Although National Park visits increased by over 11 million in 2009, the budget proposed for operating and maintaining our parks next year is $22 million less than this year.
During this period of economic downturn the visitation to many National Park Areas is on the increase. Our parks not only provide a place for an inexpensive family outing or vacation; they provide a source of escape from the burdens and stresses of everyday life. Many parks located near centers of population are seeing the most significant increases in visitation.
To some the specific cuts to parks may seem insignificant, but most parks are already running on or below necessary operational levels on skeleton crews and with deteriorating facilities. At present funding levels the Blue Ridge Parkway in North Carolina and Virginia is already leaving 58 full time positions vacant. There is no money to pay for these employees. Even the slightest decreases to funding in parks results in positions being left vacant, services being cut, the continued degradation of resources, and ultimate visitor dissatisfaction with their expected experiences.
You can read more at this link:
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/21251
Here is a report on how the proposed budget would affect National Parks in Minnesota:
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=877279&catid=396
For a detailed report with specific impacts on individual parks, you can read this document put together by Environment America:
http://www.environmentamerica.org/uploads/11/13/111318ff9bd65f9963e2f9f23a6d9c29/Environment-Missouri-National-Parks-Report.pdf
I get letters from different groups asking for money to support our National parks. Do you know if any one is better than the others?
ReplyDeleteIs it sometimes better to give money to groups that support specific parks?
Thanks,
Ken