Big fee increases may be in the future...

A place to talk about Glacier in general, if you have something that is political, please post it in the "Politics" section of the chat system.

Moderators: Kathy, Tara

Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby daveparker » Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:07 pm

Sounds like it is going to get a lot more expensive to visit a lot of parks in the future..

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/local_new ... e_increase
User avatar
daveparker
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:00 pm
Location: Kalispell, Montana

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby joybird » Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:52 pm

Quite a jump.

I hope that the parks in question will at least get to keep the additional revenue.

That said, I think it is a crying shame that our National Parks cannot count on adequate government funding to preserve these irreplaceable, natural places and to maintain the infrastructure necessary to ensure appropriate public access.

Sounds like the NPS-wide "America the Beautiful Pass" is still gonna be the bargain buy...$80 covers admission for you plus a whole carload of your friends to ALL the parks for a whole year!ll :arrow:

(Try comparing THAT to the cost to take your family to Busch Gardens or Disney World or any number of other "attractions" for just a day...) :roll:
joybird
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:03 pm
Location: Afton, Virginia

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby griffin » Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:59 am

joybird wrote:
(Try comparing THAT to the cost to take your family to Busch Gardens or Disney World or any number of other "attractions" for just a day...) :roll:


Or heck, parking at some of the beaches here in Mass. for a single DAY. The fees don't seem that unreasonable despite this being a steep jump. I'm more concerned that they're offsetting the potential for increased revenue by slashing the Park Service's budget. It's hard to justify this increase by touting how important it is to "protect and preserve" the parks and "shore up infrastructure" but then gut the agencies' budgets for doing just that.
User avatar
griffin
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 8:50 am

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby mattB » Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:27 pm

griffin wrote:
joybird wrote:
(Try comparing THAT to the cost to take your family to Busch Gardens or Disney World or any number of other "attractions" for just a day...) :roll:


Or heck, parking at some of the beaches here in Mass. for a single DAY. The fees don't seem that unreasonable despite this being a steep jump. I'm more concerned that they're offsetting the potential for increased revenue by slashing the Park Service's budget. It's hard to justify this increase by touting how important it is to "protect and preserve" the parks and "shore up infrastructure" but then gut the agencies' budgets for doing just that.


Exactly!! These are our National Parks, part of our nations history and heritage, and should be one of our top priorities especially consideringn how small the NPS budget really is! Why is it that giving billions in tax breaks to the wealthy and giant corporations is so important but adequately funding the repair and maintenance of our National Parks,(which would require a tiny fraction of the amount given as tax breaks) is not a priority of our government? Is it really going to come down to the point where are National Parks are supported by volunteer staff clearing trails and painting buildings, and relying bake-sales to get funding?
User avatar
mattB
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:03 pm
Location: Seattle/(Eureka MT)

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby Jay w » Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:05 pm

griffin wrote:The fees don't seem that unreasonable despite this being a steep jump. I'm more concerned that they're offsetting the potential for increased revenue by slashing the Park Service's budget. It's hard to justify this increase by touting how important it is to "protect and preserve" the parks and "shore up infrastructure" but then gut the agencies' budgets for doing just that.


+1
The NSA...the only people in the government who listen.
User avatar
Jay w
 
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:17 am
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby daveparker » Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:09 pm

Please don't make this political, I simply posted it for informational purposes, if you want to discuss the politics of National Park Funding, please start a topic in the Political section.

Thank you.
User avatar
daveparker
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:00 pm
Location: Kalispell, Montana

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby IndianaTom » Fri Oct 27, 2017 7:43 am

I welcome the increase, but I think they should also look at fees in other parks. I was shocked when after I spent a week in Great Smokey National Park this fall, I realized "oh there are no entrance fees". 10 Million people a year enter that park with no fees. It's a heck of a deal, but this is a simple supply and demand situation. Hopefully this will keep us from going to a permit system to visit the park. The parks system has to hire more rangers to manage the crowds. I'd rather seem them increase the price, than cut how many people are allowed to visit.
IndianaTom
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:00 pm

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby tibber » Fri Oct 27, 2017 10:12 am

I thot you might enjoy this post from the HAZ forum where we are discussing the same issue:

In 1916, Yellowstone charged a $10 vehicle fee. (There was no entrance fee, just a fee if you were to drive on the roads). That equates to $226 in 2017. The fee was valid for an entire season.

Glacier, Olympic, Yosemite, Mesa Verde, and others also charged a vehicle fee.

This fee was primarily paid by the wealthy who could afford a car at that time.

By 1926 as more and more people visited parks by vehicle there was pressure to reduce the vehicle fees.
Yellowstone dropped to $7.50. Yosemite was $5. Glacier was $2.
Adjusted for inflation, that would equate to $105, $70, and $28 in 2017 dollars.
User avatar
tibber
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:50 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby mattB » Fri Oct 27, 2017 9:13 pm

tibber wrote:I thot you might enjoy this post from the HAZ forum where we are discussing the same issue:

In 1916, Yellowstone charged a $10 vehicle fee. (There was no entrance fee, just a fee if you were to drive on the roads). That equates to $226 in 2017. The fee was valid for an entire season.

