Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Monday October 30 2017, @10:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the color-me-green-as-a-bill dept.

Cost to Enter National Parks Will More Than Double, As Land Around Them Gets Leased for Oil and Gas

The current Republican president and his Secretary of the Interior have a different view of things. They are cutting the budget of the National Park Service and significantly increasing the fees to get in.

"The infrastructure of our national parks is aging and in need of renovation and restoration," said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. "Targeted fee increases at some of our most-visited parks will help ensure that they are protected and preserved in perpetuity and that visitors enjoy a world-class experience that mirrors the amazing destinations they are visiting."

But then according to AP,
"While the national parks counted 292 million visitors in 2014, those visitors tend to be older and whiter than the U.S. population overall." Sounds like people who voted for the president, and if you are over 62 it's free (albeit with a lifetime pass that just increased in price) so the boomer base is protected.

But wait, there's more; in accordance with the President's executive order "promoting energy independence and economic growth, "they have started leasing land around National Parks (they are not allowed to in the parks) to today's Robber Barons for oil and gas development.

Oh well. National Monuments are better anyway.

U.S. National Park Service Seeks Comments on Proposed Fee Increases

The National Park Service issued a press release about its proposal to raise fees at its most popular parks:

News Release Date: October 24, 2017

Contact:NPS Office of Communications, 202-208-6843

Public invited to provide comments on proposed peak season fee increases at 17 highly visited parks

[...] The proposed new fee structure would be implemented at Arches, Bryce Canyon, Canyonlands, Denali, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, Olympic, Sequoia & Kings Canyon, Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Zion National Parks with peak season starting on May 1, 2018; in Acadia, Mount Rainier, Rocky Mountain, and Shenandoah National Parks with peak season starting on June 1, 2018; and in Joshua Tree National Park as soon as practicable in 2018.

A public comment period on the peak-season entrance fee proposal will be open from October 24, 2017 to November 23, 2017, on the NPS Planning, Environment and Public Comment (PEPC) website https://parkplanning.nps.gov/proposedpeakseasonfeerates. Written comments can be sent to 1849 C Street, NW, Mail Stop: 2346 Washington, DC 20240.

If implemented, estimates suggest that the peak-season price structure could increase national park revenue by $70 million per year. That is a 34 percent increase over the $200 million collected in Fiscal Year 2016. Under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, 80% of an entrance fee remains in the park where it is collected. The other 20% is spent on projects in other national parks.

During the peak season at each park, the entrance fee would be $70 per private, non-commercial vehicle, $50 per motorcycle, and $30 per person on bike or foot. A park-specific annual pass for any of the 17 parks would be available for $75.

The New York Post called some of the proposed increases "steep":

The National Park Service is considering a steep increase in entrance fees at 17 of its most popular parks, mostly in the West, to address a backlog of maintenance and infrastructure projects.

Visitors to the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, Yellowstone, Zion and other national parks would be charged $70 per vehicle, up from the fee of $30 for a weekly pass. At others, the hike is nearly triple, from $25 to $70.


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday October 30 2017, @04:23PM (3 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Monday October 30 2017, @04:23PM (#589503) Journal

    In general I presume his supporters are okay with this kind of thing because it puts the burden of upkeep on those who use the service rather than by taxing those who may use the service. From what the summary said it isn't like they are using the revenue to give tax breaks to the oil companies that surround the parks.

    Really enjoy that when Trump does something that should actually help liberals (keep the parks they tend to enjoy more in good repair) they bitch and moan that he is only doing it because literally Hitler. Trump's base will continue to support him because the media pushes shitty narratives where Trump is literally the devil so they just assume the media is lying. Hell, if even 20% of what the media reported on Trump was unbiased in either direction the right would probably like Trump less, but the media just can't do that because they hate him so much.

    So list of accomplishments.
    TTP = Dead
    Support for Syrian Rebels = Gone
    Isis in Iraq = 50% contained from the time he took office
    North Korea = Still not at war
    Iran = Still not at war
    Kurdistan = Revolted but civil war avoided and Kurd participation in Iraqi parliament possible
    Growth = Greater than 2% (media and experts said this was impossible and not to trust liar Trump, but don't worry because he is still a liar because he said he could probably get 4)

    He has done some bad as well, but so far doing better than Clinton. Better than second term Bush, although I suspect he would have failed worse than anyone else at 9/11.

    --
    Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday October 30 2017, @04:43PM (2 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday October 30 2017, @04:43PM (#589516)

    Really enjoy that when Trump does something that should actually help liberals (keep the parks they tend to enjoy more in good repair) they bitch and moan that he is only doing it because literally Hitler.

    No one sane is saying Trump is "literally Hitler" because of raising the National Park fees. Perhaps for other reasons, but not that one; that's just dumb. This is just a typical Republican move of reducing/removing government benefits for the public, it's nothing unique to Trump.

    It's not going to keep the parks in good repair. You're assuming that the visitor-ship will remain the same, which is obviously wrong. The higher fees will cause many people to avoid going, so the actual amount of revenue they get may even be lower (it's impossible to predict at this time).

    As for me "bitching and moaning", $70 isn't that big a deal for me. I make plenty of money, unlike most Trump voters. The upper-middle-class liberals aren't being hurt much by Trump's policies (mainly the environmental ones, which hurt us all), it's the working-class Trump voters who are getting hurt, but they voted for it, so we're not particularly sympathetic. We tried to warn you, but you wouldn't listen.

    He has done some bad as well, but so far doing better than Clinton.

    Where did you get that crazy idea? For one thing, it's pretty hard to compare the performance of a President who's been in office for less than a year, in the year 2017, to a President who was in office for 8 years way back in the 1990s. But secondly, the Clinton years were probably the very peak for American society in most ways, and certainly economically. It's been downhill ever since. Of course, you can't give Bill all the credit for that, just like you can't give any President all the credit or blame for the economy during their watch (much of it is out of their control, and much is under the control of Congress, not the pres, and also much of the time the effects of the previous Pres's actions aren't fully realized until the next Pres's term), but I think it's pretty undeniable that overall, the American economy was better in the late 1990s than today. (And again, I don't believe this is Clinton's fault, he was just at the right place at the right time and didn't screw it up too badly. The credit goes not to the politicians, but to the people who created the Internet and then commercialized it. I guess you could give Al Gore a little credit for his work in the 70s in funding it, but the lion's share goes to those who actually built it, and created the services which made it irresistable to the general public.)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @07:55PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @07:55PM (#589620)

      I believe you're thinking of the wrong Clinton...

      • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday October 30 2017, @08:37PM

        by MostCynical (2589) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:37PM (#589659) Journal

        So Trump, the elected President, is a better President than someone who isn't President?

        Or, your crystal ball shows how bad a President a person *would have been*? Does your cruystal ball also gove out lottery numbers, or just back up your prejudices?

        --
        "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex