National Parks Traveler

I sit and wonder if there was such public outrage when radio communications were first introduced into the park system. Certainly there was a percieved need for safety and security. Is the general public aware that the Parks have recently spent millions of dollars to upgrade radio communications with narrow band digital systems resulting in reduced coverage?

I think that Wi-Fi access in buildings is a great idea, and can't imagine why anyone would have a problem with it if it is privately funded. If you don't want to check your e-mail while staying in a National Park lodge, you don't have to.

Future jury trial: Backpacker gets into trouble in the area of Yellowstone without cell phone coverage. He is eventually rescued but the delay in rescue means that he suffers more serious injuries than he would have with better communications. Backpacker sues. The case goes to a jury. Jury hears that Yellowstone rejected better cell phone coverage even though it could have been installed.

I wonder if its possible to add cell technology to the existing infrastructure of the park. I doubt anyone wants to see cell towers pop-up all over the Yellowstone landscape, but there is already a significant human footprint that should be considered. I am sure that current park communication involves use of "walkie-talkie" type radio technology which relies on radio towers and repeaters.

For those who don't want cellular distractions use the on/off switch. Place your phone in the bottom of your pack and when an emergency arises be thankful to have such a communication tool. We don't need more government regulation telling us how to live our lives.

An unwelcome question, but perhaps one worth asking - does Ft. Hancock really meet the criteria for inclusion in the National Park System?

She should apply at Ocala National Forest or USFS in Tallahassee, they ONLY hire incompetents!

Our company, Tracks & Trails, arranges self-guided National Park camping trips for active families from around the world. In the early days we, too, felt that these sorts of tours were for braindead city folks who didn't get the wilderness ethic, and we seldom recommended them. Since then, we've come to realize that, for those with the money, a competent guide is worth his weight in gold.

What we need are less scientists (who make big $$...~40-80K/yr) and more maintenance and rangers...until NPCA and others start addressing this issue, the parks will continue to deteriorate...but I guess it is easier for them to just blame Bush!

Bill Wade is on target with his assessment of the NPS under Ms. Fran's "leadership." No one has done more over the last 50 years to drag the Service and, thus, the parks down than the recreation-oriented Mainella. Too often it appeared that she was simply a shallow "be happy" smiley face, ready to say anything that would keep the public from seeing the real picture of her disastrous tenure.