Some progress toward Navajo/Chilean prices for our National Parks

Loyal readers may recall What if our National Parks charged Navajo prices? (2023)

$100 per person per day is the “Navajo rate” for what could reasonably be charged … the Chileans charge foreigners $35 per adult to visit their signature national park for one day. Even at Chilean prices it would seem that the NPS could easily be self-funded.

“Department of the Interior Announces Modernized, More Affordable National Park Access” (yesterday):

Beginning Jan. 1, 2026, the Annual Pass will cost $80 for U.S. residents and $250 for nonresidents, ensuring that American taxpayers who already support the National Park System receive the greatest benefit. Nonresidents without an annual pass will pay a $100 per person fee to enter 11 of the most visited national parks, in addition to the standard entrance fee.

Orwell fans will appreciate the contrast between headline (“more affordable”) and body (“$100 per person extra”). Also, nobody questions that “American taxpayers [SHOULD] already support the National Park System”. Why does a working class American who can’t afford the epic costs of airline tickets, rental car, hotels, etc. have to pay taxes to subsidize rich people from around the world who can afford the $1,200/day cost of a hotel-based family National Parks trip? (I estimated $1,000/day in 2023, but airline ticket, restaurant, and hotel prices have gone up significantly since then.) Separately, if the NPS funds itself via entry fees it won’t have to turn people away during the inevitable government shutdowns.

I can’t understand how the new park entry pricing system will work. Americans aren’t required to carry passports. Tens of millions of residents of the U.S. have no documents at all (22 million as of 2016, according to Yale). How is a gate agent at a National Park supposed to determine if a visitor is a U.S. resident? We’re informed that it is racist to demand ID for voting. Could a National Park demand to see a state-issued driver’s license or other ID before offering the “resident discount” rate? We’re informed by CNN that “Outdoor recreation has historically excluded people of color” and “racist laws and customs kept Black Americans out of these parks”. Surely our government wouldn’t want to intensify the racism inherent in the racist National Parks by demanding ID from visitors of color?

Loosely related, a couple of photos from the Schoodic Peninsula, an often forgotten piece of Acadia National Park. As with the core portion of Acadia, the land was donated to the American People. The Rockefellers donated the island land and Schoodic was donated anonymously in 2015. This reminds me to note the tragedy of Bill Gates giving all of his money to Africa, which doesn’t seem to help average Africans (every year that the Gates Foundation has operated in Africa, the number of needy Africans has increased; maybe some rich people in Africa have gotten richer?). If Gates had to sell the Microsoft stock and pay capital gains before shipping the proceeds to Africa, the tax revenue would easily fund an additional national park. Alternatively, if he spent his money on unspoiled U.S. land he would easily be able to create five new national parks.