Future of National Parks

The NPCA is hosting a meeting in Chicago on March 4 about the Future of the National Parks.

Dear Partners and Friends:

March 4th is an important date for our National Parks. It provides the

opportunity for all of us in the Midwest to provide guidance on the

future of the National Park System as it approaches its second century

in 2016.

The National Parks Second Century Commission

http://www.visionfo rtheparks. org/ ,

which was convened by NPCA, plans to host a public input forum in

Chicago on Wednesday, March 4th, from 2:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the Chicago

Cultural Center.

The Commission is charged with compiling a report, which includes public

testimony, that examines the role of the national parks today and

articulates a bold vision for the future. The Commission will recommend

how our National Parks can adapt to serve future visitors, better

protect resources, and be more active “classrooms” for all ages.

Details will follow on how you and your members, friends, and staff can

give your input in person, by proxy, or electronically. Please circulate

this email as widely as you can and “Save the Date!”

Lynn McClure

Midwest Regional Director

National Parks Conservation Association

8 South Michigan Ave.

Suite 2900

Chicago, IL 60603

P: 312-263-0111

F: 312-263-0140

C: 312-343-7216

lmcclure@npca. org


I will post updates as I get them


John, you might cross-post on the
Paddlers Discussion Forum.

i hate most national parks
Not because of anything they do - they’re just too crowded and too restrictive, which they have to be because of the crowds. You won’t catch me dead in most national parks.

There are a few exceptions but clearly I’m not going to name them.

I don’t know what the solution is. Given the crowds, I guess I should favor traffic restrictions and closer supervision, but I hate to see millions of dollars spent for that kind of stuff. The same amount of money spent on land acquisition could add thousands of acres of beautiful wilderness to the public domain every year.

The parks are crowded
because they usually occupy spectatcular, scenic spots that everyone wants to see. That’s why they were chosen as NP’s to begin with. As far as being restrictive, they’re meant to be pristine, untouched areas, to be visited and not “used” per se.

“Useable” land comes in the form of the National Forests, BLM lands (mostly out west), and to some extent, the National Wildlife Refuge system.

I don’t favor the parks, either, mainly because I like to “do” things and not just look at them, but if I do visit them, I go off-season and on weekdays.

I love National Parks
they are the perfect outlet for the futzers.

They attract the wannabe, the slob, the ugly, lazy and stupid like the proverbial flies to sh*t.

What would we do if National Parks would not exist?

Imagine all those crowds going to State Parks, National Forest or even just BLM…

Where would we go then to find a decent place with a bit of pristine and quiet nature without RVs, McDonalds and Imax?

Please don’t rock the boat and leave it as is :slight_smile:

More use of birth control
The problem isn’t lack of space; it’s too many people, no matter where they are. Literally every resource problem would be alleviated if there weren’t so many prolific breeders.

I don’t think it’s as simple as NP’s being only for the lazy people, wannabes, etc. How about the elderly, the handicapped, or people who - for one reason or another - are not “into” being outside the way a lot of the members of this board obviously are? My wife is not into doing things outdoors at all, but that doesn’t put her in one of those categories. NP’s are for everyone, even those who can’t hike into the backcountry to enjoy the same things you or can.

Personally, I’d take someone who might not be the most outdoorsy person in the world over the kind of person I inevitably see every weekend - the “REI snob” who looks down on people who don’t paddle 1,000 miles a year and has a gazillion ‘gear’ stickers all over his/her car.

Good grief

– Last Updated: Feb-05-09 11:27 PM EST –

Parks differ, but I've been to a bunch of them where you most certainly can get away from the crowds AND you can (have to) do it under your own power. While the vast majority of NP visitors are car-bound sightseers, there are opportunities for long, self-supported backcountry exertions also. If you go at other than peak season, it gets even better.

Just because a place has something for the typical lazy American does not mean it has nothing for active doers.

Just don't stay in the car campgrounds in peak season...

Forest Service and BLM areas often have a different type of people problem: drunken partyers who litter, tear around on motorized toys, cut down trees, and cram 12 people in one site. Been there, done that, and THAT kind of neighbor is ten times worse than the usual NPS camper. And if you think that being in Designated Wilderness will save you from these trashie morons, you haven't been in the wild, wild west often enough.