FOR or AGAINST the privatization of national parks?

RipDatLip · 04-14-2002, 03:52 PM

Are you FOR or AGAINST the privatization of national parks? AND why?

Matt

[ 04-14-2002, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: RipDatLip ]

04-14-2002, 04:27 PM

Kick the concessions out of the parks too!

Fish Hunter · 04-14-2002, 07:08 PM

To hell with that trailhead fee too while we're at it.

boater · 04-14-2002, 07:12 PM

anyone know where the "diet pepsi/fort canby state park" is ?

crabbait · 04-14-2002, 08:10 PM

I'm all for user fees as long as the money collected goes for the designated purpose and not to the general fund.

sinker · 04-14-2002, 08:56 PM

The problem is that the entrance fees collected go into a general fund and then get doled out to parks regardless of the amount of visitors they get. Generally speaking the more visitors the higher the maintenance.
This works out good for the small parks that don't get many visitors but sucks for the busier ones such as Yellowstone, Rainier, and Yosemite to name a few.
It wouldn't be so bad if they sent 20-30% to the general fund and kept the rest at the park it was collected at.

Jim · 04-14-2002, 09:05 PM

I am for privatization of most things but must go against on this one...now if you start talking hatcheries......different story!!

Jim

Capin' Dan · 04-15-2002, 01:10 AM

Now that I have voted for I'm second guessing myself. If the money would go back into the park that would be good. If they raise the prices and try to make them a multi million dollar industry then that would be bad. With that said we all know that a private organizations could do things much better than our government I do not know why that is I just know that it is sad.

Dan!

sinker · 04-15-2002, 01:13 AM

Basically what it comes down to is both of them are interested in the almight $$.

Now a private org. is going to cut corners to put more money in their pockets.

The gov't on the other hand isn't gonna pinch pennies when it's your money they're dealing with.

Personally I'd rather have the feds blowing my $$, some things are worth protecting and our national parks are one of them.

bait boy · 04-15-2002, 07:04 AM

well, if I wanted to visit "bobs big mountain park" instead of Rainier national park then that may fly, but I don't think so....

garyk · 04-15-2002, 09:52 AM

"Privatization" means giving away to a private party something that is currently owned by the public - now that's just crazy-stupid.

TheRogue · 04-15-2002, 10:46 AM

Some Pros/Cons of privatization...

Pros: The administration makes the conservatives happy. The dollars to administer the parks more likely to come from them. Those that get the traffic can pay for themselves.

Cons: Significant price hikes. Less accessible to many citizens. Small, less-visited parks will lack in maintenance/upkeep $$, or close. No employee background screening. Most Americans against it.

There are more reasons for each side...I just listed the ones that I think about.

Welcome to the world of the Free Market Economy. Next will be federal highways, federal forests.......all to the lowest (or highest, depending on the scenario) bidder.

RipDatLip · 04-15-2002, 12:48 PM

Hey, some of you people that voted FOR privatization, I'd like to know why. No bashing here, just learning.

Matt

TheRogue · 04-16-2002, 05:13 AM

Bringin' it back up!!