The National Park Service is soliciting public comments on a proposed fee increase for 17 National Parks. The comment period ends Nov. 23, 2017. The proposal does not affect the America the Beautiful Lifetime passes.

This is likely to be an unpopular opinion but I think I understand the need.  I'd like to see some kind of voucher system where every tax-paying family is given one entry annually but that feels like a lot of overhead and cost.

I was happy to see that they were at least going to apply this evenly and increase the cost for the commercial bus providers.  If you have been to Glacier, Yellowstone, Yosemite in prime season  you know that it is hard to move because of buses continuously unloading 75+ people.  

Considering that many of us have spent $100 per head per day to visit places like Disneyworld, $70 for a carload of people to visit Yellowstone for a few days sounds pretty reasonable.   I know there are those who think we shouldn't have to pay to visit "our" lands, but I understand the need to pay for maintaining our parks for future generations to enjoy.

It would be great if we didn't have to pay but the fact is the government budget is not starting to cover the costs of keeping our NP system up to par. So I see no other remedy but increasing entrance fees. While I love my senior pass I don't think it would be unfair to start asking us to cover more of the entrance fee.

What is a shocker is the $30 Walk in Fee. 

 
Quote

The majority of national parks will remain free to enter; only 118 of 417 park sites charge an entrance fee, and the current proposal only raises fees at 17 fee-charging parks

 

I wonder if they should not expand the number of locations where fees are charged?  

List of the United States National Park System official units

I have always felt that we underpay to visit our parks. I also never understood why the fee paid was for 7 days.

I would like to see the fee go to a per day price. We pay $15 for parking in many places, the Parks are a  bargain, even with a price increase.

I think it is about time.......................

  On 10/27/2017 at 1:15 AM, jpcoll01 said:

 I'd like to see some kind of voucher system where every tax-paying family is given one entry annually but that feels like a lot of overhead and cost.

There's no need for vouchers since the NPS offers free entry days several times a year.  Unless they're going to do away with this as part of the fee increase.

  On 10/27/2017 at 7:59 PM, SWharton said:

I would like to see the fee go to a per day price.

That would *really* keep out many moderate to low income families from visiting!

  On 10/27/2017 at 10:50 PM, LindaH said:

That would *really* keep out many moderate to low income families from visiting!

Not sure I understand your logic. If the fee was based on a day at 1 seventh of the proposed weekly fee, it would save those who can not spend a whole week at the same park some cash.

I don't think many family's on vacation would opt to skip Yellowstone due to a $70 car charge. However, it would be great if the $$ collected stayed in the actual park. We have volunteered at parks where facilities are in need of repair, but the funds collected are sent to HQ and a much reduced amount is sent back as "Budget".

Parks might even get financially creative and sponsor events like "Halloween Walk" if they could keep the collected funds locally, thus eliminate the need to increase entrance fees.

Greg

Edited October 27, 2017 by gjhunter01

  On 10/27/2017 at 11:05 PM, gjhunter01 said:

...However, it would be great if the $$ collected stayed in the actual park...

Since the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act became law in December of 2004, 80% of the fee collected remain in the park where they are collected. 

  On 10/27/2017 at 11:04 PM, TCW said:

Not sure I understand your logic. If the fee was based on a day at 1 seventh of the proposed weekly fee, it would save those who can not spend a whole week at the same park some cash.

If the *daily* fee was $70, yes, it would keep out many people.  Heck, it would keep *us* out if we didn't have our Senior Passes.

Now, if you're talking about, say, $10 per day...which for the week would be the same $70 currently being discussed, that might be something different, especially for those people who don't want to spend 7 days in a park.

I found this Opinion piece from today's Spokesman-Review to be interesting:

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/oct/27/70-park-fee-doesnt-add-up/

  On 10/27/2017 at 11:30 PM, LindaH said:

...Now, if you're talking about, say, $10 per day...which for the week would be the same $70 currently being discussed, that might be something different, especially for those people who don't want to spend 7 days in a park.

I thought that is exactly what I said.

  On 10/27/2017 at 11:04 PM, TCW said:

...If the fee was based on a day at 1 seventh of the proposed weekly fee, it would save those who can not spend a whole week at the same park some cash...

  On 10/27/2017 at 11:24 PM, TCW said:

Since the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act became law in December of 2004, 80% of the fee collected remain in the park where they are collected.

Interesting, but not what I am seeing, Yellowstone must be swimming in cash then base on attendance alone. It is apparent that COE parks seem in better condition. State Parks are usually run down due to state budget constraints and I know that $$ doesn't stay in the parks.

Greg