Privatize National Parks campgrounds?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Two of our favorite campgrounds are concessionaire operated in National Forests and both are very well run with updated facilities and good maintenance. The Senior Access Pass rates can be a little confusing though, since only the base rate is discounted, not the extra charges for full hookups, etc. That still puts both of them at about $22/night for full hookups though. Not bad for central Florida in the peak winter season and Asheville, NC in the spring.
 
Continuing east, we decided to stop at Mount Washington National Forest in New Hampshire. Upon arrival we are told our US national park pass is no good there, as it is a private venue that runs it.

We found a similar thing at Mt. Rushmore. The parking concession didn't recognize the geezer card, so you have to pay a (then) $10 parking fee. Since the only way to get in there is through the concession folks' gate...
 
Larry N. said:
We found a similar thing at Mt. Rushmore. The parking concession didn't recognize the geezer card, so you have to pay a (then) $10 parking fee. Since the only way to get in there is through the concession folks' gate...
Cost us $11 at Mt Rushmore. They didn't recognize the Senior Pass at Prince William National Forest Park in Triangle, VA.

If you look at who is on the committee you will find people with an interest in privatizing the National Parks (like a past executive of KOA). I don't think they should be on that committee.
 
We found a similar thing at Mt. Rushmore. The parking concession didn't recognize the geezer card, so you have to pay a (then) $10 parking fee. Since the only way to get in there is through the concession folks' gate...
I was appalled by that when we visited, but subsequent research made me realize I was wrong to be angry.  There is no other place to park the humongous crowds that show up at Rushmore most every day.  That's why you cannot get in without paying the parking garage fee - there aren't other places where you could avoid using the garage and people were jamming the roads with parked cars.    Might be different if you could fold up your F350 and put in your pocket, but until that day... 

A parking garage was the only practical solution to the need for parking but the NPS didn't have the funds to build one, so they contracted it out as a concession. The concessionaire built the garage and got an exclusive contract to operate it at the NPS-approved fee scale until they recovered costs and made some profit.  Now the garage operation contract is bid out like any other federal service and Xanterra holds the contract.  BTW, seniors now get a 50% discount at the Rushmore garage.

The real issue here is lack of funding for all the federal recreation lands.  People quickly get up in arms at the mere mention of losing their senior discount, but where are they when it comes to appropriations for park improvements and operation?
https://www.mtrushmorenationalmemorial.com/parking
 
Let's lay the body in the place it belongs, Washington. Someone is cutting NP funding by 14% in 2020. But the wall will be built. So do you want immigrants or senior discounts?
 
Build the wall.

When talking privatizing in this article, it is really just the campgrounds.  I lived in YNP for 10 years, campgrounds need updating. Privatizing can fix that.  The concessions are under requirements to update, look at what Xanterra agreed to in getting the Yellowstone contract for hotels.  Lots of upgrades, look at Fishing Bridge CG and a 2 year closure to rebuild it.  That would not have happened if it were under NPS.  The NPS funds go for roads and other infrastructure. 

 
I can see some privatization working if it is done right. I believe that it should be localized - meaning each park is individually negotiated, giving preference to local Vendor/operators, with some fairly strict rules, and supervised by the NPS. No nationwide contracts to big vendors/operators.

I'd like to see the idea simmer for a while, and maybe wait for an administration change before taking the idea too far. 
 
A mere 12 billion needed? Maybe give Bill Gates and his buddies a call. A drop in the bucket for them. Its a great way for some mega billionaire to become a national hero.
 
muskoka guy said:
A mere 12 billion needed? Maybe give Bill Gates and his buddies a call. A drop in the bucket for them. Its a great way for some mega billionaire to become a national hero.

Agreed!

Some of these mega billionaires do give lots of money to charities and other welfare, child education, fights against life threatening diseases, etc., which is great and nice of them.

Why not some to our National Parks?  I do not want to start listing the reasons, there are too many!

Thanks all for your thoughts, comments....all the best to all of you...
 
...the U.S. park service faces a $12 billion maintenance backlog.
How many Million has they handed, tax free. to Billionaire industrialists to encourage them to "invest in America" only to have 'em fly off to Panama or the Islands or some other tax shelter and we never get a dime back?

On the other hand if they increased the Food Stamp budget by oh say 20 billion. they would get the 20  billion back and 16 more on top of it so they could fund the park service and have 4 billion left.

But Food Stamps are a waste of taxpayer money.
 
John From Detroit said:
How many Million has they handed, tax free. to Billionaire industrialists to encourage them to "invest in America" only to have 'em fly off to Panama or the Islands or some other tax shelter and we never get a dime back?

A partial list with their effective tax rate:

Amazon -1%, Delta Airlines -4%, Chevron -4%, General Motors -2%, Occidental Petroleum -1%, Honeywell -1%, FirstEnergy -1%, Prudential Finance -24%, Xcel Energy -2%, Devon Energy -1%, DTW Energy -1%, Halliburton -2%, Netflix -3%, Whirlpool -10%, Eli Lilly -9%, Goodyear -3%, Penske Automotive -3%, Aramark -15%, etc etc

These companies, plus a couple others, blew a $20B hole in the budget last year, enough to pay the entire U.S. Park Service maintenance backlog with $8B leftover.

This isn't about raising user fees or reducing the senior discount.
 
Of the 12 billion dollars that the park service needs only a few billion are for the campgrounds. The lions share is for improving roads, visitors centers, trails, and signs. And right now the parks are highly dependent on volunteer labor. They should be paid.
 
SeilerBird said:
Of the 12 billion dollars that the park service needs only a few billion are for the campgrounds. The lions share is for improving roads, visitors centers, trails, and signs. And right now the parks are highly dependent on volunteer labor. They should be paid.

Totally agree (I'm sure others as well) '...parks are highly dependent on volunteer labor.  They should be paid.'  Couple of times we camped this year - tent (before we bought our pop up) and after, I have really good experience and help from the camp hosts/camp folks.  One time, we arrived late at Shenandoah NP and the camp store was closed and we did not have any firewood on us.  We thought the store would be open, but unfortunately it closed just before we arrived.  The host told us we could pick up what we can find on the ground and burn them, but it had been raining and everything was wet.  She realized it and then brought us some firewood from her stock!  Very recently, at Brown County state park (Nashville, IN), our power source was mistakenly taken by another camper.  Ater calling the camp folks, one guy came and helped us sort it out.  He was very courteous and did the talking with the neighbor camper that they should be using another power source.  I am sure many of you had similar experience!
 
Interpretation Rangers will still be there, the privatization would only affect the campgrounds which Rangers don't work in anyway.  Hopefully, the bidding for this would include requirements to update the areas.  Some are fine, some are not.  Look what Xanterra is doing at Fishing Bridge CG in Yellowstone, it was built in the 50's with 50's camp trailers in mind, over the years camp trailers and motorhomes got bigger.  Ideas on CG's have changed.  It was so outmoded, they had to close the CG for 2 years, demolish the entire CG and start from scratch with infrastructure.  I look forward to their new opening, I am sure the price will be higher, but even that part is regulated, and the price was already high for what you got.  Now there will be better sites for a better value. 

As to the programs, these are run from interpretation, based out of visitor centers.  This portion would remain the same.

I worked for 10 years in the visitor center at Old Faithful along side the Interp folks.
 
My Golden Age Passport cost $50.00.  That was the annual cost of a pass at the time, about 15 years ago.  So if I purchased one every year since, at $50.00, I'd have paid $750.  But the current cost is $80.00.  So maybe my actual costs for the past 15 years would have been closer to $1,000.  Sounds to me like one hell of a bargain.  In fact, I've thought many times as I've pulled my card from my wallet that this can't last forever.  We prefer public parks to private parks and resorts and probably stay at public parks when not boon docking 90% of the time.  So in addition to the $750+ I've saved on park admissions, I've saved a fair amount on camping fees.  On average we're probably on the road 3 months a year.  For 15 years, that's maybe 1,350 days.  If we camped half the time at national parks, Corp parks, Forest Service Campgrounds, etc., we'd have saved conservatively maybe $8-9,000.  That's 50% off, an average campground fee of $25.00 a night for 675 nights.  So I don't have any issues with paying more.  I don't like to pay more than I have to for anything.  But let's be honest.  There's no better deal anywhere.  In fact, if the average under age 62 camper had any idea of how much we save, I think they'd be less than sympathetic to our concern.  So maybe it's time to bite the bullet and not push back when the guys who do the budget try to keep things going with a business model that would have bankrupt ANY other enterprise many years ago. 

 
Part of the problem I see is the push back against any form of update and modernization one sees at any national Park.  You have groups that actively want to discourage people from visiting national parks, groups that are against enlarging parking lots, having cell phone coverage, widening roads, etc. as that might encourage more people to visit.

In the last couple of weeks I have visited multiple national parks, and stayed in concessionaire operated campgrounds in two locations.  Wahweap campground on Lake Powell (Glen Canyon National Recreation area), and Mather Campground at Grand Canyon, I also visited Petrified Forest National Park, which has no campgrounds.

Both these campgrounds are managed by 3rd party companies, and each has a very different feel.  Mather Campground you would never guess a 3rd party company was involved, though with Wahweap, things felt much more commercial, check in was by a store clerk wearing a logo sports shirt at a desk inside the camp store, which was filled with trinkets, t-shirts, etc. though also well stocked with food items.  By comparison Mather, had the more traditional walk up window check in, with either a ranger or someone dressed similar to a ranger doing the check in.

This is just to say that there is a range of styles out there, and which one works best, may depend on the setting.
 
My Golden Age Passport cost $50.00. That was the annual cost of a pass at the time, about 15 years ago.
I paid $20 for my Senior Pass about ten years ago. When they announced they were raising the cost to $80, we bought one for $20 for my wife in case I lost mine.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
131,928
Posts
1,387,649
Members
137,676
Latest member
traxster
Back
Top Bottom