[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
EXAMINING BARRIERS TO ACCESS:
ONGOING VISITOR EXPERIENCE ISSUES AT
AMERICA'S NATIONAL PARKS
=======================================================================
OVERSIGHT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
Thursday, July 27, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-54
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
or
Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-095 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member
Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Tom McClintock, CA CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY
Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
http://naturalresources.house.gov
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
PAUL GOSAR, AZ, Chairman
MIKE COLLINS, GA, Vice Chair
MELANIE A. STANSBURY, NM, Ranking Member
Matt Rosendale, MT Ed Case, HI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX Ruben Gallego, AZ
Mike Collins, GA Susie Lee, NV
Anna Paulina Luna, FL Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio
----------
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Thursday, July 27, 2023.......................... 1
Statement of Members:
Gosar, Hon. Paul, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Arizona................................................. 2
Stansbury, Hon. Melanie A., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New Mexico.................................... 3
Statement of Witnesses:
Reynolds, Michael T., Deputy Director for Congressional and
External Relations, National Park Service, U.S. Department
of the Interior, Washington, DC............................ 5
Prepared statement of.................................... 6
Questions submitted for the record....................... 11
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON EXAMINING BARRIERS TO ACCESS: ONGOING VISITOR.
EXPERIENCE ISSUES AT AMERICA'S NATIONAL PARKS
----------
Thursday, July 27, 2023
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:39 p.m. in
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Paul Gosar
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Gosar, Rosendale, Collins,
Westerman; Stansbury, and Lee.
Also present: Representatives LaMalfa, Stauber, Wittman;
and Quigley.
Dr. Gosar. The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
will now come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
The Subcommittee today is meeting to hear testimony on
``Examining Barriers to Access: Ongoing Visitor Experience
Issues at America's National Parks.''
I ask unanimous consent that all Members testifying today
be allowed to sit with the Subcommittee, give their testimony,
and participate in the hearing from the dais.
I ask that the gentleman from California, Mr. LaMalfa, be
allowed to sit with the Subcommittee and participate in the
hearing.
I ask that the gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Stauber, be
allowed to sit with the Subcommittee and participate in the
hearing.
I ask that the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Wittman, be
allowed to sit with the Subcommittee and participate in the
hearing.
And I ask that the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Quigley, be
allowed to sit with the Subcommittee and participate in the
hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at
hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority
Member. I therefore ask unanimous consent that all other
Members' opening statements be made part of the hearing record
if they are submitted in accordance with Committee Rule 3(o).
Without objection, so ordered.
I will now recognize myself for my introductory comments.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. PAUL GOSAR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Dr. Gosar. I thank Deputy Director Reynolds for coming
before the Subcommittee. We are gathered here to examine the
incredible failure of the National Park Service under the Biden
administration in carrying out the agency's core mission of
both providing access to public lands and conserving those
lands for future generations.
And to be clear, I have a lot of respect for the many
dedicated, talented Americans working day in and day out in our
parks and welcoming visitors every day. My criticisms today are
pointing toward the bureaucrats in DC who have steered the
agency in the wrong direction.
Over the last several years, the Park Service has received
an historic level of investment from the Federal Government
and, I should note, the private sector. For years, I have
listened to the Service come before this Committee and my
friends on the other side of the aisle as well, who mirror one
another, ``If you give us more money, we will solve these
problems.''
If I can get one message across today, it is this. Maybe,
just maybe, more money isn't the solution.
My friends, I am here to tell you something. Americans
continue to love their national parks, as they should, but the
management stinks. The lines are longer. The employees continue
to not show up for work in person. Bathrooms are dirty, windows
are broken, and trails across the country are closed.
The so-called Inflation Reduction Act set aside $500
million. Yes, that is half a billion dollars to hire staff for
the Park Service. Several years ago, Congress passed the Great
American Outdoors Act, a pact made in part with the National
Park Service, among other management agencies to pay down then
the approximately $13 billion of deferred maintenance backlog.
Today, instead of a growing and thriving workforce, we
continue to receive reports of closed trails like the popular
White House Overlook Trail and Canyon de Chelly at the National
Monument, the only public trail on the south rim, or alerts on
an official website to be aware of the illegal traffic or
smuggling, as well as the presence of rabies in the park like
Coronado National Monument.
Lake Powell has numerous boat launches closed along with
the marinas, and convenience stores closed until further
notice, which is effectively permanent at this point. The
Service has added recreational water advisories to its website,
warning visitors not to ingest any of the water at the lake,
ostensibly where the same freshwater that millions of Arizonans
drink, although it is obviously not filtered first.
Despite the historic and growing levels of investments in
our national parks at every level, from employees to critical
infrastructure, heck, even to climate change projects, the
situation seems to be getting worse for both the visitor and
the critters who live in the parks. The entire park system is
suffering from mismanagement and, as usual, the American people
end up paying for it.
My home state of Arizona, as of September 2022, had over
$1.2 billion in deferred maintenance and repairs across 22
different park units. This is unacceptable, and ultimately it
damages the overall visitor experience and restricts access to
America's national parks.
Reducing the deferred maintenance backlog should be our
utmost priority, but the record clearly shows that this is not
the case. With the deferred maintenance backlog continuing to
grow year after year, and the huge increase in the backlog
since the National Park Service received over $1 billion from
the Great American Outdoors Act, the Committee expects to hear
a concrete plan from you on how the National Park Service can
get back on track.
The National Park System infrastructure is in a state of
disrepair, with countless examples across the nation of damaged
transportation infrastructure cutting off access to whole areas
of the National Park System and impacting recreation
opportunities, businesses, and the gateway communities that
support the parks and outdoor recreation economy.
In 2022, the National Park System recorded over 311 million
recreational visits, a 5 percent increase from the year before,
with similar visitation numbers expected for this year. As
visitors from around our country and the world continue to
flock to our national parks, I find it shocking, quite frankly,
that the National Park Service isn't doing everything in its
power to support the businesses and gateway communities who
support these parks.
In my home state of Arizona, as well as a number of other
states, I have been discouraged by the Service's efforts to
effectively shut down air tours over our parks. These air tours
are very critical for those who do not have the physical
ability to hike or bike through some of our nation's natural
wonders, and at the same time support local economies.
I still believe that with stronger leadership at the
National Park Service and working together with Congress, we
can get back to the basics and accomplish a lot for the
American people. The National Park Service should work with
Congress to develop a more active, efficient management
strategy for the National Park System that incorporates the
best science and technology available in order to increase
access to public lands and recreational opportunities for all
Americans and to protect these amazing spaces.
I now recognize the Ranking Member for her opening
comments.
Ms. Stansbury.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MELANIE A. STANSBURY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Ms. Stansbury. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
welcome our Deputy Director, Mr. Reynolds.
Thank you so much for being here with us today.
And I also want to just take a moment to thank all of our
Federal employees and our Park Service employees who are out on
the ground serving our great country every day and protecting
these iconic and beautiful spaces that are so important to our
cultural heritage and our ecological integrity.
This is a wonderful and welcome hearing to be here with the
Park Service today, and I want to take a moment to just
acknowledge what an incredible moment we are living in,
historically, in terms of the transformation of the Park
Service. I actually worked at the Office of Management and
Budget during the Obama administration, and was involved in
oversight of the Department of the Interior. And it is amazing
to see, even during the last several years, the transformation
within the Park Service and what a difference that great
leadership makes.
It is extraordinary to think that the U.S. Department of
the Interior is now under the leadership of our nation's very
first Indigenous Cabinet Secretary, and that the National Park
Service has at its helm our nation's very first Director in
Chuck Sams, III. And we are extraordinarily grateful for his
leadership and for all of the things that he is doing to help
transform the culture within the Park Service, to help tell a
more complete history of our nation's beautiful public lands,
and his efforts and all of the efforts of the National Park
Service to protect these historic and ecologically important
places.
Of course, the National Park Service is working to advance
equity, to support underserved communities, to tackle the
climate crisis, to conserve our natural resources, and to
preserve these public spaces and waters for generations to
come. The Park Service is indeed making these spaces more
accessible to all people and, as I said, telling a more
complete history.
And, in fact, as we know, many of our national parks are
actually spaces that are formerly Indigenous lands in which our
tribes lived, used, hunted, prayed, and used for ceremonial
purposes since time immemorial. The Park Service is partnering
with our tribal communities and co-stewardship efforts, helping
to return sacred places and access to important resources. The
Park Service is working with our communities to increase access
for underserved communities and, of course, doing the daily
activities that they have always done to make sure that we can
access those spaces.
