Which National Parks did you think were "overrated"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None. I have loved all I've been to, from Shenandoah to Yosemite to Denali.

I'm even willing to pay $70 if I'm going on a vacation to one, but hate that the fee hike is being imposed to balance out corporate tax cuts.

The fee hike is not being imposed to balance out corporate tax cuts. The fee hike has been in the works a long time -- back into the Obama Administration. The National Parks have over ten billion $$ in deferred maintenance. Meanwhile, the Park Service has done studies that show that visitors to National Parks spend around $18 billion a year in the "Gateway Communities" around National Parks. It only makes sense to try to capture a small part of that money to maintain the Parks themselves (which are the draw, in the first place). Even at $70, the Park entrance fee is a minor portion of the expense of a trip to visit Yellowstone.

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/socialscience/vse.htm

I’m not opposed to fee hikes per se, but $20 to $70 (regardless of whether you’re visiting for a day or a week) is a huge jump. I’d rather see a smaller raise (or introduce a 1-day option for less) and give NPS more funding in the budget.

PP here -- I probably should have also added that the Park Service would not be sad at all if fewer people go to the parks that have had the big fee hikes. Those parks are overcrowded, and they have described those parks as being "loved to death." I do think part of the plan is to try to get those people to go to some of the other parks, instead. One thing most people don't realize about the Park Service is that they see their primary mission as being the "preservation of the resource," not entertaining people.

I'm not sure that's quite accurate. I went to an interesting ranger talk this summer talking about the history of the NPS and conservation, and how it has kind of gone through different periods throughout its 100 year history with a focus on entertaining people (feed the bears!) versus more conservation (stay out!). I think they try to strike a balance now, but of course it's always a push and pull type thing. It was an interesting talk. They used to allow some CRAZY stuff in National Parks.

[Anonymous]

Zion.

[Anonymous]

Shenandoah is not spectacular compared to Yosemite, etc.

But considering how boring the geography of the DMV is, and how much ugly sprawl there is, it is heavenly to arrive there, as long as it's not a very crowded weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None. I have loved all I've been to, from Shenandoah to Yosemite to Denali.

I'm even willing to pay $70 if I'm going on a vacation to one, but hate that the fee hike is being imposed to balance out corporate tax cuts.

The fee hike is not being imposed to balance out corporate tax cuts. The fee hike has been in the works a long time -- back into the Obama Administration. The National Parks have over ten billion $$ in deferred maintenance. Meanwhile, the Park Service has done studies that show that visitors to National Parks spend around $18 billion a year in the "Gateway Communities" around National Parks. It only makes sense to try to capture a small part of that money to maintain the Parks themselves (which are the draw, in the first place). Even at $70, the Park entrance fee is a minor portion of the expense of a trip to visit Yellowstone.

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/socialscience/vse.htm

I’m not opposed to fee hikes per se, but $20 to $70 (regardless of whether you’re visiting for a day or a week) is a huge jump. I’d rather see a smaller raise (or introduce a 1-day option for less) and give NPS more funding in the budget.

PP here -- I probably should have also added that the Park Service would not be sad at all if fewer people go to the parks that have had the big fee hikes. Those parks are overcrowded, and they have described those parks as being "loved to death." I do think part of the plan is to try to get those people to go to some of the other parks, instead. One thing most people don't realize about the Park Service is that they see their primary mission as being the "preservation of the resource," not entertaining people.

This was my assumption as well, and I wasnt opposed to the hike bc the parks really need the funding. But at Yosemite recently, I asked several rangers their opinions on the controversy, and they all thought it was a terrible terrible proposal. It made me reconsider my opinion.