Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EDITORIAL: Downsize National Park Service, dumping costly, unpopular sites
Washington Times ^ | April 22, 2014

Posted on 04/25/2014 8:06:19 PM PDT by george76

When too much of a good thing can be too much.

...

the swollen agency spends $2.6 billion a year.

President Obama wants to spend still more money on parks, asking Congress to approve a scheme to spend an additional $1.2 billion over the next three years. The cash would be earmarked to celebrate the National Park Service’s centennial anniversary in 2016. It would fund, among other projects, an expensive youth work program and provide more muscle for the federales to wrestle land from individual property owners.

...

Few national parks are financially self-sufficient. The rest are on the dole, requiring taxpayers to subsidize a failure to attract visitors, revenue and interest. Fees paid by park visitors fund only a nickel of every dollar devoured by the Park Service. Taxpayers fund the rest.

Playwright Eugene O’Neill’s hillside home in the San Francisco Bay is now a National Historic Site. It costs federal taxpayers $687,000 per year to keep open, though visitors trickle through at an average of just seven a day. That’s $270 for each and every visitor. In contrast, the Columbus, Miss., home of O’Neill’s contemporary, Tennessee Williams, was restored by private donors and is open to visitors at no cost to taxpayers.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California; US: District of Columbia; US: Idaho; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: agenda21; greenagenda; nps; parkservice; privateproperty; propertyrights; ruralcleansing; taxpayers

1 posted on 04/25/2014 8:06:20 PM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76

But they’ve got all that ammo... and obviously would like to use it.


2 posted on 04/25/2014 8:07:14 PM PDT by ponygirl (Be Breitbart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Here in Michigan the state parks and forests have nicer facilities than the national parks.


3 posted on 04/25/2014 8:08:52 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

How better to keep LAND out of the HANDS of the Proletariat?

How I HATE the Nation we’re currently forced to live in!

ALL of these b@stards need to go!


4 posted on 04/25/2014 8:15:26 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (I don't have 'Hobbies.' I'm developing a robust Post-Apocalyptic skill set...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
The cash would be earmarked to celebrate the National Park Service’s

There it is AGAIN --celebrate. Such a seemingly innocent word, yet do you realize HOW often this word is being abused..? It's like no one really knows what it means.

CELEBRATE diversity --see? How does one do that, really..?

Another slippery one is "ACCESS", as in "access to educational opportunities" or "access to grocery stores" "access to transportation".

The Maoists in this country are learning to hijack A LOT of words.

Sorry, but NO ONE needs a billion bucks to "celebrate" anything --let them buy their own Silly String and streamers.

And let's fire 60% of them, for starters.

5 posted on 04/25/2014 8:22:24 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

the Poe house here in philly is essentially closed. I bet it cost millions a year to maintain.


6 posted on 04/25/2014 8:22:24 PM PDT by kvanbrunt2 (civil law: commanding what is right and prohibiting what is wrong Blackstone Commentaries I p44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

I like this better:

“Celebrate BUDGET REDUCTION”

Or how about:

“Celebrate SMALL GOVERNMENT”

Why not turn their verbal guns around on them and give a few blasts....?


7 posted on 04/25/2014 8:24:49 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: george76

In before some bureaucrat suggests transferring the surplus national park land to the Chinese.


8 posted on 04/25/2014 8:28:28 PM PDT by Fast Moving Angel (It is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

We have a state run battlefield from the French and Indian War in our county which was slated to close due to budget cuts. Local volunteers stepped in, took it over and are running it better than the state ever did. The admission charge remains the same, but the huge drop in personnel expenses has changed the site from marginal to viable.


9 posted on 04/25/2014 8:33:45 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

to starve the Beast,,,
64000 dollar Question.


10 posted on 04/25/2014 8:34:37 PM PDT by Big Red Badger ( - William Diamonds Drum - can You Hear it G man?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I spent many summers roaming the state forests In Michigan fifty plus years ago and that was the case back then!


11 posted on 04/25/2014 8:36:34 PM PDT by MeshugeMikey ( "Never, never, never give up". Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

Short answer - turn these “non-viable” National Park lands over to the BLM, who may then operate the land for the benefit of the Chinese government.

Just another income stream for Sen. Harry Reid (D-Beijing).


12 posted on 04/25/2014 8:40:55 PM PDT by alloysteel (Selective and willful ignorance spells doom, to both victim and perpetrator - mostly the perp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
Having visited and hiked in maybe a dozen of the great parks of the West, and having lived ten years in the Sonoran desert, which was not park land, I can only say that the National Park System is a godsend and a miracle.

I realize many here have never been to a real National Park. These birthplaces and such are hardly the gems of the system. And there is nothing east of the Mississippi, except marginally the Great Smokies, that compares to the vast canyon country of the Upper Colorado Plateau or the wonderlands of the high north or the spectacles of Yosemite.