But in addition to that, and I do agree with many of the
comments that my colleague made about conditions worsening in
our national parks, but I would beg to differ that the primary
source of that problem is actually rooted in climate change. It
is getting hotter. Our ecosystems are degrading. We have less
people working in our parks right now because not only a
historic pandemic that decimated the Federal workforce, but
Donald Trump, who dismantled and made a concerted effort in
dismantling our Federal workforce, and forced and pushed many
people out of Federal service. So, while there may be
challenges that the Park Service has always faced, they have
certainly been exacerbated by climate change, by the pandemic,
and by a historically bad President who pushed out many of our
Federal workers.
But I do want to take a moment to turn to some of the
important work that the Park Service is undertaking currently
and, in particular, just to use a few moments at the end here
to thank the President and to thank our Deputy Director and all
of the staff out there for the announcement this week of the
President's creation of the Emmett Till and Mamie Till Mobley
National Monument.
For those of you that are not familiar with this story, of
course, this week would have been the 82nd birthday of Emmett
Louis Till, a young Black man from the South who met an
untimely death at 14 years old. His mother's refusal to remain
silent after the death and the brutal murder of her son and the
open casket of his death are part of what galvanized the civil
rights movement and helped to propel it forward. And this is
the work that the National Park Service and our President are
doing today to make sure that we tell the complete story of
this great nation and its sometimes tragic and complicated
past.
I am grateful for the President's brave efforts to
recognize Emmett and his mother, the signing of that
proclamation, and the continued work by the National Park
Service to uplift these stories, to create spaces where all
Americans see themselves, see their history, and see their
future.
With that, I yield back.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentlewoman. I just think there is
another way of going about things. I think I look through a
different lens. Is there something we could see with
volunteers, having a national park volunteer system, where we
can actually put people to work? I think there are a lot of
ways we should be looking at this, not just one way with more
money. So, I thank the gentlewoman.
Now I would like to hear from our witness, Mr. Mike
Reynolds, the Deputy Director of Congressional and External
Relations, National Park Service.
Your 5 minutes are starting. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T. REYNOLDS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR
CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you, Chairman Gosar, Ranking Member
Stansbury, and members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity
to present the Department of the Interior's views on the
visitor experience at national parks.
The National Park Service is honored to care for all parks
on behalf of the American people, and to welcome them to
experience the wonders of their National Park System. The NPS
seeks to provide outstanding experiences for all visitors,
while upholding our mandate to conserve each park's resources
for the benefit of present and future generations.
Significant investments from the Great American Outdoors
Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction
Act, and recent disaster supplemental appropriations have
allowed the NPS to address critical needs in our national parks
and enhance the visitor experience. Yet, the NPS faces many of
the same challenges and constraints that other government
agencies, towns, and businesses face across the country,
whether due to natural disasters, public safety, seasonal
wildlife protection, or infrastructure improvements, certain
areas of national parks may be closed out of necessity. Our
goal is to re-establish access as soon as possible and where
feasible, or provide alternatives where closures are permanent.
Park resources and facilities can be impacted by natural
events such as hurricanes, flooding, drought, wildfires,
leaving them inaccessible to visitors. There are also times
when areas may be closed to protect wildlife or culturally
significant artifacts. Closures or limited hours of visitor
facilities may occur due to staffing shortages, as our existing
staff is spread more thinly than in years past.
The NPS is grateful for the $500 million that Congress
provided in the Inflation Reduction Act to hire employees.
However, this will not fully or permanently restore lost
capacity. As we welcome visitors to their national parks this
summer and beyond, we encourage visitors to check our website,
nps.gov, to make sure the areas that they hope to see are open
and accessible.
Visitors expect to find high-quality facilities which
enable a safe and memorable experience, yet many of the roads,
trails, restrooms, and facilities in national parks are aging
and strained by underfunding for the use that they were not
designed to support that we get now. We are grateful to
Congress for the passage of the Great American Outdoors Act to
address deferred maintenance. This much-needed funding infusion
has helped us make meaningful progress in improving the
condition of high-priority assets.
While projects are underway, temporary closures will
typically be required as we work to improve the facilities for
visitors. Incidental road trail and facility closures in
individual national parks have not resulted in significant
reduction in total visitation across the National Park Service.
Park facilities and staffing levels are challenged to keep pace
with ever-increasing visitation.
The NPS is employing a range of park-specific strategies to
provide a welcoming and enjoyable environment while ensuring
the protection of nationally significant resources. We have
long managed access in backcountry areas by issuing trailhead
and overnight permits, and as we test new ideas and planning
tools we are conducting robust public and stakeholder
engagement before committing to long-term implementation.
Congestion can result in gridlock, visitor conflicts,
safety issues, resource damage, and delays in emergency
response. Timed entry systems spread visitation throughout the
day, reduce lines at entrance stations and parking lots, and
avoid impacts on resources. These systems allow visitors to
better plan and have more enjoyable experiences, while often
having the added benefit of expanding the economic benefits of
parks to more local businesses and area attractions.
The NPS wants visitors to have high-quality experiences
wherever they go in the National Park System. The NPS is
committed to finding innovative solutions, collaborating with
communities, and making responsible choices to ensure future
generations can enjoy and be inspired by the parks entrusted to
our care. We appreciate your ongoing support as we endeavor to
achieve these goals.
Chairman Gosar, Ranking Member Stansbury, thank you again
for this opportunity to appear today. I would be happy to
answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Reynolds follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael T. Reynolds, Deputy Director for
Congressional and External Relations, National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior
Chairman Gosar, Ranking Member Stansbury, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the Department
of the Interior's views on the visitor experience at national parks.
National parks are among the most remarkable places in America for
recreation, learning, and inspiration. These special places belong to
all Americans. The National Park Service (NPS) is honored to care for
all parks on behalf of the American people and to welcome them to
experience the wonders of their National Park System. We also welcome
international visitors, in keeping with our commitment to extend the
benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor
recreation throughout the world.
Visitor enjoyment is a critical part of the NPS mission. The NPS
seeks to provide outstanding experiences for all visitors while
upholding our mandate to conserve unimpaired each park's natural and
cultural resources for the benefit of present and future generations.
Fulfilling our mission and ensuring positive visitor experiences is the
work of our 20,000 employees and thousands of volunteers, interns,
fellows, and partners who are the heart of our agency. I want to
acknowledge their accomplishments and thank them for their dedication.
Significant investments from the Great American Outdoors Act, the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction Act, and recent
emergency disaster supplemental appropriations have allowed the NPS to
address critical needs in our national parks and enhance or recover the
visitor experience. Yet, the NPS faces many of the same challenges and
constraints that other federal agencies, cities, towns, organizations,
and businesses face across the country. We rise to meet these
challenges and work daily to sustain these remarkable places that the
American people have entrusted to us. Indeed, many countries look to
our leadership and to us as the model park system.
Responding to Road, Trail, & Facility Closures
Whether due to natural disasters, significant weather events,
public safety, seasonal wildlife protection, or infrastructure
improvements, certain areas in national parks may be closed out of
necessity. Our goal is to reestablish access as soon as possible where
feasible or provide alternatives where closures are long-term or
permanent.
In years with heavy snowfall, mountain roads and facilities open
later than they might in an average year. Deeper snowpacks provide
needed drought relief but also require more time to clear. This past
winter and spring, for example, the Tuolumne River basin in Yosemite
National Park received 250% more snow than average. Crews and equipment
worked exceptionally hard this year to clear Tioga Road while
maintaining safety in avalanche hazard areas. The North Rim of Grand
Canyon National Park saw over 250 inches of snow this past winter and
reopened to visitors in early June with water conservation measures in
place while the park repaired a break to the water infrastructure.
Floods impact parks across the country every year. Notably, in
Yellowstone National Park last year, record flooding events washed out
portions of two major roadways, leaving the park headquarters and the
park community of Mammoth Hot Springs isolated. The NPS and its
partners worked quickly to ensure the safety of visitors, employees,
and community residents, and to restore damaged roads, water and
wastewater systems, power lines, and other critical park
infrastructure. The park rapidly reopened areas when it was safe to do
so and over 90% of the park was reopened just a couple weeks after the
flood event. Thanks to the strong partnership with the Federal Highway
Administration, the agencies were able to re-establish access for
Yellowstone National Park visitors, employees, and gateway communities
in under five months. It would not have been possible without the
tremendous support from the Congressional delegations, governors,
counties, communities, and other partners.
