How many amenities should national park campgrounds offer? Fruita Campground, Capitol Reef National Park/Kurt Repanshek file
How do you like your national park campground? Wish there was WiFi so you could stay abreast of news or sports? Want a food truck to show up so you didn't have to cook over a camp stove? Is there a need for hot and cold water showers in each and every campground in the National Park System?
A two-page list (attached below) of recommended improvements to park campgrounds calls for some of those changes, though it remains to be seen how fully Interior Secretary David Bernhardt embraces the suggestions.
Drafted by Interior's Subcommittee on Recreation Enhancement Through Reorganization, the document also suggests that holders of the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Senior Pass, an $80 lifetime pass those 62 and older can buy and which provides a 50 percent discount on campground fees, face some blackout dates during busy seasons that would prevent them from that discount. It also recommends that perhaps national park campgrounds should offer cabins for nightly rental, and maybe a tent rental pool as well.
While many campgrounds suffer from deferred maintenance, the draft suggests that concessionaires be encouraged to tackle some of the needs by ensuring they would be repaid by subsequent concessionaires if they ever lost, or surrendered, the campground management contract.
"We're looking at a couple things," said Derrick Crandall, the former president of the American Recreation Coalition who now holds the same title at Outdoor Solutions USA, when asked about the impetus behind the draft plan. "No. 1, we actually have fewer campsites now than we had 30 years ago. And a lot of the reason for that is not by plan, it's because water treatment plants and other kinds of infrastructure have deteriorated and we've seen (campground) closures.
"It is absolutely true that most Park Service campgrounds are ill-prepared to deal with the larger RVs. I don't think that we should be building all of our campgrounds to accommodate 42-foot diesel pushers that are towing a car," he continued during a phone call Friday. "I'm not an advocate for that. I think we need some capacity. I'm more concerned about the fact that we see demand in many national parks for group camping. Where we have extended families to accommodate people who just camp differently than we camp.
"In some cases I think we can do that, so whether it's for a scout troop or whether it's a family reunion of largely Latino and others who are seeking that, I think we need to figure out a way to be able to understand what the current demand is and to have a system in place that tries to accommodate some of this demand."
The increasing length of RVs, with secondary vehicles in tow, have some calling for larger campsites in national park campgrounds/NPS
There are many campgrounds across the National Park System that already are operated by private companies, as opposed to Park Service staff. And the Trump administration doesn't seem averse to expanding that practice. President Trump's first Interior secretary, Ryan Zinke, told a gathering of the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association back in 2017 that, "As the secretary, I don't want to be in the business of running campgrounds. My folks will never be as good as you are."
Going a step further, Zinke added that, "We'll be looking at where our employees should be spending their time. ... Yes, cleaning the bathrooms. But actually running services, that's something we should be pushing to somebody who's updated and knows the market better."
The subcommittee's recommendations don't call for a wholesale turnover of park campgrounds to private operators. But it does propose a pilot program of five to 10 campgrounds in the system for "modernization, enhancement or even new construction, especially in park units with low levels of visitor services that now limit public use. The incentive would be an allocation of funds equal to current deferred maintenance, but available for discretionary use to improve the campground and associated infrastructure."
The plan was knocked down by Sierra Club officials, who said it would be another step toward pricing some Americans out of the National Park System.
"Turning our national parks into profit centers for a select few vendors would rob our public lands of just what makes them special. Hiking fees and limiting discounts for seniors will shut out working families and elders on fixed incomes," said Joel Pannell, associate director of Sierra Club Outdoors for All. "We will not allow the embattled Trump administration to turn our national parks into playgrounds for the wealthy and privileged, or permit companies that financially support the Trump campaign to profit from privatization of our public lands. Park lovers and outdoor advocates across the nation will rise up in resistance.”
The campground suggestions come at a time when, according to Kampgrounds of America's 2019 North American Camping Report, park visitors younger than Baby Boomers want more amenities with their campfires.