I have seen, in contrast, what the private sector has done to otherwise unspoiled lands which, once compromised, are gone forever. Thank God we have had the wisdom to keep irreplaceable beauty from the grubby, mindless, destructive hands of the proletariat.

13 posted on 04/25/2014 8:54:21 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Thanks george76.
Playwright Eugene O’Neill’s hillside home in the San Francisco Bay is now a National Historic Site. It costs federal taxpayers $687,000 per year to keep open, though visitors trickle through at an average of just seven a day. That’s $270 for each and every visitor. In contrast, the Columbus, Miss., home of O’Neill’s contemporary, Tennessee Williams, was restored by private donors and is open to visitors at no cost to taxpayers.

14 posted on 04/25/2014 9:03:50 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

Certainly, that is the other side of this...OTOH, the system has mutated into a jobs program.


15 posted on 04/25/2014 9:13:07 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

Democrats: Let’s Celebrate our brain damage


16 posted on 04/25/2014 9:17:09 PM PDT by Professional Engineer (No $#@t there I was...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: george76

Turn small and obscure parks over to the states, or privatize them (with conditions).


17 posted on 04/25/2014 9:24:07 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Economy wouldn’t hurt but I can think of a whole lot of things a lot more worthless to spend money on.


18 posted on 04/25/2014 10:39:31 PM PDT by Sequoyah101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ponygirl
Does the Eugene ONeil historic home have its own SWAT team? ( Just wondering.)
19 posted on 04/25/2014 10:51:05 PM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76
Downsize National Park Service, dumping costly, unpopular sites AND GIVE THE LAND BACK TO THE STATES!
20 posted on 04/25/2014 10:54:29 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

21 posted on 04/25/2014 11:51:02 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala

Similar to our entire country, it isn’t the Park System that needs revising, it’s the “Management” there of.


22 posted on 04/26/2014 3:18:38 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Progov

“Similar to our entire country, it isn’t the Park System that needs revising, it’s the “Management” there of.”

Since retirement my wife and I have traveled extensively with our travel trailer. We have found state parks to be better maintained, and have better campgrounds and other facilities, than the national parks. National park campgrounds tend to be poorly maintained, have small sites, and lack the water and electric hookups of state and private campgrounds. Plus the government has been rapidly raising fees so these substandard facilities often cost as much or more as private or state alternatives outside the park. We’ve also found many visitor centers at national parks to be dirty, run down, and obsolete.

The reality is parks are attractive to visitors when they have well maintained, up-to-date facilities. When facilities are obsolete and deteriorating, they are not attractive to visitors and the neglect will negatively impact attendance.

To some degree I have the perception the management of the National Park Service would prefer people not visit the larger scenic parks. The environmentalist element in the NPS seems to be determined to make the parks pristine shrines to nature instead of places of natural beautiful citizens can enjoy. Certainly there is more emphasis on “primitive” camping than campgrounds for modern recreational vehicles. While I certainly appreciate that primitive camping affords one the opportunity to explore the remote areas of the parks, many retired and elderly visitors are not physically able to journey into the wilderness for days. Young families, traveling by RV, have limited vacation time and can’t spend days on the trail. RV’s allow millions of Americans of all ages an affordable way to experience the national parks. Parks should have modern facilities to accommodate overnight RV stays.

Many of the state parks were developed by the CCC during the Great Depression and have been maintained and modernized under the stewardship of the states. Today our national parks need infrastructure upgrading and could benefit from a CCC type program. We have a high young adult unemployment rate and we are spending billions on government programs that pay people to sit at home watching television. Why can’t some of these funds be redirected to creating real “shovel ready” jobs for 18-30 year olds in a new CCC in the national and state parks? Upgrade roads, modernize or build new facilities, clear new trails, etc. The young people might actually benefit from being out in nature learning something about hard physical work and seeing something other than a computer or smartphone screen.

With respect to the proliferation of parks my personal preference would be to focus the NPS on managing large properties with national beauty such as the Great Smokies, Yellowstone, and the Grand Canyon. With respect to the birthplaces of “famous” people, let states or private organizations manage those properties or allow them to be reused for other purposes. Private foundations do a good job owning and operating Mount Vernon and Monticello, the homes of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and those are national treasures. Quite frankly the homes of Carl Sandburg and Eugene O’Neill are not national treasures worthy of taxing the entire population to preserve. Privatize them and redirect the resources to improving the visitor experience at other locations.


23 posted on 04/26/2014 4:31:20 AM PDT by Soul of the South (Yesterday is gone. Today will be what we make of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
Humm, your post pretty much sums up the article...

Dump the monuments (birthplace homes) to leftist dead people and keep the incredible parks better maintained...