Increased winter snowpack and spring rain have improved conditions
slightly at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and Lake Mead National
Recreation Area, but declining water levels due to climate change and
over 20 years of ongoing drought have reshaped these parks' shorelines.
As Lake Powell and Lake Mead continue to recede, extending launch ramps
and other infrastructure becomes more difficult and more expensive due
to the topography and projected decline in water levels. The NPS
recognizes the important role that launch ramps and marinas play in the
economies of gateway communities and the numerous businesses that
operate in and around both parks. Our commitment to understanding the
impacts of climate change on park resources, infrastructure,
operations, and visitor experiences is central to ensuring the safe,
responsible, and long-term use and enjoyment of all the parks have to
offer.
We know one year of heavy snowpack alone will not sustain lake
access into the future. To prepare for the possibility of continued
rapid water level decline, Lake Mead National Recreation Area is
preparing a Sustainable Low Water Access Plan, which is currently open
for public comment. The NPS looks forward to the next phase of public
and stakeholder feedback and engagement to develop a responsible and
feasible plan to preserve both motorized and primitive recreational
boating access to the lake.
Besides heavy snow and ice, flooding, and drought, events that can
damage park resources and facilities and leave them inaccessible to
visitors include hurricanes, landslides, rockfalls, structural fires,
wildfires, and beach erosion. The NPS appreciates the support of
Congress in providing recent emergency supplemental appropriations to
recover from the consequences of these disasters, but notes that these
funds do not support proactive investments in infrastructure hardening
or resiliency at a portfolio scale.
The protection of natural and cultural resources is core to the
NPS' legislative mandate. There are times when an area may be closed to
visitor use to protect wildlife or culturally significant artifacts. In
the spring, certain trails or rock-climbing routes may be closed to
protect nesting peregrine falcons, such as at Joshua Tree National
Park, Zion National Park, and Acadia National Park. At national
seashores, certain dunes and beach areas may be closed to protect
piping plovers or sea turtles from disturbance during vulnerable
nesting periods. These federally threatened and endangered species are
an integral part of what makes these places special and national
seashores provide critical habitat for their survival.
Closures or limited hours of visitor facilities due to staffing
shortages is another access issue the NPS is working to address. Our
existing staff is spread more thinly than in years past. Between FY
2011 and FY 2022, the total number of NPS full-time employees decreased
by approximately 3,400 or 15%. Capacity requirements of the NPS have
increased significantly as Congress has authorized new parks and
programs, as well as expansions of existing parks. The NPS is grateful
for the $500 million available through FY 2030 that Congress provided
in the Inflation Reduction Act to hire employees in the national park
system; however, this will not fully or permanently restore lost
capacity.
Other factors also complicate this issue, including how NPS pay,
benefits, and work environment compares to that in the local area. The
NPS typically tries to hire approximately 7,000 seasonal positions
annually to fill critical roles across the National Park System during
the heaviest periods of visitation. The NPS is committed to using all
available hiring authorities and pursuing strategic workforce planning
and recruiting to fill these and other positions. In many parks,
housing availability or affordability in the local area challenges
their ability to recruit or retain employees. The FY 2024 President's
Budget Request for the NPS includes an increase of $7.0 million, for a
total of $14.9 million, to support improving the condition or quantity
of park housing units.
As we continue to welcome visitors to their national parks this
summer and beyond, we strongly recommend they ``Plan Like a Park
Ranger'' so that the only surprises are happy ones. A park visit begins
with a trip to NPS.gov for ideas about where to go, what to see, and
most important, to make sure that the areas visitors hope to see are
open and accessible. Information about current conditions and timelines
for facilities reopening can be found on each park's website and social
media platforms. The NPS provides advance notice, when possible, of
anticipated closures. We appreciate visitors' understanding and ask
that they be prepared to adapt their plans, slow down on roadways,
expect delays, and pack their patience.
Making Progress on Improving Facilities
When Americans visit their parks, they expect to find high-quality
facilities which enable a safe and memorable experience. Many of the
roads, trails, restrooms, water treatment systems, and visitor and
operational facilities in national parks are aging, obsolete, and
strained by underfunding and use they were not designed to support. We
are grateful to Congress for passage of the Great American Outdoors Act
which established the National Parks and Public Lands Legacy
Restoration Fund (LRF) to address the Department's deferred maintenance
and repair backlog. The NPS is using this investment to accomplish
much-needed asset maintenance, repairs, and replacement. Improved
facilities will be more resilient, operate more efficiently, and better
serve visitors. The NPS has prioritized 130 LRF projects that will
improve the condition of roads, buildings, utility systems, and other
assets in 176 parks located in 48 states, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. While projects are underway,
temporary closures will typically be required as we work to improve
facilities for visitors.
Hot Springs National Park received $16.7 million of LRF funding for
roof repairs to the Buckstaff Bathhouse and structural and systems
upgrades to the Maurice Bathhouse and the former Libbey Memorial
Physical Medicine Center. These essential repairs include structural
improvements and upgrades to electrical, plumbing, and fire suppression
systems, which will provide employees and visitors with more
accessible, safe, and energy-efficient facilities.
Several miles of the Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier National Park
will undergo rehabilitation as part of a $17.1 million LRF project.
Work will include replacement of the current multi-span McDonald Creek
Bridge with a clear-span bridge. The project also entails curve
widening, milling, and repaving of the road segment, along with
installing conduit for future fiber lines.
At the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, water system
improvements are part of a planned $180.1 million LRF project. The
improvements would address frequent failures with extended periods of
service outages and would result in a reliable water system to meet
supply needs at the North Rim and in the cross-canyon corridor for a
projected life span of up to 75 years. Feedback received during the
public comment period will be used to refine the project proposal.
Tuolumne Meadows Campground in Yosemite National Park will receive
a major overhaul with $26.1 million in LRF funding. The project will
rehabilitate and modernize the park's largest campground, which hosts
more than 150,000 campers annually and which was built by the Civilian
Conservation Corps in the 1930s. The work will enhance the visitor
experience, fix structures damaged from heavy snowfall, and repair
aging, inefficient infrastructure.
At Lyndon B. Johnson National Historic Site, a $9.1 million LRF
project will address repair work, structural concerns, code
deficiencies, and deterioration of historic features in the Texas White
House and the surrounding site. The work will ensure the long-term
integrity of a critical park resource and allow it to be reopened to
the public. The nearby communications building will be repurposed to
provide essential restroom facilities and expand visitor amenities.
The much-needed funding infusion from the LRF program has helped us
make meaningful progress in improving the condition of high-priority
assets, yet there remains an ongoing need for long-term maintenance,
modernization, renewal, strategic evaluation of low-priority assets,
and operations support. We recognize, even with this significant
investment, the NPS has more assets than staff and funding to
adequately operate and maintain them.
The impact of appropriations for park facilities is measured in
decades; therefore, it is critical that we adopt a sustainable mindset
and business model that considers fiscal and staffing limitations for
resource allocation to ensure the preservation and accessibility of our
cherished national parks. That includes making strategic choices like
decommissioning, closing, or removing lower priority structures. This
will allow us to allocate funds and staff to protect priority resources
while creating meaningful experiences for visitors that will be enjoyed
by future generations.
We will continue to seek funding through line item construction,
Federal Highways, and other programs, to ensure facilities, including
roads, trails, and natural and cultural resources are properly
maintained and improved to meet code compliance for safety,
sustainability, and accessibility for people with disabilities, and to
meet current and future capacity needs.
The President's budget request for the NPS for FY 2024 is $3.8
billion. This request makes bold investments essential for the NPS's
continued mission success in its second century while remaining
committed to the daily mission of ensuring that the American public
continues to have an enriching experience at each site.
Addressing High Visitation and Enhancing the Visitor Experience
Incidental road, trail, and facility closures in individual
national parks have not resulted in a significant reduction in total
visitation across the national park system. In FY 2022, the NPS
received 312 million recreation visits, up 15 million visits (5%) from
FY 2021, which is nearly at pre-pandemic levels. Visitors may
experience congestion at popular parks and at attraction hotspots and
where entries and exits are limited. Crowding can also be felt at the
most popular scenic viewpoints that are within one-quarter mile of a
parking lot.