Even though only 5 percent of campers use the presence of on-site recreation as a determinant of campground selection, when asked to rate the importance of on-site recreation and the campground’s proximity to local cultural events and attractions in selecting campgrounds, about 4 in 10 camping households view these as important considerations.
On-site recreation grew in importance across all age groups in 2018. About 40 percent of millennials and Gen Xers listed on-site recreation as an important factor in their camping experience, with 37 percent of Baby Boomers and 34 percent of Mature campers in agreement.
Once they’re at the campground, clean bathrooms has consistently been the most important factor for campers while staying at a campground (averaging nearly 50 percent since 2014). The second tier of factors include allowing pets (up 4 percentage points since 2014 to 23 percent); being kid friendly (21 percent); and offering recreational activities (20 percent). Interestingly, the importance of free WiFi connectivity has dropped 3 percentage points since 2014, with a 2018 rating of 16 percent.
"I do know absolutely that today's campers are more urban in background than they were 20 or 30 years ago, and in many cases are looking for greater support," Crandall said. "They do want WiFi. They do want some food options. What we're saying is we think there is a strategy to deal with providing food in a campground as opposed to telling people that they basically have to go out of a park to a gateway community to find dinner and come back."
Are the days when most campers pitched a tent and cooked their own meals passing national parks by?/Kurt Repanshek file
Crandall said park superintendents have told him that "part of the traffic congestion (in parks) is caused by people who need things, whether it's just a camp store kind of operation, just basic camp supplies that people who are novices in the outdoors don't know about because they're not aware that there's going to be a drop in the temperature down to 25 degrees in August in a campground."
The KOA report also claimed a decline in national park campers.
Campers continue to be reliant on public lands for their camping trips. About six in ten camper nights is spent on public lands or in public campgrounds.
While the proportion of camper nights spent at both state and national parks is near 2017 levels, there has been a proportional drop in camper nights in national parks since 2016, suggesting that as campers spend more time camping, they are devoting those additional camper nights to different locations (e.g. public & private land outside of campgrounds).
The overall proportion of camping in national parks and state parks has declined since 2015.
The subcommittee's report alludes to those trends in calling for greater investment in national park campgrounds, through private businesses.
There is also broad consensus that the current national park campground system, largely operated by federal employees, combines inadequate and outmoded visitor infrastructure and a need for both capital and operating subsidies with appropriated funds. Overall capacity has not kept up with growth and changes in camping demand, and the infrastructure that does exist, with few exceptions, fails to meet expectations of the contemporary camping market. National park campgrounds are also the victims of other park infrastructure problems, including roads and water systems. In addition to adverse impacts on visitor experiences, the challenges facing campgrounds make the system an underperforming asset.
... As a serendipity, private sector operation of the campgrounds would generate a dramatic increase in NPS awareness of visitor characteristics and satisfaction. The lessons learned with near-immediate operational changes in national parks can be then replicated for other Interior bureaus, including the Bureau of Land Management, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation and , cooperatively, on American Indian lands.
The recommendations made by the subcommittee also included a call for a "national charrette" involving experts from the private sector as well as state and national campground operators and relevant federal officials to pull together "a centralized library of information, trends, and best practices" that can be reviewed and used to build an approach to upgrading campgrounds on federal lands.
It also suggests arriving at campground models and the use of "categorial permissions" that would allow construction of utility systems, for example, without the need to go through full-blown NEPA analysis.
Pricing for campsites should be adjusted regularly for inflation and offered options, such as WiFi and RV hookups, the document said, and campground franchise fees -- the percentage of revenues operators agree to return to the Park Service -- should be used for "needed and appropriate NPS services, including education/interpretation, fire, and safety and related."
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
The Parks like everything else are evolving. The Nature in the parks is contrived and phony and goes with a elitist view of the Parks that was sold by racist Madison Grant and his ilk in the early 20th century. The American People should get the type of Nature they want in their Parks. Hordes of foreigners take ove in many of our Parks. Is that just Nature?
