Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Nikhil Nayyar
Dr. Lyn Freymiller
CAS 138T
6 April 2016
Americas Greatest Idea:
How National Parks Benefit the US and Why They Should Be Funded
American novelist Wallace Stegner once remarked, National parks are the best idea we
ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they reflect us at our best rather than our
worst (Americas Best Idea). In the midst of the political maneuvering inherent in any
democracy, the notion of these parks represents something larger than just the individual. These
parks represent the very ideals sought for in any democracy. They prove Americans share a
common sense of purposea purpose manifested from the values of culture, conservation, and
economics.
Yet, today, the notion of National Parks and their importance is fading at an ever-
increasing rate. The most recently proposed budget would strip the National Park Service (NPS)
of $120 million in funding (America First 28). Already, this comes after the proposal of
Congressional bills to ease the selling off of all federal land, including land in National Parks.
(Nijuis). In defunding these parks, America is losing sight of the values which have aided the US
in the past century of the NPSs existence. Because of the benefits provided to the United States
by National Parks, the Federal Government should seek to maintain and develop the NPS by
increasing its funding and further supporting its activity. The arguments are centered around
three main categories of benefits provided: cultural benefits, ecological benefits, and economic
benefits.
Nayyar 2
The National Park Service should be funded because they preserve American cultural artifacts, in
the form of the National Parks themselves, and because they contribute to American culture daily
by providing for the leisure and recreation of millions of citizens. Before one can see the impact
of these parks on American culture today, one must first understand the parks from a historical
context and their importance as the product of some notion of an American culture.
The National Parks were the earliest manifestations of something uniquely American.
Guided by a sense of patriotism, the individuals who pushed for these parks in the late 19 th
century sought to develop these parks as natural monuments, distinct from the traditions
brought from the Old World (Jones 34). The choice to reevaluate nature as the source for the
new tradition takes on a special significance from this cultural perspective. This duality and clash
between human and nature was viewed as a quintessential characteristic of the American way of
life (Jones 33). It makes sense then that nature was used as the basis for creating this unique
cultural identity, given its role in the history of the country and its distinct association with
frontier life in the America. Europe had ancient tradition and a sense of cultural identity
grounded in man- made artifacts such as castles and in a centuries old historical text. America,
meanwhile, had no such basis for its sense of identity. As a result, the National Parks were
founded in the belief that they were independent of European thought, and thus, were the one of
the first steps in creating an American sense of identity correspondingly independent from
What this historical evidence indicates is a need to view these parks not just as designated
tracts of land but as the earliest product of Americas solely independent culture. In funding the
National Park Service, the Federal Government is taking on the role of preserving an integral
Nayyar 3
aspect of American culture. These parks are truly something that are uniquely American in
scope.
Now, turn to modern impact of these parks on the American culture. For the day to day
lives of many Americans, this takes the form of recreation. In 2015, the number of National Park
visits reached a record high at 75.3 million visits (Flowers). Meanwhile, the number of total
visits to all lands operated by the National Park Service has been increasing steadily since 1996,
with a reported 307.2 million visits in 2015 alone (2015 National Park Visitor Spending). The
figures denote that about 21 visits were made per 100 people in the US. Thus, a significant
proportion of the US citizenry take advantage of these parks, making them a large aspect of the
These parks also provide numerous health and well-being benefits to individuals, who in
turn benefit the larger cultural setting in which they inhabit. For a more quantitative analysis of
the effects of parks, look to the Benefits Approach to Leisure (BAL). This system identifies a
steady list of benefits endowed upon the individual and said society. A small sampling of
examples of these benefits include increased mental and physical health for the individual and
greater cohesion among members of the larger community (Shultis 62-63). Though harder to
fully enumerate, there do exist recorded and measurable beneficial effects from the Parks
themselves.