For some parks, providing great experiences has become more
challenging due to increases in the number of people visiting, changes
to when and how visitors arrive, and evolving visitor needs and
expectations, including how visitors want to engage in the parks. Some
parks are finding the level of visitor demand to be significantly
outpacing their ability to accommodate, resulting in the need to
explore new management strategies. Park facilities and staffing levels
are challenged to keep pace with this changing visitation, impacting
the quality of the visitor experience, health and safety, and resource
protection. These visitation changes are also felt outside park
boundaries in adjacent lands, waters, and communities.
The NPS is employing a range of park-specific strategies to provide
a welcoming and enjoyable environment while ensuring the protection of
nationally significant resources. In addition to using pilot projects
and flexible planning tools to test ideas, we are conducting robust
public and stakeholder engagement before committing to long-term
implementation. Over the next few months, our expanded social science
research will also provide us with visitor information at the park and
bureau levels for visitor experience planning. The data will also
enable the NPS to facilitate strategies to provide for more inclusive,
diverse, and equitable visitation.
Some strategies for managing use have been employed for decades.
The NPS has long managed access in backcountry areas and wilderness,
for example, by issuing trailhead and overnight permits. Permit systems
for remote backcountry locations have helped preserve the qualities of
solitude and minimize resource impacts.
To address vehicular congestion, the NPS has invested in multimodal
transportation options such as shuttles and multi-use paths where
biking and walking are encouraged. We also strategically support the
use of ride-hailing applications and micromobility options such as
scooters, e-bikes, and bike-share where appropriate.
Other managed access strategies, such as reservation and timed
entry systems, are now in place or have been piloted at several parks,
with each addressing specific park-level issues. Congestion can result
in gridlock, visitor conflicts, crowding, safety issues, resource
damage, and, of particular concern, delays in emergency response.
Managed access strategies are intended to address the amount, type, and
timing of access to an area to ensure desired conditions are met for
high-quality visitor experiences and resource protection. For example,
reservation systems spread visitation throughout the day, reduce
queuing at entrance stations and parking lots, and avoid the cascading
impacts on resource conditions, operational capacity, and visitor
experience. These systems allow visitors to better plan and have more
enjoyable experiences, while often having the added benefit of
expanding the economic benefits of parks to more local businesses and
area attractions that have historically seen less use.
Comprehensive, reliable, and accessible traveler information plays
an important role in enhancing recreational access to parks. The NPS is
working on several technological advances that will improve the visitor
experience in parks through enhanced trip-planning tools. In FY 2023
and FY 2024, the NPS Transportation Planning Program and Federal
Highways Administration Innovation and Research Council have funded a
$500,000 research project to develop a recreational travel forecasting
tool to be applied across a range of parks to assist visitors in
advanced trip planning by informing them of where and when congestion
occurs. Pilot tool development will occur at approximately 10 different
parks of varying types. Meanwhile, expansion of wireless service
coverage along transportation corridors would ensure visitors have
increased access to these travel tools.
Recreation.gov provides reservation and trip planning capabilities
and features more than 110,000 individual sites and activities across
4,000 recreation areas. The platform offers expanded features to
improve the customer experience through visitor mapping and trip
planning tools that allow visitors to discover locations and activities
new to them, especially when their chosen sites are already reserved.
The Recreation.gov mobile app offers visitors the convenience of making
and managing reservations on the go.
The NPS mobile app is another helpful tool visitors to national
parks can use to assist them in their trip planning. The app ensures
visitors have access to the most current information about the parks
they visit. It currently offers interactive maps, tours, accessibility
information, and more. The app is built to be used even in remote
parks, where internet access may be limited by allowing visitors to
download information to their phones in advance.
The NPS wants visitors to have a high-quality experience everywhere
they go in the National Park System. National parks are working to
offer new ways for people to receive timely information to better plan
and enjoy their trips. We cannot meet these challenges alone. The NPS
is committed to collaborating with local communities, businesses, and
nonprofit partners to find solutions that improve the quality and
diversity of visitor experiences, address crowding and congestion in a
thoughtful way, and maintain the tremendous range of benefits that
national parks provide. Given the iconic and finite nature of these
highly valued places, along with the complexity of providing inclusive
and high-quality visitor opportunities, creativity, active
collaboration, and shared responsibility will be essential for ensuring
sustainable and effective strategies.
Enjoyment of our parks and park resources by Americans and
international visitors is a fundamental purpose of all national parks.
We may face many challenges, but the NPS is committed to finding
innovative solutions, and making responsible choices to ensure future
generations can enjoy and be inspired by the parks entrusted to our
care. We appreciate your ongoing support as we endeavor to achieve
these goals.
Chairman Gosar, Ranking Member Stansbury, thank you again for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I would be happy to answer any
questions that you may have.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Michael Reynolds, Deputy Director
for Congressional and External Relations, National Park Service
Mr. Reynolds did not submit responses to the Committee by the
appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record.
Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman
Question 1. An efficient, timely contracting process is important
to maintaining the continuity of visitor services and high-quality
visitor experiences in our National Parks. We understand that
concession contract award decisions and announcements are often taking
longer than anticipated, with extended periods between the submission
of proposals and selection decisions and announcements.
1a) Please identify and explain any factors that are contributing
to the length of concession contract award processes and any delays in
those processes, including specifically for time periods after offers
have been submitted.
1b) Please provide the Committee information on the duration of
contracting processes for concession contracts, including specifically
identifying amounts of time between proposal due dates and the
selection announcements.
1c) In these processes, how much have the actual time periods
between proposal due dates and selection announcements differed from
the projected time periods between those milestones?
Questions Submitted by Representative Gosar
Question 1. The National Park Service has an active lease with
Oregon Inlet Marinas, LLC (Lessee) in the Bodie Island District of Cape
Hatteras National Seashore, the term of which is 20 years, currently
set to expire on December 31, 2038. It has come to my attention that
the Lessee has an interest in extending the term of the lease, and all
parties are currently satisfied with the performance of the Lessee. In
addition, the Lessee is interested in providing additional capital
improvements to the property, which would be mutually beneficial to
both the Lessee and the National Park Service. However, the local
superintendent has stated that he does not have the authority to extend
the current lease, despite the fact that leases, in a number of cases,
have been granted for up to 60 years within the National Park System.
Please provide a detailed explanation for any reason the lease may not
be currently eligible for an extension, as well as options for working
with NPS and the Lessee to find a mutually beneficial path forward.
Questions Submitted by Representative Collins
Question 1. How is the National Parks system currently using
public-private partnerships, with both community organizations and
private businesses, to address their maintenance backlog?
Question 2. What are the biggest barriers to expanding the use of
public-private partnerships for maintenance within the National Park
System?
Question 3. What can be done to streamline the approval process for
individuals who would like to repair a picnic table or trail shelter
for example in one of their local National Parks?
______
Dr. Gosar. Thank you very much for your testimony, Mr.
Reynolds.
We will now go to our Members for 5 minutes, and the first
one out of the gate is Mr. LaMalfa from California.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate being
able to sit in on the Committee today.
Director Reynolds, thank you for your time in addressing us
here. In my own district, and there might be an example of
others around the country, as well, but we have Lassen National
Park there, the volcano. And what we find is that the phone
lines have been down for quite a while, at least April, perhaps
longer. And that is not to be unexpected from the amount of
snow we had this year and such, that there would be issues like
that. What we have is there is no other phone number listed on
the park's website that is working or available, even including
the fire and law enforcement, except for 911.
So, the only option available for visitors to inquire is
through email, which, you know, the email response is, ``We
will get back to you ASAP,'' so we have been getting some
dissatisfaction from our constituents on that. How can we
improve? Because I can't imagine this is really making a
positive experience for our folks there, with just that level
of communications. And then take that into what it means for
public safety, as well, if you would.
Mr. Reynolds. Is that a question, sir?
Mr. LaMalfa. Well, I mean, do you believe that is going to
be a positive experience for people to not be able to have
really timely communication as we are here in the summer
season, and, you know, ``Beach Boys all summer long,'' or
almost.
And then what about the public safety concerns for those
that you really can't communicate with them in real time?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. Thank you, sir, for bringing that to our
attention. I will personally reach out to the superintendent
and find out what the status is of their phone systems.
We pride ourselves on our interpretive rangers, our
facilities, our 800-plus visitor centers throughout the System,
we try to be open, as I mentioned in my testimony, for a high-
quality experience. So, there must be something uniquely
happening around Lassen.