So, Primitive Camper, it's hard to be sure what your comments are actually intending to communicate. I "think" we might both in favor of some of the same things; but, help me get a clear understanding of what you're actually trying to say. Before we dig into it, I need to mention that, in your first comment, you said you want to "truly feel free" and I have to set that part aside because I spent forty years in national security, working to protect and preserve American democracy against both internal and external threats. A distant in-law who has pretty much never exerted enough energy to hold down a full-time job said those very same words to me about a month ago; he said "I just want to truly feel free" in justifying his position; but, he's really just a mooching doper, just wanted money to clear his debts and grubstake his next misadventure, and he's not alone. There's plenty of that going around, especially among those who inherit enough to prevent them from actually needing to launch. So, I can't deal with words like "freedom" or "liberty" being casually used in vain.
However, all seriousness aside, you also indicate, in that first comment, that you want "to immerse yourself in nature" and so urge everyone to "keep our parks primitive" and that's what I would love to see as well. To back all of that up, you reach back 150 years to the establishment of Yellowstone and, in your second comment, seem to focus on it as a "pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people" to be retained in its "natural condition" for that purpose.
Are you familiar with today's Yellowstone? Have you "primitive" camped there recently? If so, did you camp in one of the campgrounds? I am extremely familiar with today's Yellowstone, spent more than my share of time there, hiked along miles and miles of streams and across miles and miles of country to get into and back out of those streams. Along the way, I've crossed through a number of park campgrounds, there in pristine Yellowstone where close to five million visitors pass through each year. Let me describe those campgrounds. They are acres and acres of stomped ground, trees clinging to life, no fertile cones, because the soil has been compacted to the point where tree roots are exposed and hardened to the point where moisture cannot penetrate. Rain and runoff just flow away leaving acres and acres of artificial desert at 8,000 feet above sea level and just south of the 45th parallel. There's dust in the air and distemper infected dog feces on the ground, along with the occasional spot of greenish mucus where some diseased camper has spit. Sure, campers say they clean the area before leaving and the campground staff try to police it; but, they only seem to have time to get the "big" stuff. The bottle and can tops, chewing gum, bits of plastic or foil candy wrappers, and the cigarette butts are left behind, not to mention the really gross debris. Vehicles are parked cheek to jowl in every possible helter skelter configuration; unrestrained dogs are barking, fighting, and running up to menace hikers and campers alike; and unsupervised children are yelling and ripping low hanging branches from the trees. There are acres and acres of it, taking up limited park lands and consuming wildlife habitat. I can see that some folks, perhaps you as well, would see it as a "pleasuring-ground" of sorts; but, it's not in any "natural condition" that I can recognize.
Oh, you say you backpack, don't ever bother with campgrounds, and instead stay at the remote campsites in the backcountry? Well, in that case, I have a few questions. First, many of those remote campsites are situated along streams I frequent and I have to pass by them as I hike. They are more widely distributed and the negative impacts less densely concentrated than the campground carnage, with emphasis on the car; but, the soil is no less stomped into a concrete level of compaction in many cases and there is clearly more trash washed into the water downstream of these sites. Does any of that bother you and, if so, has it led you to any specific conclusions? Second, what if more of those close to five million visitors who pass through Yellowstone each year decide to stay at those remote campsites? They will as overcrowding worsens. Should we just build more remote campsites? Would that be a sustainable strategy? Third and, again, I am extremely familiar with Yellowstone, you get to your backpacking trailhead the same way you would get to a park campground, in a vehicle, over the roads. How was that experience? Did you notice the traffic jams, the crowded roads, the road rage, the overflowing parking lots, the amount of precious park land paved over and devoted to servicing vehicles? Do you think things have been retained in their "natural condition" so far? What do you think it will be like in the future, when there will be even more than five million visitors each year? Do you think that, if you just stick to "primitive" camping on your own, it will somehow revert to its "natural condition" without any need for you to bother yourself about it?
People here have commented on the responsibility of the NPS (per the Organic Act) to preserve natural and cultural resources and the fact that national parks cannot be all things to all people and still fulfill that mission. They have lamented the overcrowding and argued about "primitive" as opposed to "developed" camping. But, for the most part, they still want their senior discounts, their cars, and their RVs and they don't want to pay a cent more for any of it. If parks are overcrowded, just tell those other people to go away. We've even been plagued by the usual vultures wanting to "privatize" everything, as if that ship hasn't already sailed. Nobody seems to want to think about what needs to be done to preserve our national parks for the future. The future be damned, full speed ahead.
I have offered, repeatedly, that studies indicate hotels/lodges/dorms of around four stories served by rail or shuttle buses would serve the most visitors/others with the smallest viable footprint being placed on limited park lands. These studies show that every conceivable configuration of campgrounds, "primitive" camping, or RV parking actually has a far greater footprint and associated impacts than these kinds of multi-story hotels/lodges/dorms. I have urged folks to try imagining parking their vehicles in a controlled lot outside the park, taking a direct shuttle to a hotel/lodge/dorm, then taking a smaller local shuttle to trailheads and attractions within the park. The impacts on everything, from land use to overcrowding to ecosystems to wildlife to energy use to air and water quality, would all be much reduced and the things we all love about our national parks could be sustained for the future; but, although many profess their true love of nature, the outdoors, and our national parks, only a few seem ready to consider changing their ways to preserve them.
There are even those who say we have too much public land and too many parks and that we should close some of the parks to free up resources for other places. But, usually the only parks that they want to close are either the ones celebrating American diversity or the urban parks that are too small to have or need high margin concessionaire contracts associated with them. The motivations there seem all to obvious.
So, Primitive Camper, do you have any fleshed out ideas about what to do to preserve our national park heritage for future generations or do you just want to keep doing things the way you like to do them and let others worry about the future?
National Park campgrounds provide a variety of site choices for a variety of family types, which is a current benefit that will be lost with commercialization. RVs, car camping and walk-ins provide choice to families and offer an affordable experience with nature to family members of all ages. The wildlife will be negatively affected by commercialization, therefore the experience for families will be too. Charging what the market will bear doesn't provide the democracy for the parks that the founders intended. Enough facilities are opening for glamping, keep fast food out of the NPs!
Let the rangers focus more on the nature walks, campfires, and the huge stores of knowledge they have that is often underutilized. With the emphasis on stewardship and enjoyment of these last open places, the parks will see more of the people who do not make a mess of the bathrooms and campsites. Let the vacation vomiters and those that need someone else to flush their toilet go to the private resorts.
Maybe perfect. But not enough spots. Updated power and wifi seems reasonable. We don't have a lsrge 5th wheel, but some enlaged spots and more spots total would be welcome. Some spots are so primitive that only tent trailers or tents could use them. I don't expect to see food trucks in there at all.
The an calls for a pilot of 5-10 campgrounds, makes a way forward to adjust to the changing needs of modern campers, would also help with the maintenance backlog, and provide additional enhancements for campers and all the Trump-haters can say is, "no." Seriously? Apart from raising taxes, how do you propose that we improve our parks campgrounds? How many of you camp in the NPS campgrounds? They are already mostly privately run.
You have missed it, When I go to National Park I go in my motorhome.
I dont need any hookups no water no elect no sewer. I go to be out with nature.
I can park on gravel,dirt,grass. I do not stay at any koa.
It would be nice to have one place to drive to to dump water and sewer and to fill up with water.
This year I went to Yellow Stone park, It been 20 years since I had been to Yellow Stone.
I will never go back to Yellow Stone, Yellow Stone is to commercialized for me and other people I have talked too.
Keep the parks PRIMITIVE. AND NO DAM WI-FI
Remember The parks belong to the People.
Why dont you keep 50 % of all outdoors sporting goods tax sales go for the parks and not for some contractor.
State of Texas give 40% for there tax money to state parks from sales of sporting goods.
Why do I use a motorhome staying in a tent is little hard for me at 76 years old
Agree 100 percent!! I love nature. If I wanted to stay at a KOA then that's where I'd go. There are plenty of alternatives for the younger generations just starting out in camping.