• There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.

Pressures on National Parks from record visitation

Six years ago I was on vacation out West. Zion wanted $45 just to drive through the park. Forget it! I went around to the North as I was heading to NV.
I now have a lifetime Access Pass that I can use to travel through or visit any of the National Parks. The Senior Pass was $10 a couple of years ago. They just had a major increase this year on that price!
 
Six years ago I was on vacation out West. Zion wanted $45 just to drive through the park. Forget it! I went around to the North as I was heading to NV.
You probably bypassed Zion using the Arizona Strip road to Kanab, then on to US89 to Page. Though not as spectacular as Zion, that road is also quite scenic. And interesting, as it passes through the adjoining polygamist towns on the state borders.
 
At least you lot get SOME access to your National Parks!! One State here in Aus hiked the entrance fees fairly significantly & then basically closed ALL access to any people not walking in at over 90% of their previously accessible & frequently visited State & National Parks a decade or so back - and now that State Govt is bleating that people no longer visit & their Parks aren't generating any revenue & so are becoming too expensive to maintain?!? And yet other States seem to be following that lead!? :shocked:

But at the same time, the 'desire' for access National Parks by many who cannot walk in with a weeks worth of provisions on their back has grown massively; and privately run 'wilderness', 4WD, camping, &/or adventure activity parks are booming & being inundated by visitors of all shapes, sizes, and accessibility needs..... :sour:

Methinks the 'Shut them up & throw away the key' mentality of many National Parks & Wildlife Services here has resulted in them throwing out the baby with the bath water!! Or should that be 'they've killed the goose that laid the golden eggs'?? :dontknow:
 
Last edited:
A dilemma for sure. I consider myself one of the lucky ones. I bought a senior pass when I passed that age barrier. I have access to all the National Parks now, just by showing the pass.

A success story--I think. Anyone been to Mount Rushmore? I have been going since the 1980's. I was there when it still had the old visitors center. Remember the movie North by Northwest? A few scenes were shot there. With improvements, the place had been completely revamped. New parking areas, an avenue of flags, an outdoor auditorium for nightly shows of the monument, hiking trails that let you get real close to the monument. IMO: a vast improvement in accommodating the public.

My first visit to Rushmore was in 1977 and then two years ago I spent 5 months in the area and went several times, the senior pass really helps the travel budget now days. We really enjoyed Zion 2 years ago when we rode to the Red Rock Rally. I think that limiting the number of visitors would be better than adding bigger and more facilities.
 
More visitors means capacity needs to be increased,

That's pretty hard to do with real estate. You can only pass so many people per hour per acre for a given visit duration regardless of how much money you have. Instead of letting people gaze at a rock formation for 20 minutes you'll have to limit them to 5 minutes. That would create a rebellion if you ask me!
 
That's pretty hard to do with real estate. You can only pass so many people per hour per acre for a given visit duration regardless of how much money you have. Instead of letting people gaze at a rock formation for 20 minutes you'll have to limit them to 5 minutes. That would create a rebellion if you ask me!
Depends on the park. But you're right there is a practical limit to how many people can be accommodated before the experience becomes degraded and loses its value and purpose.
 
National Parks belong to the U.S.A. and its citizens... personally I do not think any AMERICAN citizen should be denied access ... after all its our tax dollars that finance all national parks..

it appears to me... national park employees want to use OUR parks for their own pleasure while deny American citizen access...:mad:

osm
 
National Parks belong to the U.S.A. and its citizens... personally I do not think any AMERICAN citizen should be denied access ... after all its our tax dollars that finance all national parks.. it appears to me... national park employees want to use OUR parks for their own pleasure while deny American citizen access...:mad: osm
You kinda lost me on that last comment nojoke
 
Last time we camped overnight in a Nat'l park we had to walk a while before we could find folks that spoke English. IMHO, just like hunting licenses, residents first and nonresidents second, if there's enough tags left.
 