To your point, their winter was severe this year, and I
know they had trouble opening roads and getting facilities
online. We will double check on that, but I wasn't aware that
the phone lines were that impacted.
Mr. LaMalfa. I mean, does this underline, though, a public
safety concern if there is really no live communications there
for them?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, the rangers are, as you know, on radio
dispatch 24/7, in contact with locals, and I would think they
have mitigated those. But yes, we would want to make sure that
911 and any phone system is there.
Mr. LaMalfa. Do you have a system of oversight that should
be catching this sort of thing so that there is not a long lag?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, we do. Our regional directors are our
accountable folks that have to make sure the superintendents
are adhering to these things, and we can double check with
those folks and report back to you all.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK, all right. And in the park near
Whiskeytown, we had what was known as the Carr Fire back in
2018, 5 years ago. There are three really good hikes that are
available in that area, and two of the most popular trails
remain closed still 5 years later.
And the kicker is that neither one of them was in a real
severe burn area of that park. There wasn't that big of an
effect on those by what the fire did. So, do they evaluate the
timeliness of that, and then the superintendent there, do they
evaluate the ability of the superintendent to efficiently
reopen a park like that?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, there would be an evaluation. This will
be something else we can follow up on in terms of status for
you. I know that park--well, you know better in your district--
was really impacted by the Carr Fire, almost everything,
facilities, roads, trails. So, they were replacing facilities
over the last couple of years, and the trails may be in
somewhat of a priority that we can identify for you when they
are going to be completed and/or reopened.
Mr. LaMalfa. I mean, 5 years, though, that is quite a
milestone in the amount of time for having two of the main
trails still not available.
Whiskeytown, during and after COVID, it did have a record
amount of visitation, but they were forced to use only a
handful of the trails. So, we have to do better on that time-
wise. We know when the trails are left unused for years, not
maintained, and they become overgrown, then that just more than
quadruples the cost of the work it takes to re-establish them.
We have a lot of volunteers out there that want to help,
that want to do this, and be part of it. How can we have more
local partnerships and more folks that can be engaged in this,
and not find closed doors or closed gates in order to help?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, we are very fortunate to have nearly a
half million volunteers throughout the NPS system. So, I can
only imagine that that park has those relationships, and are
leveraging them. And this would be something else that we could
check on.
Mr. LaMalfa. But they are finding frustration in not being
allowed to do that timely, again, we are 5 years in.
Mr. Reynolds. Well, that would be something that we would
be happy to check in on and ask why there is a roadblock to
using, we use volunteers a lot, particularly for trail
building, particularly for resource help, perhaps replanting
trees.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, it is a beautiful thing, so we need to
take advantage of it. If there is an issue at the local level,
we need to know and if it is individuals that are somehow
roadblocking it, then we need to change that.
I have to yield back. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I appreciate it.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from
Nevada, Ms. Lee, is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chair, thank you, Ranking Member
Stansbury, and it is nice to see you, Mr. Reynolds, thank you
for your work.
When the President established Avi Kwa Ame National
Monument earlier this year in my district, he directed the
Department of the Interior to evaluate opportunities to locate
a visitor center or other visitor information facilities. He
also specified that the National Park Service and the Bureau of
Land Management shall manage the monument cooperatively, with
NPS retaining primary authority over the portion of the
monument within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area.
Could you please update us on the status of the Park
Service's work with the BLM to prepare an agreement to share
whatever resources are necessary to manage the monument?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you for bringing that up, and we
are so proud to be a part of your district now with this new
monument.
We started off the first thing with a new cooperative
agreement where we invited the tribes to the table. And that
process is underway, as you know. We are having planning
conversations with BLM about locating facilities, about how we
are going to be working together in this kind of partnership
approach.
And I don't have the fine details on deadlines, but we can
easily make a phone call back to you to make sure you are
updated.
Ms. Lee. Yes, that would be great, thank you.
Mr. Reynolds. But you haven't missed anything. We are just
getting everybody's feet on the ground, but particularly
consulting with the tribes because of the very unique nature of
this site, as you know, and leveraging Lake Mead and the other
existing parks around to help us get things up and running.
Ms. Lee. Absolutely. With respect to the visitor center,
other facilities, to what extent is the Park Service involved
in the development, and do you have any idea of potential
location? Is there any discussion of areas where you are
looking at?
Mr. Reynolds. I am not aware of that, and I apologize that
I wouldn't know exactly. But I do know that most of that area
was intended to be managed as wilderness, so there are probably
a few places that they have already pre-identified. BLM will
have a lot of lead on some of that is my understanding, but we
are going to be active participants in the cooperative
selection of that and development of it.
Ms. Lee. I would love a follow-up on the status. That would
be great.
Mr. Reynolds. We will do that.
Ms. Lee. Thank you. Also, I want to talk about the Lake
Mead National Recreation Area. Quite like Mr. Gosar's statement
with Lake Powell, we have witnessed many closures of boat ramps
over the past year.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Ms. Lee. In fact, at this time last year there was only one
remaining boat launch open. And now, given the banner snowpacks
in the West, things have turned around entirely with all of the
boat ramp launches open, at least partially reopened, with the
sole exception of Boulder Harbor.
How long does the Park Service anticipate conditions will
allow these to remain open, do you have any idea?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, this is the hard part, right, with
climate change. We are so fortunate this year that the water
levels are high. We are engaged in a low-water planning process
that your office, I know, has also engaged with us about, as
well as your constituents. And we are also awaiting, I believe,
a Bureau of Reclamation study or EIS on water management that
will help us understand the long-term predictability.
But I will assure you that we are very committed to being
there, to providing recreation, to keeping as many of these as
we can.
The disaster supplemental has been extremely helpful in
getting, as you mentioned, some of the other boat ramps
reopened, and that is what we are planning in the future as
these studies kind of come together, how we prioritize and how
we can design them to basically flow with the water, if you
will, up and down the shore.
Ms. Lee. Yes, with Lake Mead being one of the most visited
National Recreation Areas in the country, it was quite, let's
just say, very disruptive to our economy and our community.
In fact, I am aware that many of your excellent front-line
staff members bore the brunt of many people's frustration, and
were unfairly burdened with that. So, what are you doing to
better manage expectations moving forward, and how can we help
with that to protect your front-line workers?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, first of all, thank you to you and your
staff's help and support, both funding politically, and just in
our communications. But what we can do is keep you at the
table, and the leadership in the community, as well.
We really encourage people to be checking those websites,
which I know sounds like a simple thing, but we are upgrading
our ability to really give much more real-time information. The
park leadership is strengthening, and right now we have a very
good person there that is leading a team that is very focused
on this. So, they will be even more transparent, I guess you
can say, about the day-to-day operations, particularly the way
things change fast at Lake Mead.
Ms. Lee. Absolutely. Well, thank you, and we look forward
to working with you.
And having been through the process of closing, I hope we
can work together to prevent that, should the drought continue
in that manner in the future. Thank you.
Mr. Reynolds. Right. Enjoy this year. Thanks for mentioning
the staff.
Dr. Gosar. We are going to go to the gentleman from
Minnesota, and then we are going to take a little short recess.
They called votes.
So, Mr. Stauber, you are recognized.
Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Ranking
Member Stansbury, for holding this hearing, as well as allowing
me the opportunity to waive on.
Minnesota's 8th Congressional District is home to some of
the most beautiful landscapes you can find in our country. It
is home to two very important properties in the National Park
System, Voyageurs National Park and the Grand Portage National
Monument.
Voyageurs National Park is a crown jewel in our National
Park System that showcases our iconic northern Minnesota
landscapes. Each year thousands enjoy the outdoor recreation
opportunities that exist in every season, and Voyageurs
National Park is also unique within the National Park System,
as it is largely made up of lakes, streams, and wetlands,
rather than land.
Deputy Director Reynolds, first off, thanks for your
support and service to our National Park Systems throughout
your career. I appreciate that. I want to ask you something. To
whom do our national parks belong to?
Mr. Reynolds. The people, right?
Mr. Stauber. Do you believe our national parks and the
National Park System policies that govern these parks should
serve the best interests of the American people?
Mr. Reynolds. Of course.
Mr. Stauber. Do you believe the policies that govern our
national parks should enable or limit access for Americans?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, I think the policies need to follow the
law for what the park was set up to do, and to meet the mission
of the Organic Act, which is to provide for future generations
for enjoyment, right? We have the word ``enjoyment'' in the
Organic Act.
