Washington's National Park Fund provided $18,300 to help the Park Service repair the Sahale Arm Trail in North Cascades National Park/NPS
Skim down through the list of centennial projects (attached below) that will help paint buildings, repair trails, restore fisheries, help giant sequoias thrive, involve youth in the parks, and you have to give thanks to park friends groups.
Corporate America? Not so much.
Corporations, outside of the Disney Worldwide Conservation Fund, are largely missing from the ranks of organizations stepping up to help the National Park Service maintain "America's best idea."
While the National Park Service is bringing $10 million to the FY2015 Centennial Challenge Project List, groups such as Friends of Acadia, the Blue Ridge Parkway Foundation, the Back Country Horsemen, National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation, Save Historic Antietam Foundation, the Knoxville Arabian Horse Club, Buffalo National River Partners, and Friends of Cape Cod National Seashore combined contributed more than $15 million to the needs in the parks.
Among the projects funded with these grants, Yellowstone National Park and the Yellowstone Park Foundation will improve the connection from Gardiner, Montana, with the park's iconic Roosevelt Arch entry. The $2 million project with $1.5 million from the Foundation and $500,000 of federal funds, will improve the road, parking, walks, signage and pedestrian areas to meet modern road and accessibility standards.
Cuyahoga Valley National Park, with $183,403 of federal funds and $198,687 from the Conservancy for Cuyahoga Valley National Park, will build the park's first off-road single-track bicycle and hike trail. The East Rim Trail, a 21st century recreation opportunity, will become part of a network of major regional long distance bicycle and hiking trails including Summit Metro Park's Bike & Hike Trail, the Towpath Trail, the Buckeye Trail, and the Cleveland Metropark's Emerald Necklace Trail.
The Grand Teton National Park Foundation will provide a $23,000 match with $23,000 of centennial challenge funds to address deferred maintenance on the T.A. Moulton Barn and the Reed Moulton Barn, two iconic barns in the Mormon Row Historic District in Grand Teton National Park.
Projects at a glance:
- Number of projects: 106
- Number of projects with a total cost of $1 million or more: 7
- Largest project: $5.2 million to rehabilitate and restore the Mariposa Grove of giant sequoias at Yosemite National Park (in partnership with the Yosemite Conservancy)
- Smallest project: $6,999 to raise the sunken walks at the Raspberry Island Light Station of Apostle Islands National Seashore (in partnership with the National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation)
Comments
Kudos to these organizations and their help with these projects. A look at the attached list shows that in many cases, the partner groups are covering far more than half the cost of the work.
Kurt, the "not so much" dig at corporations was unnecessary. I am sure that if you looked into the donor base for your Park Partners, you would find ample examples of corporate support and more appropriately, individual donors that gained their wealth through corporate activities. And of course they donate outside these groups as well. For example:
http://www.nationalparks.org/about-us/our-partners
The point about the friends groups is their persistence; they work constantly on behalf of the parks. The Centennial? They know it to be important. But there is no reason for them to wait. If it needs doing, they will try to do it now.
Since the railroad era, corporate philanthropy has turned "sporadic." I really miss the railroads this time around. But perhaps they will step up to the plate, and/or another John D. Rockefeller, Jr. will appear. They had class as well as money. It was a different time, and they also did it "silently." So EC also has a point. Do we know who the "silent" partners are today? Is Bill Gates giving and we don't know about it? Has Warren Buffett been having lunch in Omaha with Jon Jarvis? Is there a "big surprise" in the offing? If not, we owe an even greater debt to the friends groups for keeping the national park idea alive and well.
Alfred - I wasn't trying to denegrate the efforts of the friends groups in any way. They are quite valuable. I was just offended by Kurt's unjustified swipe at corporations who have been equally valuable contributors, directly or indirectly, to the parks.
EC, No, I get your point, nor did I interpret it as "denigration" of the friends groups in any way. I just miss the old days when corporate philanthropy was more "visible," but I am sure that what you say is true. The friends groups themselves receive many contributions from corporations--and their executives and staff as individuals. Which is to remind us to send in our checks, and while we're at it, write a whopping check for Kurt! The parks have never had a better "friend."
...and the folks that are the mostly silent majority that enjoy and benefit from these wild places in more ways than some can imagine. The character strengthening of citizenry is a great benefit for everyone.
Nice comment trailadvocate, I being one of them. Alfred, I agree that friends groups and philanthropic efforts in general have done much for the parks and other human efforts. However, I do not think corporate sponsors, friends groups, etc. should replace the basic responsibility of our elected officials in funding our public lands, our commons. Having been associated with corporate and large donor efforts, there is a downside also, as I know you are aware. As to the railroads, I share your enthusiasm to a point, they certainly helped build the country (with generous subsides in land and construction costs from dear old Uncle Sam), and aided the National Park system in its early years. In many of their other efforts, they were monopolies of the first order whose business practices contributed greatly to the first Republican Party (post President Lincoln) effort to create progressives reforms. I maybe wrong about all this, but our corporate business entities including our financial institutions are a little out of control in my view.
I don't think Kurt is denigrating one group - corporate - when he looks at the records and finds the friends groups with clear tracks and the corporate without. It's as simple as "what do you see?" - "I see X". One can assume that some folks get their income that they donate from corporations, and one can assume that some corporations donate around a corner, but that is just assuming.
One could equally assume that corporations have gotten so good at hiding the convoluted ways that they make political donations and hide profits, and that they therefore follow the same tricks in making more benevolent donations.