In this case, the National Parks are not just preserving a fundamental aspect of American
culture, they are also molding and contributing to it daily. The National Parks accrue these
societal impacts to those who visit, thereby affecting that larger American culture in which the
individuals inhabit. Thus, by further funding the NPS, the government is fulfilling its duty by
The National Park Service should also be funded because they provide many ecological benefits
to the United States. Primarily, the Parks serve to conserve natural resources. Now, contrary to
popular belief, there is little association between total conservation, or protection of natural
resources from any human modification, and the early National Park movement (Runte 12). But,
as the parks system became more established in the early 1900s, a newfound understanding was
landscapes. This emphasis took the form of utilitarian conservancy, a key distinction from the
modern notion of total conservancy (Runte 68) where nature is primarily protected for its
aesthetic value. An example of this utilitarian conservancy would be in lumber. At the turn of the
century, forests and trees were being cut down at a rapid rate to fuel the push into mechanization.
Utilitarian conservationists argued for a more pragmatic approach, emphasizing the need for
planting and protecting trees to ensure survival of the species should the rate of consumption
exceed the rate of tree growth. (Runte 69). New efforts where then enacted to protect natural
resources in the National Parks. In having designated land for the protection of the natural
resources, the National Parks ensure the availability the resource in the future. They serve a
pragmatic role in preserving resources used in everyday life from total eradication.
In addition, the parks serve as ecological benchmarks to study the interactions of nature
and then to identify any human impacts on these environments. Following the wave of utilitarian
conservancy, there was a marked return to the notion of preserving the parks as a wilderness, as
communities of the mid-20th century began to recognize a large difference in the wildness of
Nayyar 5
Park lands and the urban, developed land in the rest of the country. (Davis, Graber, and Acker
132).
This difference proved extremely beneficial to preserving the ecological health of the
country as scientists can identify changes in environment as the result of natural processes or as
the result of human interference. For example, during the early 80s the reproductivity of
pelicans on Anacapa Island off the southern coast of California dropped drastically. Due to the
monitoring effort of the Parks, DDT, a pesticide harmful to many aviary species, was identified
as the culprit and was effectively removed from the population through regulation and legislation
In addition, the National Park Service is equipped to promote the overall safety of the
ecosystem at large beyond the effects of just humans. The NPS deals with invasive species that
threaten the viability of the environment they inhabit and with pests such as mosquitos and
various fungi that pose a threat to human safety. In addition, they seek to secure the future for
endangered species that are on the brink of dying out, due mainly to human interaction, through
monitoring and various activities to reduce physical threats (NPS: Biologic Resource).
These Parks protect the resources have aided the US throughout its industrial history and
that will ensure the continuing viability of these resources. On another level, the Parks work to
protect the environment from the long-range impact of that same human civilization. Thus, the
National Park Service should continue to be funded as the parks themselves provide numerous
ecological benefits that benefit the country as a whole. In funding the National Parks, the Federal
Government is fulfilling its role to ensure the safety and health of the nation, both for humanity
Finally, the National Park Service should be funded as the Parks contribute to the local
economies as well as the larger, national economy. This area of benefit is often misrepresented
whenever the discussion on the validity of national parks is brought into the national spotlight.
There are many myths concerns over the cost of these parks to repudiate. Before doing that, one
must first understand the gross economic gain provided by these parks.
National parks direct a large amount of cashflow into the local gateway communities in
which they inhabit. The Department of the Interior defines these gateway regions as directly
located within a 60 mile radius of the respective park (2015 National Park Visitor Spending cts).
In that same report, the Park system is estimated to have contributed $16.9 billion dollars to these
local gateway communities (2015 National Park Visitor Spending). This is through park related
admissions fees and other expenses. Something important to note is that the majority of this
income is accounted for in the form of local businesses in the gateway communities themselves.