Mr. Stauber. I can't read between the lines. Do you believe
the policies that govern our national parks should enable or
limit access for Americans?
Mr. Reynolds. I think that we should be able to have parks
open and as accessible as possible.
Mr. Stauber. I agree.
Mr. Reynolds. Within the law.
Mr. Stauber. I agree. I have, unfortunately, heard time and
time again from my constituents that the National Park
Service's policies in Voyageurs National Park, along with other
parks around this country, limit their use and enjoyment of
these incredible resources. The policies in place hinder our
way of life in northern Minnesota, and limit our ability to
recreate responsibly in the lands and waters at Voyageurs.
This April, the National Park Service proposed a frozen
lake surface access and use plan for Voyageurs National Park,
which does not have the best interest of my constituents, and
it impedes their access to this sacred public space that they
have enjoyed for decades. I have heard from many constituents
who are angry, upset, and frustrated about the plan as written,
and I stand with the constituents.
The proposed plan, as written, would block how my
constituents have responsibly recreated in the park for many,
many years, limiting access to the park via snowmobiles,
tracked ATVs, or small SUVs outfitted with tracks.
As you just stated, the National Park Service policy should
enable and expand access, not limit it. I fear that this
proposed plan is simply an attempt by this Administration to
keep our public lands off limits. I have a couple of questions.
The public comment period on the frozen use plan at
Voyageurs National Park closed on June 3. When does the
National Park Service plan to finalize its plan?
Mr. Reynolds. I will follow up with a date because I
actually don't know that, just to be honest with you. But I do
know that if it was just June 3, it is a few months for the
staff and the contractor, whatever. So, we will make sure that
Voyagers is telling everybody what their status is.
Mr. Stauber. Fair enough. Thank you.
Mr. Reynolds. But I think you haven't missed anything yet.
Mr. Stauber. I appreciate that. Will a final plan go into
effect before this upcoming winter?
Mr. Reynolds. I will also confirm that. But I would guess
that you are cutting it pretty close, and we would need more
time than that. But we will talk to the park and----
Mr. Stauber. Can you commit that the Park Service plan will
not limit access to my constituents?
Mr. Reynolds. I don't know those particulars. I do know
that there are safety concerns that the park was concerned
about, you know, the weight of certain vehicles, or where the
vehicles could go. But I don't think that there was a
particular stance taken on prevention.
Mr. Stauber. OK. With the last 30 seconds, I respectfully
request that you provide a full response back to this Committee
in writing, as you just alluded to, and I appreciate that.
Our northern Minnesota economy is largely based on outdoor
tourism, and the recreational multi-use of our public lands and
waters at Voyageurs National Park has been an economic driver
for our communities for decades. I will continue to do all that
I can to ensure it remains that way, and access is available
for the folks.
I look forward to receiving your full and complete response
to these questions, and I implore you to respect the desires of
the constituents that I serve, and ensure the finalized frozen
use plan at Voyageurs National Park does not limit our access
to recreate within the park, and it supports our way of life.
I yield back, thank you.
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you for bringing it up.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman, the
Ranking Member from Illinois, Mr. Quigley, is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Quigley. This morning I wasn't on the Committee, and I
am now the acting Ranking Member. What a country.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Quigley. Director, thank you for your service. Let me
ask you a few quick questions. Volunteers are great. They do an
amazing job. But there are limits of what they can do, correct,
working in the parks?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Mr. Quigley. And they have to be managed, as well, with
hired personnel, correct?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, for safety reasons.
Mr. Quigley. So, let's talk just for a minute about the
problems with retaining and obtaining personnel. I have been to
the national park tours that I led in the last 8 years. One of
the things that I would talk to you a lot about is housing,
right? And given the proposed cuts that we are talking about in
appropriation bills, this can only exacerbate the problem.
Can you tell us a little bit about why the housing crunch
among workers is an issue, and how serious a problem it is?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, Congressman, thanks for bringing that
up. I really appreciate it. It is probably one of the No. 1
worries and concerns coming to us from park employees and our
superintendents.
Part of it is what is happening in the nation, there are
general housing shortages everywhere, probably in some of your
communities, as well, or affordability issues if they are on
the market. And that is what we are experiencing. Many of our
parks are in beautiful places that people want to live in, so
the housing shortage and/or affordability is what is impacting
us.
We have about $7 million geared toward housing with some
requests, I think, to bump that up to $14 million in the coming
years to try to really invest in developing either housing or
some agreements with private-sector for housing. That is
something else we are interested in: leasing. We are trying to
reinvest in our housing allotment or convert buildings to
housing as we can. Or, as I mentioned, I am thinking of a
couple of parks that are working on something with the local
community.
Mr. Quigley. But it is an issue for retaining and obtaining
new personnel to do all the things we are talking about,
including access to the parks.
Mr. Reynolds. That is right.
Mr. Quigley. I was in Denali on one of these climate tours
recently, and there is no access to half the park because of a
landslide taking out the only road there. I appreciate and
respect that we are very concerned about access to our national
parks, but the problem up there is the permafrost is melting,
the land is moving much, much faster than it was. We are
talking 15.5 inches a day. No road can withstand that. This is
all because of the aspects and reactions to climate change.
So, if you can, reference what other issues involving
climate change affect access, safety, and the cost of running
the national parks.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, it is getting more complicated. We are
seeing increased fires, which we have all experienced the smoke
from our neighbors to the north this year in Canada. We are
seeing sea level rise or we are seeing storms that are strange,
right? There are heavier rains than we have seen in certain
locations, or windstorms and damage. So, yes, costs are
definitely impacted.
The disaster supplementals, as you showed in the chart, are
going up each year as we deal with either drought in the West,
or an overabundance of water in the East, or a storm impact.
And what you are describing at Pretty Rocks is a geologic
phenomena that we are struggling with.
Mr. Quigley. And a $100 million bridge to get to half the
park.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, very, very expensive, but as you say, it
is a huge park, and there is only one way in and one way out,
as they say.
Mr. Quigley. Sure. And access generally, not talking about
one particular park, you mentioned reasons why there might be
limited access to areas of our national parks. Safety is
certainly one of them. I would imagine that areas that are
being restored, or particularly sensitive and fragile, for lack
of a better word, are protected and limited access, at the very
least, to give them a break and a chance to restore themselves.
And because, as you said, it is not just the weight of some
vehicles, it is the destructive capabilities of those vehicles
in areas that are particularly fragile.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you. And we pride ourselves on
working as hard as we can, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, to
maintain the use and aspect and enjoyment of parks. But we also
equally are supposed to be preserving them, and conserving them
for future generations. So, sometimes management decisions are
made. That is often why certain permits in the backcountry
might limit how many people per day we allow in a certain area,
because they have measured it through science with trampling or
loss of vegetation, things like that.
And some of those things adjust, but superintendents, as a
general rule, try to not block off entire portions of parks.
Mr. Quigley. And issues with access to the parks, just how
much of that do you think is related to shortages in personnel?
Mr. Reynolds. We are managing with what we have, but we are
down about 15 percent in the last numbers I saw from a few
years ago. Since 2011, I think, we are down about 15 percent.
Mr. Quigley. What I am hearing is that there are not people
who can man the front gate in some cases.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, as with many American companies and/or
government agencies, we don't have as many applicants for
certain jobs. There is a lot of competition. We have a
recruitment team now that the Park Service didn't used to have
that is working really hard to find really smart, capable,
diverse people to get back out there.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Reynolds, would you be able to stay for a little while?
Mr. Reynolds. Sure.
Dr. Gosar. We are going to take a quick recess. There are
105 votes left, so I will be back.
Mr. Reynolds. See you soon.
[Recess.]
Dr. Gosar. The Subcommittee will resume. The gentlelady
from New Mexico is recognized for her 5 minutes.
Ms. Stansbury. All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think it is worth noting for the public, since we are
back here, that the reason we had to go recess is actually
because the Majority could not succeed in passing an
appropriations bill, so they just brought a CRA to the floor to
try to wipe out two endangered species, including bats and the
lesser prairie chicken. So, it is unfortunate that this is the
state of our nation and affairs, but here we are, on the last
day of voting before recess.
Mr. Reynolds, we do so appreciate you being here today. I
would like to ask a few questions about climate change, about
the current challenges that the Park Service is facing
generally, about tribal co-management, and about how you are
using the Inflation Reduction Act funds.
But I wonder, sort of big picture, could you talk to us a
little bit about what do you see as some of the biggest
challenges right now that the Park Service is facing, and how
can we here in Congress help address that?
