The price of a national park fee hike

The proposed increase in entrance fees reignites old questions about who should fund the West’s open spaces.

 

When Kitty Benzar bought her house in Colorado’s San Juan National Forest 30 years ago, federal law prohibited land-management agencies from charging people to use undeveloped public lands, like those in her backyard. Fees for developed campsites, public cabins, and access to certain national parks and monuments were legal and widely accepted. But if a trailhead or backcountry site offered only a toilet, a picnic table or drinking water, the 1965 Land and Water Conservation Act required that it be free.

That changed with the Recreation Fee Demonstration program in 1996, which allowed agencies to start charging for day use. But the new regulations didn’t directly affect Benzar until five years later, when the U.S. Forest Service began charging $5 to access a trailhead in Yankee Boy Basin, a high-alpine bowl not far from her house. Benzar and about 35 others protested the fee — not because they couldn’t afford it, but because, Benzar says, they felt it was part of a broader effort to “monetize our public land and turn recreation into a product to sell us.”

Today, access to Yankee Boy Basin is free, but Benzar hasn’t stopped fighting. As president of the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition, she battles other fee hikes that she believes are contrary to the spirit of public lands.

Few such proposals have troubled Benzar more than the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Oct. 24 call to dramatically raise entrance fees at 17 popular national parks — in some cases from $25 to $70 per car.

The National Park Service says the hike could raise $70 million a year to chip away at a $12 billion backlog of deferred maintenance on roads and buildings. Proponents claim it’s a necessary step toward ensuring the future of chronically underfunded public lands. But fee watchdogs and many conservation groups see it as simply another example of a dangerous trend: federal lands run less like a public resource and more like a commercial enterprise.

A biker exits Joshua Tree National Park at the west entrance fee station. It currently costs $25 per vehicle and $12 for a bicycle to enter the park.
Brad Sutton/NPS

The debate over how to fund the West’s sprawling public lands dates back to the Park Service’s founding, according to Barry Mackintosh, author of Visitor Fees in the National Park System: A Legislative and Administrative History. Because the nation’s earliest parks received little or no congressional appropriations, outsourcing food and beverage services to private businesses and passing costs on to visitors made sense. In 1915 — the first year Yellowstone allowed cars in and charged an entrance fee — the park’s revenue exceeded its spending. Administrators believed that the burgeoning popularity of automobiles could make all parks self-sustaining.

But as the 20th century progressed, this became increasingly unrealistic. Some popular parks, like Mount Rushmore, were forbidden by Congress to charge for entry. Others, such as Alaska’s Lake Clark, are so rarely visited that relying on entrance fees to maintain trails and infrastructure isn’t practical.

Philosophical hostility to fees also emerged. In the 1930s, Utah Republican Reed Smoot led a growing group of lawmakers in opposition to the idea that Americans should pay anything to access lands that belonged to them. A 1932 Park Service policy barred the agency from seeking “financial gain” and asserted that parks should "be free to the people without vexatious admission charges and other fees.”

Yet entrance and camping fees remained part of public-land management. Although revenue generated by user fees has risen sharply since 1996, it still makes up roughly the same portion of the Park Service’s budget that it did decades ago. In 1947, 11 percent of the agency’s budget was generated by user fees. In 2016, 9 percent was, with the remainder coming from donations and congressional appropriations.

Political opinions, on the other hand, have changed drastically. Today, some conservatives find the very idea of public lands antithetical to their ideology. As Steve Hanke, a Johns Hopkins University economist, wrote in a June Forbes op-ed, public lands “represent a huge socialist anomaly in America’s capitalist system.” Republicans in Congress are increasingly reluctant to dole out money for public-land management, and appropriations in recent years have been far less than agencies need to manage an ever-growing numbers of visitors.

That’s why Shawn Regan, a former backcountry ranger in Olympic National Park and a research fellow with the Montana-based free-market think tank Property and Environment Research Center, thinks that raising user fees is the best way for public lands to maintain a “direct, consistent stream of revenue.”

Many GOP lawmakers agree with Regan, arguing that only Americans who actually use these lands should pay for them, and that public lands would be more efficient if they were managed like private businesses. It’s this perspective that underlies the Interior Department’s proposal to raise entrance fees at 17 national parks during the peak season.

Yet John Garder of the National Parks Conservation Association says the fee increase “couldn’t possibly cover anywhere close to the actual amount of funding needed to address the maintenance backlog.” Eighty percent of the fees collected at any given park remain there, while the rest goes to a general fund split by the hundreds of national parks and monuments that don’t collect entrance fees. Garder says that 80 percent of the revenue from the fee hike would cover only 2 percent of the maintenance backlog at the 17 affected parks.

Plus, he and others worry that a $70 entrance fee will simply drive more people to purchase an $80 annual pass, which covers entrance at any national park. If a vacationing family buys an $80 pass at Grand Canyon National Park and later visits Zion and Arches, for instance, those parks won’t get extra money despite shouldering the cost of the extra visitors. Plus, if a yearlong pass costs just $10 more than visiting a single park, it’s likely that the cost of an all-parks pass will also go up before long.

Kitty Benzar has yet another concern. Under the new pricing structure, national parks will be able to charge higher rates during the summer months, when the most visitors come. If prices go up during peak season, visitors who can’t handle the $70 price tag may be more likely to visit during quieter times of year. And that, says Benzar, is exactly what private hotel and campground operators have wanted for decades: to fill more hotel beds and campsites in May and October, while turning away fewer paying customers in June and July.