Lodging (such as hotels, motels, etc.) and restaurants alone contribute 50% of that $16.9 billion-
dollar figure (2015 National Park Visitor Spending). It is extremely important to emphasize the
Therein lies the problem of short sightedness that accompanies many arguments against
the funding of these parks. Critics point to the growing backlog in park maintenance fees, a
figure that currently sits at $12 billion dollars, as a reason to cease all spending in the first place
(Rott). Further, National Park gross revenues makeup $1.69 billion dollars, a figure calculated
from the fact that this is 10% of the $16.9 billion dollar figure (2015 National Park Visitor
Spending) is contributed directly from these parks. Per annum, the NPS is usually allotted
Nayyar 7
around $3 billion dollars (Selby). Thus, it appears that these parks only operate in a net loss
But to analyze the data in this manner overlooks the wider consequences of the National
Park System. To put the budget of the NPS, in perspective, the budget makes up only .1% of the
total $3.4 trillion US budget (Budget). When compared to the impact on gateway communities,
there is a return on investment of about $6 dollars for every $1 invested. From an economic
perspective, then, there exists incentive for these parks to exist. So, for the national government,
they do operate on a net loss in regard to these parks. But there still exists net economic gain, it
is just shared between the national government and those gateway communities. In this sense, the
national government is providing for the economic health of the various communities that make
up the nation, another instance of the government fulfilling its duties at the federal level and
CONCLUSION
The benefits that National Parks and the National Park Service offer to America are many in
number and are diverse in character. The parks are a cultural monument, dedicated to preserving
the identity America has created for itself over the course of its history. The parks serve as
ecological havens, dedicated to the study and preservation of the environment and ourselves. The
parks are an economic asset, proving their worth through gains to both government and local
communities. Together, one common theme units these ideas: the National Parks are a good idea
for the country. And as such, the National Park should not only be maintained, but should be
allotted more federal funding. Going ahead, into the uncertain future of the National Park
Service and System, look to the benefits these parks pose. They truly show that National Parks
Works Cited
"America's Best Idea Today." National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, 17 Sept.
"Budget." Congressional Budget Office. Congressional Budget Office, 30 Mar. 2017. Web. 8
Davis, Gary E., David M. Graber, and Steven A. Acker. "National Parks as Scientific Benchmark
Standards for the Biosphere; Or, How Are You Going to Tell How It Used to Be, When
There's Nothing Left to See?"The Full Value of Parks: From Economics to the
Flowers, Andrew. "The National Parks Have Never Been More Popular." FiveThirtyEight.
<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-national-parks-have-never-been-more-popular/>.
Jones, Karen. "Unpacking Yellowstone." Civilizing Nature. Vol. 1. New York: Berghahn, 2015.
Nijuis, Michelle. What Will Become of Federal Public Lands Under Trump? The New Yorker.
<http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/what-will-become-of-federal-public-lands-
under-trump>.
"NPS: Biologic Resource Management " National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the
Rott, Nathan. "National Parks Have A Long To-Do List But Can't Cover The Repair
<http://www.npr.org/2016/03/08/466461595/national-parks-have-a-long-to-do-list-but-
cant-cover-the-repair-costs>.
Runte, Alfred. National Parks: The American Experience. 2nd ed. Lincoln, NE: U of Nebraska,
1987. Print.
Selby, W. Gardener. National Park Service Director Correct That Its Budget Less than Budget
for Austins City Government. Politifact. Tampa Bay Times, 24 June 2016. Web. 22
jarvis/national-park-service-director-correct-its-budget-/>.
Shultis, John. "Recreational Values of Protected Areas." The Full Value of Parks : From
Economics to the Intangible. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. 59-75. Print.
United States of America. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 2015 National Park
Visitor Spending Effects. By Catherine Cullianane Thomas and Lynne Koontz. Fort
United States of America. Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and
Budget. America First: A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again. N.p.: n.p.,
2018-BLUEPRINT/summary>.
Nayyar 10
Outline
Thesis:
Because National Parks benefit the United States ecologically, economically, and
culturally, the Federal Government should seek to maintain and develop the NPS by
increasing its funding and further supporting its activity.
Main Points:
1) National parks help to protect and conserve Americas natural resources. They provide a
benefit to many scientific endeavors that benefit the United States.
3) National Parks offer net economic gain, boosting both the economies of the local regions
they operate within and of the national government.
Research
Ecological benefits:
Schelhas
o There has been a clash between tourism and conservation efforts
o This has led to criticism
Full Value pg. 131
o NPs serve as benchmarks for environmental effects
o See what effects are manmade vs natural
o Serve as gene bank for biological diversity
o Study the interactions inherent in nature
o Testing ground for conservation policies and research policies
o Examples pg 136
Civilizing Nature