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you for that question.
I mentioned housing, which is in a broader category of one
of our No. 1 priorities. The director's No. 1 priority is a
thriving workforce. So, I think any suggestions that you either
hear from constituents or our employees that come to you, we
would be all ears. We are trying to empower, diversify, provide
housing, as we discussed earlier, before the break, and try to
deal with workloads, which have been something that comes back
in our employee viewpoint surveys.
The other thing that we are very focused on is climate and
the impacts, but also being able to maintain good visitor
experiences as the environments are changing, right? So, it
factors into our GAOA investments. And it is a question, if you
will, in design review, as is accessibility and things like
that.
The other I would say this way. The love and use of our
parks, I am trying to come up with a term that is not
``overcrowding,'' but we have this very strange dilemma in that
many parks are exceeding, as I am sure you are aware, record-
breaking visitation, places like Zion National Park, and yet
there are 426 units in the National Park System now, some of
which are under-utilized. So, we are also very focused on how
to steer the American people to, as you said earlier, the full
American story, which is represented in the System.
So, I think dealing with how to have a quality visitor
experience and take care of the resource in these very heavily-
visited places, how to get folks to really understand their
parks is another one.
Ms. Stansbury. Thank you. Yes, and certainly I know in New
Mexico we struggle with that challenge. There is a double-edged
sword in that having that Federal recognition and protection of
these beautiful and important places brings greater attention
and protection, but also brings, as you stated, over-love of
some of those spaces, and we are certainly struggling with that
in some of ours.
In terms of the challenges that climate change poses
specifically for parks, obviously, this summer the Southwest
has been covered in a heat dome. We are having historic fires
in Canada that have brought smoke descended down across all of
the United States and, of course, the historic drought and
climate and water challenges that Representative Lee talked
about across all of the West.
As the Park Service is thinking about modeling, looking at
the science, and then your mandate, what do you see are the
biggest challenges and opportunities to really address these
challenges going forward?
And what will you need to manage our parks in a time of a
changed climate?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you for that. It, of course,
varies depending on the environment we are talking about. But
if I can think of some high-priority areas, we will need to
make sure we are held accountable, if you will, to design as we
invest in things that will be resilient.
So, we were talking to Representative Lee about her
district's issues, and Representative Gosar's issues at the
Lakes. When we put in a new boat ramp, obviously, really think
ahead with our planning and our science teams and work with our
partners in our communities about what does a resilient dock
system look like to maintain access when it goes up and down?
Because some of our science folks are telling us it is not
necessarily a linear progression with climate change. You might
have one year that is just heavy snow, you might have another
year of heavy drought. So, I think that is something that we
are looking at.
And then, on a resource side of things, we have a lot of
conversations with our science teams about whether and how we
deal with different species, right, that might be falling out
of their range, and how to deal with investing in the right
landscape treatments for fire.
So, those things come to mind as huge challenges right now.
Ms. Stansbury. Thank you. And I know we mentioned it just a
moment ago, but the Inflation Reduction Act, of course, was the
largest investment in climate change accompanying the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the significant downpayment
that we have made in our national parks, alongside, of course,
the LWCF funding that we made permanent a few years ago is
really crucial to the future and climate resilience of these
special places.
So, we appreciate your stewardship.
With that, I yield back.
Dr. Gosar. Thank you. I just warn the gentlelady to be
careful what she asks for. When you start throwing first rocks,
they always come back to bite you. So, just be careful.
The gentleman from Montana is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you, Representative Stansbury, also, for holding this hearing.
The National Park Service across this country has faced
severe overcrowding and visitor experience issues due to the
lack of staff and inadequate management of our parks since the
COVID-19 pandemic first took off in 2020. As the recreational
visits begin to climb back up to pre-COVID numbers, these
issues are becoming more and more glaring.
The current infrastructure in the parks cannot handle this
renewed influx of people, and we need proper management
techniques applied by the parks to make sure that no one's
visitor experience is hampered by the overcrowding. There is
more to the numbers of visitors going to the park. It is about
the experience. And I think that you probably recognize that.
However, at the same time, my office has received many
reports, even from fellow members of the congressional body, of
issues they have had trying to book and register for their
national park visits, especially at Glacier National Park in my
home state. While timed entry is vital to allow my constituents
and tourists to enjoy their time at the parks, the process
should serve as something other than a roadblock or a deterrent
from anyone coming or booking a trip.
I asked the National Park Service and the Deputy Director,
who is here today, to come up with a comprehensive plan that
can effectively deal with these overcrowding problems, while at
the same time providing an easy, streamlined process that
people of all ages and walks of life can understand and use.
This current overcrowding not only has harmful effects on
the visitor experience, but also on the wildlife that calls
these parks home. We have heard reports from Yellowstone where
there are bear sightings in parking lots and other parts. We
have seen wastewater systems collapse due to the over-use,
sending sewage into the rivers and streams where the fish
reside. These issues are all result of overcrowding, and we
must solve this issue while maintaining open and accessible
parks for all who are interested.
I know this is no easy task, but with the help of these
agencies' highly-qualified civil engineers, a practical and
reasonable solution may be found. I look forward to hearing the
testimony of the Deputy Director today, and hope that we can
find some bipartisan solutions to these issues plaguing our
parks today.
Mr. Reynolds, are there any civil engineers currently
working or employed by the Department focusing on lowering the
congestion across the Park System?
Mr. Reynolds. We do have a collection of civil engineers.
They tend to work on our sewer treatment facilities, or our
drainage, and things like that. I don't actually know if there
is a civil engineer working on the overcrowding side, but there
are transportation planner/engineers, there are specialists in
visitor use management, and then there are contractors that we
bring in to do that. So, we are looking at those.
And I know you know the Glacier situation very well, but we
have a lot of expertise, both in-house and out-of-house,
beginning to help us with those planning efforts.
Mr. Rosendale. I work very closely with Superintendent
Sholly down in Yellowstone. He is doing an incredible job down
there, and we were able to get the park opened back up on the
north side, the north entrance, in record time after the floods
last year.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Mr. Rosendale. What I also know is that going down into the
park, two things. No. 1, wastewater systems are really, really
being strained down there. And then No. 2, housing for the
staffing is an incredible challenge.
I know housing around the country is always a big issue,
and the cost of it, and they are building some housing units on
the park, and nice units, so that they actually can attract and
retain the employees that they need.
But I am really concerned with those wastewater projects
and potable water projects. Having a development background
myself, I know that they take a lot of time, and it is very
expensive. So, do you have civil engineers looking specifically
at that?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, absolutely, and I want to thank you very
much for the support through the Great American Outdoors Act.
It has been the big boost that we needed to take on those
treatment plants.
Superintendent Sholly and his team have put forward a lot
of top priorities. There are at least three that I can think of
off the top of my head that have to do with their wastewater
treatment plants: Mammoth, Old Faithful, those areas. And as
you would know as a developer, sir, these are things no one
wants to deal with, but they are some of the most expensive and
some of the most important resource preservation things you can
do, especially with overcrowding. So, they are a top priority.
They are in the funding stream, and they are in development
now.
Mr. Rosendale. And then it has also been my experience
that, if you can start putting some even minor amenities in
different locations around the park, then you are able to draw
some of the visitors to these other areas instead of having
them all concentrated in the typical areas that they have been
accustomed to going to.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, that is true. We have this phenomena of
social media helping to amplify certain places and people show
up. I am just going to say counter that. It is not that, but we
need to add to that, right, to let people understand the other
gems that they can visit.
Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I see my time is expired.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman. I am going to recognize
myself for 5 minutes.
Just last year in June, Secretary Haaland issued Order No.
3407, directing the Department of the Interior agencies to
phase out the procurement, sale, and distribution of single-use
plastics by 2032. What is the current status of the National
Park Service's efforts in developing this plan?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. It is in various
stages. We have started it where we can. Our concessionaires, I
must throw them a compliment, the private sector is stepping
up, discussing things with our business services folks about
how best to change their products to be non-plastic oriented,
recyclable, compostable, things like that.
So, I don't know if I have an exact percentage for you, but
we could follow up and give you that.
Dr. Gosar. That would be great.
Mr. Reynolds. But we are in that early planning and
implementation phases.
Dr. Gosar. How much money did the National Park Service
spend toward the effort through Fiscal Year 2022?
And what is the highest projected spending for Fiscal Year
2023?
Mr. Reynolds. Is that in our overall budget, do you mean?