Glacier, Olympic, Yosemite, Mesa Verde, and others also charged a vehicle fee.

This fee was primarily paid by the wealthy who could afford a car at that time.

By 1926 as more and more people visited parks by vehicle there was pressure to reduce the vehicle fees.
Yellowstone dropped to $7.50. Yosemite was $5. Glacier was $2.
Adjusted for inflation, that would equate to $105, $70, and $28 in 2017 dollars.


are you saying that all the parks should be charging $80-100 per vehicle, or more? Adjusted for inflation that might be reasonable... But that still means our National Parks become a playground for the rich, is that what we want?

Maybe we could start having bake-sales or charity auctions to help create a fund to help poor people get admission to our National Parks, or to pay for trail maintenance....
User avatar
mattB
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:03 pm
Location: Seattle/(Eureka MT)

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby tibber » Sat Oct 28, 2017 9:41 am

I have no comment one way or the other. This was just some Rx one of the HAZ members had done. He had no comment one way or the other either :P.
I was just sharing what he found.
User avatar
tibber
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:50 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby mattB » Sun Oct 29, 2017 1:16 pm

IndianaTom wrote:I welcome the increase, but I think they should also look at fees in other parks. I was shocked when after I spent a week in Great Smokey National Park this fall, I realized "oh there are no entrance fees". 10 Million people a year enter that park with no fees. It's a heck of a deal, but this is a simple supply and demand situation. Hopefully this will keep us from going to a permit system to visit the park. The parks system has to hire more rangers to manage the crowds. I'd rather seem them increase the price, than cut how many people are allowed to visit.

Some good ideas, but won't increasing the price also cut how many people can visit the parks?

I didn't realize that some parks have no entrance fees.. Seems like it would be better to make a smaller fee increase that applied to all parks, but I guess what they're trying to do is discourage people from going to the most popular parks and instead go to the lesser known parks...
It would just be nice if more or our tax dollars went to supporting our parks, instead of the ridiculous stuff its spent on now. How many tax breaks to coal, oil, and pharmacuetical companies really need, or how many tanks, bombers, nuclear submarines or nuclear aircraft carriers do we really need?
User avatar
mattB
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:03 pm
Location: Seattle/(Eureka MT)

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby cdsmith379 » Sun Oct 29, 2017 5:19 pm

The population of the USA is over 323 million currently. It was 226 million in 1980. Larger numbers of visitors are going to have to be dealt with one way or the other.
cdsmith379
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:44 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby dpratt » Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:28 am

$70 for a pass that is good for one week is only $10 per day. That is pretty reasonable. It costs more to go to a movie. That is half what it costs to camp in the larger car campgrounds.

The majority of visitors are not local, and they arguably spend a lot more money just to get to the park. If an additional $40 breaks the budget, they probably wouldn't be making the trip anyway.

Locals will be hit the hardest because travel costs are minimal, but many have season passes (at least those that I know that visit the park).

I just hope the additional funds stay in Glacier.
User avatar
dpratt
Site Admin & Donator
Site Admin & Donator
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Whitefish, MT

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby mattB » Mon Oct 30, 2017 3:03 pm

I know a lot of locals don't visit the park more than one or two days a year, but still really enjoy the park, kind of a once or twice a year family special occasion, but they also couldn't afford to shell out $70....

Its true that out-of-town tourists can absorb the fee increase, or will already have annual or senior passes. But the fee income is going to make it more difficult for middle or lower income locals to visit the park.
User avatar
mattB
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:03 pm
Location: Seattle/(Eureka MT)

Re: Big fee increases may be in the future...

Postby mattB » Mon Oct 30, 2017 3:11 pm

cdsmith379 wrote:The population of the USA is over 323 million currently. It was 226 million in 1980. Larger numbers of visitors are going to have to be dealt with one way or the other.


Very true!! The population and the number of visitors is not going to be shrinking anytime soon, and will more likely just keep increasing.
What we need to be doing is spending some tax dollars to invest in infrastructure updates to handle the crowds and improve the visitors experience, and I don't mean like a giant ugly parking garage operated by a private contractor like at Mt Rushmore.

We have the technology to do some innovative things that could address the crowds and traffic issues, and still provide good experiences for the visitors and be capable of expanding to handle growing crowds, but not if we try to privatize the parks to make a profit.

We should have NASA or Elon Musk and Tesla, or other innovative thinkers take a shot at the problem, and see what kind of solutions they can come up with.
User avatar
mattB
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:03 pm
Location: Seattle/(Eureka MT)

Next

Return to General Glacier Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests