Zinke Proposes Raising Admission Prices At ‘Highly Visited’ National Parks

FILE - In this July 30, 2017 file photo, U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke speaks during a news conference near Gold Butte National Monument in Bunkerville, Nev. Zinke appears to be carving out an exception for his... FILE - In this July 30, 2017 file photo, U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke speaks during a news conference near Gold Butte National Monument in Bunkerville, Nev. Zinke appears to be carving out an exception for his home state from the Trump administration’s agenda to open more public lands to natural resources development. Zinke wants to curb mining in Montana outside Yellowstone National Park. He’s also recommending Trump create a new national monument on 130,000-acres of forest land in northwest Montana while shrinking monuments in several other states. (Steve Marcus/Las Vegas Sun via AP, File) /Las Vegas Sun via AP) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Interior Department has proposed raising entrance fees at 17 of what it called “highly visited national parks” — including Grand Canyon National Park, Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite National Park and others — only two years after a similar increase in fees at parks across the country.

The proposed increase, for which the department announced a 30-day comment period on Tuesday, was flagged by CNN on Wednesday.

According to a fact sheet published by the department, annual park pass prices would increase to $75 at the 17 parks, up from $35-$60 currently.

The increases would also create so-called “peak season” prices at the 17 parks, a five-month period during which per-person entrance fees would rise to $30, up from $10-$15 currently, and per-vehicle fees would increase to $70, up from $25-$30.

The $80 annual pass that permits entrance into all federal parks would keep the same price tag.

The department said the fee increases would likely raise entrance fee revenue from $199.9 million to $268.5 million annually. “80% of the money will remain in the park where it is collected,” its fact sheet noted. “The other 20% will be spent on projects in other national parks.”

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke told CNN: “The infrastructure of our national parks is aging and in need of renovation and restoration.”

The department did not respond to TPM’s questions.

Interestingly, Zinke supported a White House budget over the summer that would have cut his department’s budget by roughly $1.6 billion, saying “this is what a balanced budget looks like.”

Theresa Pierno, the CEO of advocacy group National Parks Conservation Association, told CNN on Wednesday: “The administration just proposed a major cut to the National Park Service budget even as parks struggle with billions of dollars in needed repairs.”

Admission prices at certain national parks across the country increased in 2015 after a six-year moratorium on fee increases, PBS reported at the time.

On Tuesday, Zinke also bragged in a press release of the “largest oil & gas lease sale in U.S. history”: “76,967,935 acres in federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico, offshore Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida.” A counselor to Zinke, Vincent DeVito, acknowledged in July that the department was “aggressively” cutting regulations on private industry in order to generate revenue. 

Read the Interior Department’s fact sheet on proposed fee increases below, and submit comment on the increases by Nov. 23 here. Mail written comments to: National Park Service, Recreation Fee Program, 1849 C Street, NW, Mail Stop: 2346 Washington, DC 20240. 

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. A small price to pay to be spared the horror of a president who gave speeches to investment bankers for the going rate.

  2. It’ll help keep the riffraff out, you know what I mean?

  3. Avatar for sanni sanni says:

    What will be Zinke’s next announcement? Perhaps - a new arrangement to bring development to these parks - to provide more on-site lodging opportunities - some small ‘start up’ chain… the hotels go by the name of Scion.

  4. Yes, by all means, let’s see if we can drive these visitors away so we can devote these federal lands to better use.

  5. Jack up prices ----> visitation slumps -----> “do we really need all this national park land if nobody’s visiting it?”

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

38 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for marby Avatar for mondfledermaus Avatar for sysprog Avatar for jloomis3 Avatar for asanders91360 Avatar for epicurus Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for wwss Avatar for mickeyg Avatar for sniffit Avatar for tacoma Avatar for johnscotus Avatar for ottnott Avatar for tena Avatar for maricaibo Avatar for georgeh Avatar for tsp Avatar for jordanolsen26 Avatar for jtx Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for 19tibekius6 Avatar for carolson Avatar for zakster17

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: