Deseret News | Reader comments: Fewer funds, more visitors hurt national parks?

Reader comments
Fewer funds, more visitors hurt national parks?

El Capitan | 1:12 a.m. April 26, 2008

Maybe we just have too many state and national parks. Many of those areas could be supervised, as they used to be, by local agencies, BLM, Forest Service people etc. I can remember when for instance, Snow Canyon State Park got along just fine as Snow Canyon and we all enjoyed it then more than now, with all the added buildings, signs, enforcement, fences, and other restrictions. Save the money and reduce taxes plus, eliminate fees needed to pay all the extra, unnecessary help.

Eric in AF | 3:43 a.m. April 26, 2008

Are you kidding? We live as part of an ever more populous world. I am 42 and can remember when Utah was a small place that a family could go to "thier" favorite campsite without reservations at a moments notice. Those days are gone, Utah now has 2.5 mil residents and are a hotspot for visitors world-wide. I live in Africa and just went to a gamepark that was devastated by people. I hate rules and organization just as much as the next guy, but I can recogize we have one shot at preserving our beauty that is Utah and once gone/destroyed/consumed it will be nigh on impossible to get it back. Fund the parks so all of the people who want to see the parks can. it takes political willpower, but is a must.

Mahonri | 5:45 a.m. April 26, 2008

As one who has worked for NPS I saw what really hurt the parks. Government attitudes. Park workers, from the top down who would not stoop to pick up trash, move rocks from trails or do the small things that needed to be done daily as they saw them. Instead they go back to the office and write a memo, "schedule" other employees to do this work or hold another asinine meeting that only peripherally related to running or taking care of the parklands.
All the problems did not suddenly crop up, they are the result of years of not doing what is needed, when it is needed. This stuff builds when not addressed when it happens.

Comments continue below

What A Joke | 5:59 a.m. April 26, 2008

Economic survival should always come first. Families will see much less of these places in the future if this economy continues to tank. Where do you think all the bucks that are needed for sightseeing comes from on the trees in these parks?

St. George | 6:16 a.m. April 26, 2008

Good point El Capitan.

Only one thing that may be a problem, more visitors and more unsupervised youngsters leads to vandalism and misuse.

We need a happy medium.

Karnatica | 6:18 a.m. April 26, 2008

Maybe we should charge more for foreigners. We just visited the Taj Mahal and they charge about ten times more for foreigners at all their attractions than for Indian citizens. It was still worth it.

to El Capitan | 6:28 a.m. April 26, 2008

Last I checked BLM and Forest Service were not local, but national organizations. The reason Dino park is suffering is it's remoteness and the billions of dollars in profit that the gas companies are gouging from the American people.

No worries | 6:51 a.m. April 26, 2008

The price of fuel and the faltering economy will slow the number of visitors to the parks. No need to raise their budgets. I find it laughable their budgets aren't keeping up with inflation. I know how they feel.

mark | 6:51 a.m. April 26, 2008

Typical shortsightedness. We do not have too many state and national parks (areas). I would contend we do not enough!

The parks are for us today and for our great grandchildren in the future. The typical NPS personnel are highly professional, underpaid, and the agency has been running on fumes for years and years now. BLM and USDA-Forest Service have been cut, cut, cut by the administration.

We get what we pay for. Either we save our beauty and our significant places now and forever more, or we don't. Is America worth saving? Should our grandchildren's grandchildren have places worth seeing, walking through, etc. ? Or not?

As to extra, unnecessary help? Where, where where? I place students into these parks and I can testify that the cuts have made it almost impossible for the outdoor agencies to hire the students. When they do hire the students, they are usually to replace full time personnel who have either retired or been laid off.

Please, speak from facts. Support having an America preserved, conserved, and appreciated. Do not think only of yourself and taxes. Good grief.
Focus on the future.

Paul B | 7:19 a.m. April 26, 2008

El Capitan - It is unclear what you are trying to communicate with several of your points:

"too many state and national parks" - parks are designated to protect cultural, historical and natural features. Should some now lose their protected status?

"could be supervised...by local agencies, BLM, Forest Service" - The National Park Service is a federal land management agency, just like BLM and USFS (also US Fish and Wildlife Service), who all have local management.

Unsure how "buildings, signs, enforcement [and] fences" are "restrictions." The infrastructure is in place for the protection of and service to visitors and resources.

"Extra, unnecessary help" - What constitutes extra and unnecessary?

bob | 7:29 a.m. April 26, 2008

I did not know there was such a thing as national parks week. I celebrate them year round, as we all do.

A reflection of a society is how it treats the future. We are not looking very good in that mirror. The Lakota say we should plan 7 generations away.

Not us. We don't even plan for next year. Sad, but true.

Hurry November. Democrats have long had a long record of supporting the NPS, while the GOP cuts and cuts and cuts. It is fact.

Geezer | 7:39 a.m. April 26, 2008

Thanks for digging into the facts. These parks are part of our patriotic heritage, and they attract visitors from everywhere. We've met tourists from Asia and Europe who were staying in San Juan County during their visit to Grand Staircase-Escalante, Capitol Reef and Grand Canyon. They deserve sound, protective management and facilities that introduce visitors to the stories behind the scenery - fossils, plants and animals, geology, and human history.

Jen S | 7:55 a.m. April 26, 2008

It's understandable at Dinosaur N.M. The building was condemned. Satisfaction would be lower if they left it open and it collapsed on people.

Ari | 8:02 a.m. April 26, 2008

Were are our Utah Senators and Congressmen? Why aren't they working to get Timpanogos and Dinosaur new visitor centers? Their involvement could speed up the process. Tourism is so important to Utah. We are spending a lot of state money to publicize Utah as a top tourist destination. Why are they letting things decline.

Miss G | 8:17 a.m. April 26, 2008

As use of the National Parks continues to expand, I do not believe we have the option to go backwards to less care and consideration for these irreplaceable treasures. I am not delighted to pay $7 a trip to tour Timpanogas Cave, but, it is a better recreational value for me than spending the money on a movie. I believe the Park system needs a regular budget increase yearly until Visitor Centers, camping facilities, tours and interpretive nature walks are outstanding, and bathrooms are always clean. We could just move a billion or so dollars out of the military budget and spend it to maintain and IMPROVE the National Parks. I think that the Parks are one of the best things the government does, not flashy, not earth-shaking, but a good value for any one who visits with their family or as a tour group.

It is foolish to expect that they will continue to provide services to an expanding number of visitors for less money every year.

Ultra Bob | 8:19 a.m. April 26, 2008

let's face it. There just isn't enough money for stuff like parks and the Military policy of the current government.

Joseph Buchanan | 8:30 a.m. April 26, 2008

It is interesting that no mention is made here about the Escalante/Grand Staircase National Monument. Isn't that one of the state parks and monuments that are part of the National Park system?

Science Teacher | 8:41 a.m. April 26, 2008

Not logical.

Attendance is up, but revenue is down?

Seems like they're not getting a fair cut and all that cashola goes back to D.C., or those heading to national parks need to start forking a bit more over.

It's the war stupid! | 8:59 a.m. April 26, 2008

As much as I like the people in iraq and appreciate all we are trying to do for them it is time for them to stand up on their own feet and take charge and control of their destiny. We need to bring out troops home and start rebuilding the United states. The money we are spending over there is crazy. We should bring the troops home, start a 5 year program to get us off of fossil fuel and rebuild our own republic!

Sorry, El Capitan | 8:59 a.m. April 26, 2008

"Save the money and reduce taxes ..."

Sorry, but NO government at any level is in the business of reducing taxes. In fact confiscating your money is almost the only thing governments dohitw reckless efficiency.

Uh huh | 8:59 a.m. April 26, 2008

That's in, El Capitan. Give the parks up and let the free market take care of them...Snow Canyon already has those lovely huge golf course homes ringing it for all to see, why not put a few gated luxury home golf communities in the parks and limit public use to one or two. That would fix everything!

cb | 9:04 a.m. April 26, 2008

The entrance fee at parks is a bargain. With the amount of visitors in the parks they need to raise the price of admission and put that money into running the parks.