In other words, she explains, “Rich people can see wildflowers in Rocky Mountain National Park at the best time of year, and poor people can’t see them at all.”

The question of how user fees impact public access is at the heart of the debate over their role in land management. And there are no easy answers. In one Forest Service study, 49 percent of visitors earning less than $30,000 a year responded to a $5 fee increase by reducing their public-land use or going elsewhere, compared to 33 percent of more well-off users. Another peer-reviewed study from 2017 found that low-income recreationists were willing to travel over three times as far to reach fee-free parks, something that could potentially shift socioeconomic diversity on public lands.

Research by the National Park Service, however, shows that visitor fees make up just 3 percent of the average family’s budget on a visit to Yellowstone; the rest goes to expenses like gas, food and lodging. Shawn Regan of PERC believes it’s possible to maintain socioeconomic diversity while still raising fees — perhaps by lowering prices for local families who just want to visit for a day, or by allowing individual parks to set their own pricing. Although he supports the latest proposal in theory, he considers it an experiment with a number of unanswered questions.

The public review period for the fee increase ends Dec. 22. At this point, no one knows what it will cost to visit certain parks next summer.

Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s push to bring more free-market capitalism to public-land management may be just getting started. Last summer he told an RV industry group that he’d like to outsource more campgrounds to private operators, who almost always charge more than campgrounds run by public agencies. And an Oct. 25 leaked copy of the Interior Department’s five-year strategic plan revealed that Zinke also plans to “review” other fees on public lands, which could include the prices charged for camping, parking and backcountry permits.

As Benzar sees it, raising one fee opens the door for more fee hikes, and ultimately greater commercialization of public lands. With each turn of the screw, she says, “We lose more of our ownership stake and concede it to private companies there to make a profit.”

Correspondent Krista Langlois lives near Durango, Colorado.

High Country News Classifieds
  • PLANNED GIVING OFFICER
    National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), the nation's oldest and largest national parks nonprofit advocacy organization seeks a Planned Giving Officer. Do you find energy in...
  • DEPUTY DIRECTOR
    The Methow Valley Citizens Council has a distinguished history of advocating for progressive land use and environmental values in the Methow Valley and Okanogan County...
  • ACTING INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS DESK EDITOR
    High Country News is seeking an Acting Indigenous Affairs Editor to oversee the work of our award-winning Indigenous Affairs Desk while our editor is on...
  • GRANTS PROGRAM DIRECTOR
    The Cinnabar Foundation seeks an enthusiastic, team-oriented and knowledgeable Grants Program Director to work from their home in Montana. Established in 1983, the Cinnabar Foundation...
  • ARTEMIS PROGRAM MANAGER
    The Artemis Program Manager will work with National Wildlife Federation sporting and public lands staff to change this dynamic, continue to build upon our successful...
  • ALASKA SEA KAYAK BUSINESS FOR SALE
    Well-known and successful sea kayak, raft, hike, camp guiding & water taxi service. Sale includes everything needed to run the business, including office & gear...
  • MEMBERSHIP AND EVENTS PROGRAM COORDINATOR
    Great Old Broads for Wilderness seeks a detail-oriented and enthusiastic Membership and Events Coordinator to join our small, but mighty-fun team to oversee our membership...
  • PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT FACILITATOR
    ABOUT THE HIGH DESERT MUSEUM Since opening in 1982, HIGH DESERT MUSEUM has brought together wildlife, culture, art and natural resources to promote an understanding...
  • LAND STEWARD, ARAVAIPA
    Steward will live on-site in housing provided by TNC and maintains preserve areas frequented by the visiting public and performs land management activities. The Land...
  • DEVELOPMENT WRITER
    Who We Are: The Nature Conservancy's mission is to protect the lands and waters upon which all life depends. As a science-based organization, we create...
  • CONNECTIVITY SCIENCE COORDINATOR
    Position type: Full time, exempt Location: Bozeman preferred; remote negotiable Compensation: $48,000 - $52,000 Benefits: Major medical insurance, up to 5% match on a 401k,...
  • EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
    ArenaLife is looking for an Executive Assistant who wants to work in a fast-paced, exciting, and growing organization. We are looking for someone to support...
  • EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
    The Mountain Lion Foundation is seeking an Executive Director. Please see our website for further information - mountainlion.org/job-openings
  • WASHINGTON DC REPRESENTATIVE
    Position Status: Full-time, exempt Location: Washington, DC Position Reports to: Program Director The Western Organization of Resource Councils (WORC) is seeking a Washington, DC Representative...
  • REGIONAL CAMPAIGN ORGANIZER
    Position Title: Regional Campaign Organizers (2 positions) Position Status: Full-time, exempt Location: Preferred Billings, MT; remote location within WORC's region (in or near Grand Junction...
  • DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
    Driggs, ID based non-profit. Full time. Full job description available at tvtap.org. Submit cover letter and resume to [email protected]
  • ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION GEOPHYSICS
    - We find groundwater, buried debris and assist with new construction projects for a fraction of drilling costs.
  • SPRING MOUNTAINS SOLAR OFF GRID MOUNTAIN HOME
    Located 50 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada in the pine forest of Lee Canyon at 8000 feet elevation. One of a kind property surrounded...
  • MAJOR GIFTS MANAGER - MOUNTAIN WEST, THE CONSERVATION FUND
    Cultivate, solicit and steward a portfolio of 75-125 donors.
  • NATURE'S BEST IN ARAVAIPA CANYON
    10 acre private oasis in one of Arizona's beautiful canyons. Fully furnished, 2123 sq ft architectural custom-built contemporary home with spectacular views and many extras....