The public has spoken. And at Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historical Park, the staff listened and agreed to shelve, at least temporarily, a plan to increase user fees.
Earlier this month several Maryland lawmakers wrote a letter opposing the proposed increases, saying they would lead to reduced tourism dollars and jobs in their state.
The fees, which would have increased the cost of driving into the park from $5 for three days to $15 for seven days and double camping costs from $10 per night to $20, were part of a move by the National Park Service to increase fees across the park system.
Opposition to the C&O Canal proposal also came from Congress, where U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski demanded more information from Superintendent Kevin Brandt into why the higher fees were being sought.
“Many of my constituents are upset and angry about the proposed new park-wide fees," the Democrat wrote. “This park is a part of their everyday lives and community. They have many questions about the proposal, and I request that you address all of them. I also request you extend the comment period for another forty-eight days.”
In response to the opposition, Superintendent Brandt, who earlier had said he considered the proposed increases reasonable and affordable, announced Friday that the proposal was being withdrawn.
"At this point, we’re midway through robust public meetings. Having heard concerns over the proposal for new fees, the park has decided to rescind its proposal to expand fee collection," he said. “We have seen the great passion we all share for this park displayed over the course of three public meetings and have three more scheduled. At this point, we’re modifying our proposal and will continue public dialogue."
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Here's the second example in the past few days of parks either dropping or revising proposed fee increases due to public input.
Lets hope we see more protests about the increase in fees to visit our National Parks. I predict there will be more protests. All parks should be free to visitors.
Should and can are not the same thing. It'd be great for the parks to be free, but based on current budget, it's also not realistic.
The NPS on the national level is the basic equivalent of the schools, libraries, and fire departments on the local level. They are the little guy pawns that the monied powers dangle and tease and threaten in public venues, to keep the public's attention off the big steals. The big steals like the incredible expense of conducting wars globally, and the give-aways to corporate cronies.
One fourteenth of one percent of the budget is miniscule; the Pentagon has rounding errors in their budgets larger. But threatening the Grand Canyon or the Washington Monument is startling in scope.
Such theater -- such criminal and grotesque theater.
Yes, God forbid our government do what it was Constitutionally charged to do. That might interfer with the incredibly expensive programs it has no Constitutional authority to persue.
The NPS needs to adopt a serious protocol for scoping out projects in a manner to contain costs, and justify the project benefits over time. Fee increases at some parks will merely encourage funding projects which are poorly scoped out. For example, at Crater Lake NP, at least one million dollars were "invested" in a new Cleetwood Cove Boat Dock project which is now collapsing under storm wave erosion. Had this project been thoroughly scoped out with qualified civil engineers and lake biologists, it would have structural integrity and a more attractive appearance blending in the inner caldera lake side environment. Those NPS employees who assisted in this embarrassing failure will be rewarded and compensated with increased salaries over time.
Thoroughly scoping out projects with a selected maintenance cadre of specialists will avoid or minimize expensive maintenance costs. Historic structures roofed with wooden shakes/shingles become very expensive when replaced every few years as is the case at CRLA. Developing a plan to adopt roofing resembling weathered wooden shingles which are non-combustible will reduce future maintenance costs and minimize fire losses. Wildland fires burning under critical fire weather can easily ignite wooden shingles via hot embers. Roofing must allow heavy snow/ice accumulations to slide off without removing a portion of the roofing material.
Gateway park community businesses cater to travelers on smaller trip budgets vs the large corporate presence like Xanterra Parks and Resorts focused more on the "high-end" visitor. Increasing Park Entrance Fees will adversely affect future visitation numbers while rewarding failure in construction projects poorly planned and implemented.
Thank you m13cli, excellent points, I have seen it often. It also applies, unfortuately to mega non-profit or corporate donors. A complicated issue, but I agree with you.
Whatever happened to "zero based budgeting" that we had to use back in '70s?