Dave | 9:07 a.m. April 26, 2008

Since when do more funds make state and national parks more successful? Dinosaur isn't "successful" because it's boring. The drive, city, and monument have always been dull. Even when the facilities were new it was still boring.

My family had more fun at the hotel's swimming pool and the city's visitor center than at the monument.

We went to Arches and Dead Horse Point a couple of weeks ago. We weren't there for the facilities nor were we lured because of extra funding. We were there to enjoy the natural beauty. Duh!

TheMadNuker | 9:49 a.m. April 26, 2008

I could care less about the Parks. As long as the government continues to raise fees,and charge us
just to drive on a road that was paid for by tax funds years ago,so as to look at the lake, as is
done at Lake Powell. Also since all Public Land is
overseen, and managed by "Eco-Fascists", let it rot.
I stopped going to the parks 10 years ago, as well as hunting and fishing. It gives me great pleasure
to know that in the State of Washington, they have
been losing revenue for longer than that. Everything
is over taxed, regulated,with excessive fees, etc.
And as to the comment about the people loving the
parks to death, give me a break. I suppose that the
Elites of society should only be the ones to be allowed, to make their presence know at such sacred
places. The great unwashed are not worthy!

MertricWrench | 9:52 a.m. April 26, 2008

The biggest problem that I see is all the pork that goes into NP administered areas in big states like California. They have alot of areas that suck up tons of NP dollars for areas that are nice but not worthy of federal funding. Places like the national rec area along Mulholland Dr. in the hills above LA. Seriously, if this needs some special funding make all the Hoollywood rich people take care of it with their money.

L | 10:08 a.m. April 26, 2008

I'm sure a little investigation will reveal that other agancies (USFS & BLM) havn't been able to keep up with budget restrictions vs increased use either. In some cases it has been even more pronounced.

Paul B | 12:45 p.m. April 26, 2008

Joseph Buchanan: To answer your question, even though Grand Staircase-Escalante is a National Monument, it is managed by the Bureau of Land Management.

When it was designated years ago, it was decided the BLM should have jurisdiction since they had been managing the area all along, prior to designation.

This is the case with certain national monuments and national recreation areas, where the BLM or Forest Service administrates due to already being in place.

Woodsy Owl | 4:17 p.m. April 26, 2008

Whatever the amount is that spent on Utah's state and national parks, it's the best investment made in the whole state. The number of visitors they bring in from all over the world is huge, and so is the amount of money those visitors spend on food, lodging, transportation, and souvenirs. As some have noted, tough economic times will make visitation by Americans slow - but the falling value of the dollar versus other world currencies is making a US vacation seem like an incredible bargain to the rest of the world. All that money from foreign vacationers is the greatest protection Utah has against current and future economic downturns.

Ponderer | 6:41 p.m. April 26, 2008

It's the economies of state and local government who reap tremendous wealth from national parks and forests. If they want to advertise these places through tourism campaigns, pony up and contribute something back in the way of funds or services. Think creatively.

russ | 8:30 p.m. April 26, 2008

I agree with those who know and state that the NPS needs more funding. These are our national treasurers, the socalled national jewels. If we can't save them, what good is it to be a nation?

More cars? Bigger homes? Or... protecting, conservaing, and looking to the future for our national jewels?

Go NPS!!!

Dave'sBrain | 10:09 p.m. April 26, 2008

Boy, Dave, I don't know if you went to the same Dinosaur National Monument that we visited. Which we found beautiful and thrilling. Are you sure you didn't visit the town of Dinosaur, Colorado, instead?

Sigh | 9:44 a.m. April 28, 2008

It is "lesser" not "fewer" -- funds=uncountable. Let's save the language--what's left of it.

Sigh | 9:45 a.m. April 28, 2008

...or "less," of course

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.