Above, the Colorado River makes its way through the Grand Canyon. Photo by Armand Vaquer. |
Projects to upgrade and repair national park facilities have been languishing for decades. A proposal to raise seasonal entrance fees to fund these projects at 17 parks has been met with strong opposition.
An editorial at The Daily Courier is in opposition to this proposal.
They wrote (in part):
The problem with our national parks has been simmering for a long time and isn’t the blame of one political party or the other.
For decades members of Congress have been cutting funding to the national parks. It’s easy to do, you aren’t going to lose any votes over it, and it demonstrates you’re serious about keeping an eye on the deficit.
However, our parks are suffering because of it. Roads have potholes, scenic views aren’t quite as scenic as nature grows wildly out of control, trails are poorly maintained and visitors’ centers are in need of updating and a good cleaning.
The same time that Congress has been cutting funding to the National Park Service, they have also been buying more parks and increasing the size of existing parks. The National Park Service estimates it needs $12 billion to complete its deferred maintenance projects at our nation’s parks.
President Trump proposed in his budget another 11.7 percent reduction to the Interior Department, which includes the Park Service.
To deal with that, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced last week a proposal to raise fees at the most-popular national parks significantly during peak season. Officials estimate this will raise $70 million a year that would primarily be used for maintenance projects.
Much of the outcry over this proposal is that it would put the national parks "out of reach" to low-income people. Yet at the same time, politicians (such as in California) are raising taxes (particularly gasoline taxes), that will also hurt low-income people. These taxes, too, will keep low-income people from being able to afford to drive to the national parks. This will prevent this proposal from reaching revenue targets to meet the needs to fix the parks. It's a loser, no matter how you look at it.
To read more, go here.
No comments:
Post a Comment