To the President: Set the Parks on the Correct Path

With the completion of the major political parties presidential campaigns, the country now heads to the homestretch in its election of commander-in-chief. As such, its never to early to get National Parks on the incoming president's agenda. Below is an open letter to the next President of the United States.

To the President:

Congratulations on your recent victory and becoming America's 45th chief executive.  The next four or possibly eight years will likely be quite challenging.  Managing the economy, foreign and domestic affairs, energy matters, and many more matters will place great demands upon your time. However, I write today to make sure that National Parks stay on the radar during your administration.

To some, National Parks aren't on the same level of importance as other issues like the economy or energy production.  However, I believe National Parks are equally important as these is
sues. National Parks are more than pretty places or dusty old buildings, rather they are the physical manifestation of all American's value and hold sacred. 

Americans today inherited the National Parks from our ancestors who set aside their short-term desires and wants so that we could enjoy parks like Yellowstone and Yosemite.  We can never repay our ancestors for this gift, however we can pay it forward to the next generation. In other words, we can leave the National Parks and the National Park System in better shape than what we were given.

To do this, I recommend the following things:

1. Fund the Parks
The National Parks are an incredible bargain. Congress allocates a little more than $3 billion to run the park system. For that amount, which is about half of what the United States spends on a single nuclear aircraft carrier, the American public gets more than 400 sites that preserve and protect some of America's most sacred ideas, hopes and places. It's an incredible bargain.

What's more, research shows that every dollar the country spends on national parks, it returns $4 to the national economy.  That's a great return on investment. 

The past several administrations have rightly recognized the value and importance of national parks and reflected this in a growing national park allocation. I encourage you to continue this trend.

2. Establish New Parks
Over the past several years, the Obama Administration has used the Antiquities Act to create 10 new National Park System monuments including Castle Mountains, Waco Mammoth, and Fort Monroe.  I encourage you to continue this trend as well.  However, the trend the past several years has been to add historical monuments to the park system, while adding monuments dedicated to protecting the environment to other agencies such as the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. The Park Service has a stronger conservation mandate than these other agencies and placing them in under other agencies reduces natural resources protection. I'd encourage you to reverse this trend.

3. Define and Enforce Appropriate Recreation
The National Park Service often argues that it has a duel mission that it must balance recreation with preservation. Yet, this is incorrect. The Organic Act of 1916 establishes for the  National Park Service a single mission which is to provide enjoyment of the national parks in such a way that will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. The law does preclude what we understand as modern recreation, nor does it mandate it however. Rather, the law clearly states the Park Service is only to allow those form of enjoyment that leave the resources unimpaired. Surprisingly, the Park Service has yet to complete neither a system wide recreation review nor even a single park review. There is no way for the NPS to know if its recreation is impairing the resources without this review. As President, I encourage you to conduct these reviews.

4. Get control of Visitation
National Parks are quite popular. In fact, 2015 set an all time visitation record at more than 305 million visitors. This smashed last year's record by more than 15 million! These incredible visitation numbers clearly show that the national parks are well loved, however the parks may soon become loved to death. Some are even calling upon the National Park Service to establish park carrying capacities.  In fact, Congress ordered the Park Service more than 40 years ago to come up with these capacities, yet the NPS has failed to do so.

Rather than recognize visitation limits, the Park Service has over the past several years actively promoted the national parks with programs like Find your Park. These programs have been so successful, pushing visitation to all time records.

It's time to recognize that national parks have limits on their ability to absorb visitors.

5. Recommit the Service to its Mission
Twenty Sixteen marks the 100th birthday of the national park system. It is a time to celebrate and look back upon the Park System's achievements the last century. However, it also provides an opportunity to look forward to set the tone for the Park System's next century. I'd encourage you to set the tone for the next 100 years by achieving the following before the end of your first term: fully fund the parks, establish new parks, define and enforce appropriate recreation, and establish need visitation controls. 

Doing these simple tasks will set the parks on a trajectory which will best insure they reach their bicentennial.


Sean Smith is a former Yellowstone Ranger, and an award winning conservationist, TEDx speaker, and author. He writes national park thrillers from his home in the shadow of Mount Rainier National Park. To learn more about his thrillers click here or follow him on twitter: @parkthrillers

Dual Mandate? Time for some balance

"Sentinel Bridge & Half Dome" by Jim Getchell 

In August the National Park Service (NPS) will celebrate its 99^th birthday, and begin what’s expected to be a yearlong celebration leading to its centennial in 2016. Americans can expect 365 days of events, speeches, and celebrations. But many are wondering if the centennial will cause the NPS to take a serious look at its management.