In business parlance: cut out the dead wood...

24 posted on 04/26/2014 4:53:15 AM PDT by Popman ("Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God" - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Popman

I think one reason the state parks and forests here in Michigan are better maintained is the fact that we do allow limited economic activity like logging, mining, drilling etc.
Its strictly controlled to avoid spoiling the natural beauty and it produces revenue which supports the system.

Pictured Rocks national lakeshore has plenty of natural beauty but the facilities are substandard in Comparison to places like Tahquamenon falls state park.


25 posted on 04/26/2014 6:41:21 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

Any time Government is involved, you have problems.

I have been to nearly all of our National Parks and know my Wisconsin state parks like the back of my hand.

That said, you can’t deny government land grabs through the years HAVE been an issue.


26 posted on 04/26/2014 6:41:25 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (I don't have 'Hobbies.' I'm developing a robust Post-Apocalyptic skill set...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: george76; Lil Flower; Din Maker; Malichi; WXRGina; duffee; onyx; DrewsMum; Tupelo; mstar; jdirt; ...

Mississippi ping


27 posted on 04/26/2014 8:49:43 AM PDT by WKB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South; Popman
To understand this, the scope and scale, you have to look at the money streams. There are several.

Sources of money: 1. OCS royalties. 2. Excise Taxes 3. DOT money. 4. Special appropriations.

OCS royalties.- In the 50's, to get the Submerged Lands Act passed, Eisenhower proposed and congress OKed a group of funding acts that would get money from the royalties that would be split between the feds and the states. The first(1960s) was the Land and Water Conservation Fund. In the 70s the park money fund and the historical/cultural site money fund were passed. Originally they were all based on matching state money, but now, park money and historical money require state, local, and private money.

Excise Tax money. The first was Pittman Robertson in the 30s aka Federal Aid to Wildlife an excise tax on hunting equip and supplies. Next was Dingall-Johnson in the 50s aka federal aid to fish. A tax on fishing equip and money. Then on outboard motor fuel. Then on large watercraft fuel. Treasury collects these taxes, turns it over to FWS, who grants it back to the states.

DOT money. Usually projects require an improved road or new road, parking lots, bike paths.

Special Appropriations. Sometimes a special project comes along after all the regular money has been spent and Congress has to appropriate it for the project. When the BACA #1 Ranch came up for sell, Congress didn't want the developers to get it so they came up with a million to buy it and turn it into Valles Caldera(Forest Service). When the Rio Grand Ranch came up for sell, Texas didn't want the Park Service(Big Bend Natl Park) to get it so Texas bought it.

So all this money is accumulating, how is it split up. In congress the appropriation committees and chairmen(Congressional Cardinals) have a lot of influence. The Regular committee and chairmen. Earmarks. What Congress people doesn't get their hands on, the Prez does. Recall the two senator gals from CA were constantly complaining that Bush was stealing their money and sending it to Texas. Illinois is in high cotton with Obama.

And once the states get their cuts of the money, its just as bad. There it is all fungible.

Its not uncommon to is a single project or an area like the Chesapeake Bay receiving funneled money from all these different sources.

We call this systemic corruption or institutional corruption.

So just remember, if North Dakota gets the historical site money to build the Lawrence Welk museum, then Texas is gonna get some for the Fort Worth stockyards

28 posted on 04/26/2014 9:19:23 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Progov

Wrong. It’s in dire need of abolition, both NPS and about 90% of the rest of fedgov. But then, your name gives away your game. Why, in the name of all that is righteous and good, are you on THIS site???


29 posted on 04/26/2014 8:06:41 PM PDT by dcwusmc (A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South
We have a high young adult unemployment rate and we are spending billions on government programs that pay people to sit at home watching television. Why can’t some of these funds be redirected to creating real “shovel ready” jobs for 18-30 year olds in a new CCC in the national and state parks? Upgrade roads, modernize or build new facilities, clear new trails, etc. The young people might actually benefit from being out in nature learning something about hard physical work and seeing something other than a computer or smartphone screen.

While I agree, you came very close to the line of fire with that one. Good thing you only mentioned an age demographic or the knicker twisters around here would be having a contest.

30 posted on 04/26/2014 8:52:58 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: george76

31 posted on 04/26/2014 9:28:56 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
Good thing you only mentioned an age demographic or the knicker twisters around here would be having a contest.

Only those wearing all COTTON knickers.

32 posted on 04/27/2014 12:17:53 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: george76
Playwright Eugene O’Neill’s hillside home in the San Francisco Bay is now a National Historic Site. It costs federal taxpayers $687,000 per year to keep open, though visitors trickle through at an average of just seven a day.

Lame.

33 posted on 04/27/2014 6:06:33 PM PDT by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson