requires even stronger reasons than closing Colorado NM for a day for a bike race.