Give the Nat'l Parks to the States

[church mouse guy]

The feds always shut down the National Parks because they are popular with the public and so the public notices the shutdown of a nonessential service. This year we are hearing about trash and so forth piling up.

Well one author, Ryan McMaken, at his website the Mises Institute has come up with a good way to make the federal government smaller and allow local people to keep the parks open--give them back to the states. I know that Indiana had a nice state park at the Indiana Dunes on Lake Michigan but it became a national seashore and Indiana lost out.

Here is what Mr. McMaken says:

"Contrary to the myth that public lands would immediately be sold to rapacious developers and oil drillers were the lands to fall into the hands of state or local governments, the reality is that public lands such as those in national parks are usually viewed very favorably by surrounding communities and by the voters in the states in which they are located."

and

"The whole thing illustrates the danger of allowing the federal government to exercise control over vast swaths of the American landscape, while minimizing the influence of those who are impacted most by federal decisions. Besides, there's certainly no justification for having an entire national system of parks dependent on Washington, DC. The very idea that access to an outhouse in rural California should depend on a backroom deal in Washington DC should strike every reasonable person as utterly absurd."

Read the brilliant article for yourself here:

Government Shutdown Shows Why We Need to Decentralize National Parks | Ryan McMaken

Bill Whittles comment on the idea:

 

[InTheLight]

I can see the pendulum swinging both ways on this issue.

"public lands such as those in national parks are usually viewed very favorably by surrounding communities and by the voters in the states in which they are located."

Maybe. But supposing people in densely populated urban areas don't see the parks so favorably. Suppose they see a high speed train going between two large cities as being more desirable than a former national park (now a state park) and figure in order to fund the train they sell the state park to developers?

The very idea that access to an outhouse in rural California should depend on a backroom deal in Washington DC should strike every reasonable person as utterly absurd."

But having access to an outhouse in Joshua Tree state park depend on a backroom deal in Sacramento is preferred, I suppose.

 

[OnlyaSinner]

Before having the parks go to the states, perhaps a study of how well said states are funding maintenance of current state parks should be done first. When a state budget gets tight, parks infrastructure dollars are often one of the first things to be cut.

 

[church mouse guy]

Before having the parks go to the states, perhaps a study of how well said states are funding maintenance of current state parks should be done first. When a state budget gets tight, parks infrastructure dollars are often one of the first things to be cut.

Indiana has an excellent state park system with a long history. What state are you saying has a bad system? What could be worse than the feds who are always shutting down?

 

[InTheLight]

I would look to the rest areas on interstate highways to see how states might treat national parks if they are converted to state parks. Some states have really grungy rest areas and others have very nice ones. I know the analogy isn't perfect, but it's pretty close.

 

[church mouse guy]

I would look to the rest areas on interstate highways to see how states might treat national parks if they are converted to state parks. Some states have really grungy rest areas and others have very nice ones. I know the analogy isn't perfect, but it's pretty close.

The issue is serious because states dependent upon tourism are hard hit when the feds cannot keep the parks open and clean. If the feds were to nationalize Indiana's state parks, it would be a step backwards as we learned when they took over the Dunes. Giving the parks to the states might relieve pressure on the national government, which is bankrupt.

A more serious problem is TSA.

 

[Adonia]

Constitutionally, how did the Federal entity come to own so much of each of the sovereign states' land in the first place?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Because

• it was Federal land before a territory became a State.
• or it was bought from private owners.
• or it was local\state owned land that was sold\donated to the Feds.

Constitutionally, how did the Federal entity come to own so much of each of the sovereign states' land in the first place?

 

[OnlyaSinner]

Indiana has an excellent state park system with a long history. What state are you saying has a bad system? What could be worse than the feds who are always shutting down?

I didn't say that any states had bad systems, only that their parks management would best be checked out before any mass transfer from the feds were made. What could be worse? Cash-starved parks unable to properly maintain infrastructure such as bathrooms, campsites and trails, with attendance/revenue declining as folks choose pricey private campgrounds over parks that have degraded to pigpens. Oceanfront parks without lifeguards.

In response to ITL's quite relevant rest area comment - our state's DOT has closed almost all of the rest areas outside of those on interstates - some of those are gone as well. In slightly more than 350 miles of interstate, there are 3 full-service (gas/food court) areas, all in the southern part of the state, and 3 part service (restrooms/vending machines), one of which is in the northern half, which is quite sparsely populated.
The state forest service used to maintain a couple hundred campsites, some drive-to, more being water access, but that program was defunded several decades back. The agency for which I work (self-funded, mainly through sale of timber from the lands we manage), has assumed management of some of those, mostly the remote-access sites, along with many more created by our staff. Should our dedicated revenue status be ended and our budget come out of the general fund, most if not all of those sites would probably either go a way or perhaps be maintained by volunteers.

 

[church mouse guy]

National parks operate by federal subsidy. It is time that user fees matched costs, isn't it? My taxes are so high that I could not afford to go to a national park.