The history of the National Park Service’s (NPS) recreation management is a mixed bag at best. Yellowstone, the world's first national park, was set aside in 1872 as "pleasuring-ground" to protect from injury or spoilation, of all timber, mineral deposits, natural curiosities, or wonders within.” Later in 1916, Congress established the National NPS with its primary mission being"....to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

From nearly day one, many have maintained that congress gave the NPS a dual mandate, one that requires the NPS to "balance" preservation with recreation. Yet despite the fact that neither the Organic nor Yellowstone Acts mention recreation specifically, this perceived need to balance conservation with recreation doesn't comply with federal law, court cases or even NPS policy.

Congress recognizing the confusion some had over its original intent in the 1916 Organic Act passed additional legislation that America's National Parks are to be managed as a single system and that no activity is to be authorized "in derogation of the values and purposes for which [the parks] have been established.” In other words, recreation or use can only be authorized if it doesn’t degrade the parks.

The NPS knows they only have one mandate. In its 2006 management policies the agency states "when there is a conflict between conserving resources and values and providing for enjoyment of them, conservation is to be predominant. This is how courts have consistently interpreted the Organic Act." As such, the NPS understands that it can only authorize those activities that are "appropriate" for the national parks.

This language plainly implies that not all activities are appropriate for the park system, or put another way some are inappropriate. Moreover, the guidance implies that the potential list of appropriate activities should be extremely small.

It couldn't be more clear that conservation of park resources is the NPS' primary mission. Yet, despite Congress' intent, the NPS' belief in its dual mandate still persists. Why? 

Sadly, it's because the agency's actual approach to recreation management is far more lax than the law requires and some believe is an abuse of their discretionary authority.

A recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request revealed the NPS has not completed even one system wide recreation review. Just as troubling the agency doesn't know of a single park that has ever conducted a comprehensive recreation review either. So, despite Congress' clear intent, it appears the NPS lacks even a basic understanding of recreation impacts.

Yet, this failure to fully investigate likely led to far more liberal recreation management than Congress intended. Sadly, with no information the NPS seems to conclude there is no problem, a kind of see no evil, there is no evil self-perpetuating management cycle.

Without a comprehensive recreation review it’s impossible for the NPS to say it’s complying with its legal mandates to leave park resources unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.

However, despite this lack of information the NPS nearly every year considers and accommodates new and arguably questionable recreation. In the meantime, the agency has no way of knowing the impact upon the system’s natural wonders and wildlife. Many ask where is the balance?

In 2016, the NPS will celebrate its 100 anniversary. The federal government is already making preparations to rightly celebrate what some have called "America's greatest gift to world culture." Early plans include public events across the country, with an emphasis being placed on reconnecting the people to their parks. Many argue this re-connection is necessary because the parks are losing relevance.

Hogwash! 

Last year the National Park System saw record visitation. Many individual parks like Montana's Glacier broke visitation numbers as well. Americans and the world love the national parks. Why? A case could be made it’s because national parks provide some of the last truly authentic experiences. They are places where one can escape the stress and hassle of everyday life and connect with something bigger.

Sadly, it appears the NPS has forgotten this simple fact, as it moves forward with plans to authorize an ever expanding list of questionable activities, partnerships, and events. Yet we shouldn’t forget the only reason we are able to debate the park system's relevance today, is because our ancestors put aside their short-term wants and desires and set it aside. 

The NPS’ upcoming 100^th anniversary celebration is sure to include many parties, special events, and speeches in honor of its mission. Perhaps to truly honor its mission the NPS should bring actual balance to its management and conduct its first comprehensive recreation review. If it does, future generations are certain to thank us for our foresight. 

Sean Smith is a former Yellowstone Ranger, and an award winning conservationist, TEDx speaker, and author. He writes national park thrillers from his home in the shadow of Mount Rainier National Park. To learn more about his thrillers click here or follow him on twitter: @parkthrillers

National Parks or Amusement Parks?

Navy Pier Amusement Park

Back in 2001, I was the lead author on a piece for the George Wright Society's Biennial Conference on the Park Service's struggle to get control of recreation, especially motorized thrillcraft.  Over the next several years, the agency created rules banning jetski from nearly every national park, Yellowstone specific winter regulations and ORV rules for parks like Big Cypress.

The Park Service created many of these headaches through a misinterpretation of the Organic Act.  The Park Service believes the law requires the agency to balance recreation and conservation. It doesn't. But even if it did, the Park Service's management of the "recreation vs. conservation" balance currently favors an ever expanding number of recreational pursuits.  Many of which do not need a park setting to enjoy.

In the George Wright piece, my co-authors and I note the battle to determine the appropriateness of jet skis, snowmobiles, and off-road vehicles in the National Park System is part of a much larger struggle over what type of vision will guide future of national parks like Yellowstone, Glacier, and the Everglades. Will our national parks remain those sites where America protects some of its most sacred ideas, hopes, and places, or will they be allowed to degrade into nothing more than amusement parks?  Sadly, even after 15 years the jury is still out on this question.