National Parks belong to the U.S.A. and its citizens... personally I do not think any AMERICAN citizen should be denied access ... after all its our tax dollars that finance all national parks..
Which is why raising the fees to an exorbitant level is unfair to the people. Only those with money can go. But, there has to be some sort of rationing system in place to keep the visitor load at a level that doesn't destroy the park or the experience of visiting.

it appears to me... national park employees want to use OUR parks for their own pleasure while deny American citizen access...:mad:
That is an unjustified cynical view. A huge problem is that Congress does not hold the belief that all Americans are entitled to visit the parks and therefore that entitlement needs to be funded by the American population as a whole, i.e., fully, or near fully, tax supported.
 
Last time we camped overnight in a Nat'l park we had to walk a while before we could find folks that spoke English. IMHO, just like hunting licenses, residents first and nonresidents second, if there's enough tags left.
Foreign visitors, especially Chinese currently, are a significant percentage of park visitors. A couple of years ago I stayed at a hotel in Idaho Falls, ID. The desk clerk said two and three busloads of Chinese tourists stayed there every day during the Yellow Stone Park season. In fact, there were signs in the dining room written in Chinese to accommodate them. But should we, or can we, try to keep them away? That goes right to the heart of the issue of open borders, which is currently a topic hotter than hell. But keep this in mind, those visitors are bringing back to this country loads of cash that we send them to buy their goods. It's either let them come and spend their money in our economy, or they will spend it to buy US Government bonds and US real estate. Do we want foreigners buying up our country, or just spending their money here? Not a pleasant choice to ponder.
 
You have over-demand for a finite resource. One way to do it fairly is via a lottery system, like with elk tags in hunting. You pay your money and takes your chances. Unfair? Can't afford the price increase? Blame Ryan Zinke and the rest of the idiots that were voted in.
 
You have over-demand for a finite resource. One way to do it fairly is via a lottery system, like with elk tags in hunting. You pay your money and takes your chances. Unfair? Can't afford the price increase? Blame Ryan Zinke and the rest of the idiots that were voted in.
That's one of the things that National Monuments can do; take the pressure off the National Parks.
 
Prices for national park passes and senior passes would go unchanged. But I hear what you're saying.


On our yearly drive around your western states we always purchase an annual NP pass. Costs us around $80US but pays for itself in our first week. We have found that probably Zion is the busiest. We used to drive in but have had to use the shuttle for the past few visits.

We loved Pipe Spring on the road that has Colorado City, but saw no one there as we passed though. It was soon after they had the Virgin river flood there.

By far, Utah is our favorite state. Red rocks rule!
 
On our yearly drive around your western states we always purchase an annual NP pass. Costs us around $80US but pays for itself in our first week. We have found that probably Zion is the busiest. We used to drive in but have had to use the shuttle for the past few visits. We loved Pipe Spring on the road that has Colorado City, but saw no one there as we passed though. It was soon after they had the Virgin river flood there. By far, Utah is our favorite state. Red rocks rule!
And we Utahns enjoy all the appreciative visitors from around the world. I'm glad you stopped by Pipe Springs, one of our earliest National Monuments, and one of my favorites.
 
My suggestion is to go to our National Parks, Monuments, etc. now while they are still there. With the political climate in Washington these days, in 10 years you might see nothing but oil and gas rigs or mines.
 
My suggestion is to go to our National Parks, Monuments, etc. now while they are still there. With the political climate in Washington these days, in 10 years you might see nothing but oil and gas rigs or mines.
I think National Parks are safe from exploitation and from politics. But, the National Monuments obviously are not. That's why there's an effort underway now to change the status of what remains of Grand Staircase / Escalante to that of a National Park. A pity, really, since Parks and Monuments have a different focus and purpose. I'd hate to see wilderness developed as a park, but if that's what it takes to protect it, then so be it.
 
I posted here previously about our annual western US adventure. To reiterate, Yellowstone was the low light of our trip. It was so crowded and road work kept us from even getting off the bikes. The usual sights were packed. We just drove through and didn't even see a chipmunk. Jackson Hole was like rush hour in the big city. Too bad. The popularity has overcome the ability to accommodate.
 
I posted here previously about our annual western US adventure. To reiterate, Yellowstone was the low light of our trip. It was so crowded and road work kept us from even getting off the bikes. The usual sights were packed. We just drove through and didn't even see a chipmunk. Jackson Hole was like rush hour in the big city. Too bad. The popularity has overcome the ability to accommodate.

A shame. Both areas were something to behold. :sour:
 
Back
Top