Rep. Bishop touts plan to use energy development to fund park maintenance

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Capsaicin Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2018 10:45 a.m.

    Like most representatives, Bishop and Love ignore the massive national debt. This is called scorned conscience....when one ignores that nagging little voice in the back of your head promoting sustainability. All discretionary spending should be used to pay down the debt, not build out our national parks and make them even busier.

  • UtahTroutStalker Draper, UT
    July 26, 2018 3:50 p.m.

    I like the idea of a sliding fee based on the time of year. For instance if July is the busiest time to see Zion's then triple the entrance fee.

    Either the park service will see an increase in revenue or there will be less traffic and therefore less maintenance needed.

    Either way it is a win.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    July 26, 2018 1:59 p.m.

    Anything that Bishop proposes is not good for our parks, environment or taxpayers. Period.

  • TiCon2 Cedar City, UT
    July 26, 2018 1:48 p.m.

    Hmmm. $12 Billion you say? I think I've heard that number recently....

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    July 26, 2018 12:56 p.m.

    I love our national parks and monuments. We need to fund them as a high priority. They are really for our children and grandchildren.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    July 26, 2018 12:04 p.m.

    A novel idea would simply be to raise the entrance fees to make the national parks self sustaining. It would also relieve congestion and pressure on park resources.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    July 26, 2018 8:44 a.m.

    The NPS needs funding. For the past decade the GOP has strangled the agency by cutting funding and raising user fees. Now, it says it will restore funding by providing more access to private companies to get oil and gas from our public lands. When you step back, you understand what their strategy was all along.

  • quackquack Park City, UT
    July 26, 2018 8:29 a.m.

    Sounds like robbing Peter to pay Paul, Mining/Fracking require toxic chemical pumped into the ground leaving the area inhabitable for any of life or vegetation.

    So on one have you have a nice clean park on the other you have a toxic wasteland

    Basically in order to make profits for Bishop and company there going to destroy the land and as a consolation prize we get a clean park....

    Ill take a dirty park over not having to worry about the tap water becoming flammable as it was in the Midwest. People being able to ignite their tap water ( yes this is a real thing google it )

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    July 26, 2018 7:48 a.m.

    Here's an idea that isn't a gimmick like the one proposed by Bishop. Stop cutting taxes, especially for the rich, and appropriate the necessary funds to maintain the taxpayers property. For crying out loud, these kinds of schemes just make government more complicated, drive up costs, and lead to more regulations. It makes no sense whatsoever. As an example, if I need to pay for something, I don't deliberately cut my income and then come up with a complicated scheme to raise money from other sources. See the madness of Bishop's contrivance? It doesn't have to be that hard.