Dr. Gosar. How much in this plastics recycling?
Mr. Reynolds. Oh, that. I will have to follow up on an
answer for that.
Dr. Gosar. Did you have an estimate for the total cost of
this transition near the 10-year implementation period?
Mr. Reynolds. I am not aware that we have one, but I am
sure we do somewhere, and I can get it to you.
Dr. Gosar. It would be nice to see if we had a policy to
see where we were heading, nice to know where we are going.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Dr. Gosar. As you know, the state of Arizona has 22
national parks, Mr. Reynolds, with an average of over 10
million visitors per year coming to our parks. The economic
impact is over $1 billion per year. One of the things that
visitors enjoy in the parks, and particularly those who are
either short on time or who have physical disabilities at being
able to see the parks, and this is our air tours.
Air tours are a great way to see the parks, especially for
those who have mobility issues. Recently I have been hearing
from the air tour operators on issues about the Park Service.
Specifically, the Service has not been listening to the advice
of the National Parks Overflight Advisory Group. I am
particularly concerned about the upcoming discussions related
to the air tour management plan, and efforts to shut down air
tours completely in some national parks.
Mr. Reynolds, yes or no, can I get a commitment from you to
work with the Committee on this effort?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, we are working with many parks on the
air tour management plans, as you have indicated. We will
continue to work closely with you or whoever can step up
through the public process.
Dr. Gosar. Can I get a yes or no on a commitment for the
Park Service to seek the counsel of the National Parks
Oversight Advisory Board, particularly as it relates to the
economic impact to these gateway communities?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, we will talk to any of the oversight
folks, along with the FAA, who is our prime partner in this.
Dr. Gosar. Thank you very much.
The Grand Canyon currently has $829 million in deferred
maintenance and repairs, which has become a great challenge for
the staff who run the park, and impacts overall visitor
experience. For the second-most visited park in America, with
an outrageous $829 million in deferred maintenance outstanding,
do you agree that it should be a priority for the Park Service
to resolve some of the issues at Grand Canyon Park ASAP?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, we are working very hard. As I mentioned
earlier, along with sewage treatment plants, the Grand Canyon's
problem, as you know well, sir, is the water supply itself. So,
we have obligated a project, thanks to GAOA and rec fee money,
to get that water system fixed, $180 million.
Dr. Gosar. Well, that is one of the things I really wanted
to hit was the water supply on that issue.
I want to come back to the overflight aspect. How receptive
would you be to that board in regards to their plans?
Mr. Reynolds. I am not super familiar with the board and
its makeup, but we would listen, and are trying to be as
transparent as we can in the planning efforts. So, I can't see
why we wouldn't want to work with them.
Dr. Gosar. I think that they have felt like they have come
up with some rather interesting solutions, and yet have not
been heard. So, I thought it would be very interesting to see
how you could work with them, to see how this works. I mean, a
lot of these people only go over the airspace. They are from
somewhere else, they are from Ms. Lee's district, they may have
their outfit over at McCarran Airport, and they fly over there,
and they keep their trash all the way to when they come back to
McCarran. So, I think it would be a great thing.
I am running short of time. Do you want a quick second
round?
Mr. Rosendale. I could ask a couple of questions.
Dr. Gosar. You are recognized for 5 minutes, Mr. Rosendale.
Mr. Rosendale. Mr. Reynolds, what type of feedback are you
receiving, and how are you collecting it in regards to the
staggered attendance through Glacier Park and some of the other
parks?
Mr. Reynolds. As you know, sir, we have started the pilot
programs, and I think Glacier needs to move in next to more
formal planning, which would involve some public involvement.
They have gotten positive comments about the overall
experience they have. As you mentioned in your earlier remarks,
there have been some frustrations about ordering, but the park
has responded to those. I will give you a quick example.
They have been watching the feedback to the point where
they changed on the fly how the tickets were allocated. And
they also have changed the hours so that you can come into
Glacier if you perhaps are on a road trip, and you didn't
realize you needed a reservation, or you don't have online
access, you can come in before 7 or after 3, which, actually,
are some pretty decent times, especially if you are just trying
to go to the Sun Road. So, they are trying very much to work
with people on it.
And, again, it is not about prevention. It is trying to
make these experiences work and to try to give people, I guess,
more certainty that they would also then spend time in the
community.
Mr. Rosendale. It is about the experience, exactly. But
what I am trying to get at is how are you collecting the
information from the visitors.
Mr. Reynolds. Right. We are doing online input, we are
taking any comments that are dropped off at a visitor facility.
We have open comment periods, much like you would see in a
planning or NEPA process.
Mr. Rosendale. And do you have anyone who is taking this
data and organizing it, and establishing some kind of matrix
that says we have a problem with the hours, we have a problem
with the amount of time that we are allowed to spend, we have a
problem with the advance notice that is required? Is somebody
evaluating that, and actually creating a matrix?
Mr. Reynolds. The short answer is yes, absolutely. And we
will be able to share that with the public.
Mr. Rosendale. OK, because that is the only way we are
going to be able to measure results and find out what the
traveler's experiences are like.
Mr. Reynolds. Agreed.
Mr. Rosendale. What other methods are being used to manage,
or stagger attendance times or days around the nation?
I am familiar with Glacier, but are other park systems
using different types of staggering?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, there is a whole series of different
strategies.
Arches National Park in Utah has something similar about
timed entry, whereas before they were just shutting the gate
down once the parking lots and the roads were completely
packed. So, that has been well received, actually, by the Moab
community, as well, because people know they are going in at a
certain time, so they are spending money in the restaurants,
they are hanging out doing other activities in town.
And I mentioned earlier the social media and Web space. We
have a program called Plan Like a Park Ranger, where we try to
encourage people to know a list of things that they can do
outside the park, in the community, as well as other parks in
the zone, which you are rich of in Montana, right?
Mr. Rosendale. Yes, we are.
Mr. Reynolds. There are different places to go.
Mr. Rosendale. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I see my time is expired. I yield back.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman. The Chair of the Full
Committee, Mr. Westerman, is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Gosar, and thank you to
Deputy Director Reynolds for being here today.
National parks are obviously very important to all of us. I
happen to live in Hot Springs National Park, which is a source
of pride in Arkansas. It was the first land ever set aside as
in reserve by the Federal Government.
And I will commend the Park Service employees there for
their work to keep the park healthy, and actually do some
active forest management on the park just to keep the threat of
catastrophic fire down, and to do controlled burns, and to
really be good stewards of the park, as well as the Buffalo
National River, which is in my district, which was the nation's
first Wild and Scenic River. And I know all Members probably in
Congress can talk about parks in their state, or their favorite
places to visit.
But I know in the Wildland Fire Strategic Plan for 2020
through 2024, you state the goal of using active management
techniques to protect National Park Service structures and to
reduce the risk of communities and assets. Could you provide an
update to the Committee on progress made regarding the
deployment of active forest management techniques since the
issuance of the Wildland Fire Strategic Plan?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I think I can offer a couple of things.
We have been able to up the acres that we treat and that
can be, as you know, sir, different kinds of activities. You
can clear brush, have active forest management, controlled
burns, those kinds of things. So, we have gone from a little
over 200,000 acres this year, up from about 170,000. We have
gone up to about 268, I think.
Mr. Westerman. Good. How about your workforce? How much has
it increased under the plan?
Mr. Reynolds. I will follow up and get you a note on that.
We have been doing better. There has been support for wildland
firefighter pay. There have been those kinds of issues. I
haven't heard of any major problems with staffing this year
yet.
Mr. Westerman. Let's talk a little bit about maintenance
budget, and maintenance backlog. For years, I have heard the
Park Service come before the Committee and say, ``If we only
had more money, we could fix all these problems with the
outdated buildings and trails in the parks. If we had more
money, we could hire more employees.'' But over the last few
years, Congress has made historic investments in the Park
System, yet it seems that these problems, if they are
improving, they are not improving very quickly.
And kind of to add insult to injury, the Park Service
requested an increase of 8 percent in discretionary funding for
Fiscal Year 2024.
Can you explain why last year the Park Service reported a
dramatic increase in the deferred maintenance backlog, and what
concrete plans does the Service have to reduce the backlog,
other than just continuing to ask Congress for more money?
Mr. Reynolds. We very, very much appreciate the investments
that have been made between all of the various funding sources,
and they are putting them to very good use as quickly as we
can.
There is at least $1.2 billion obligated right now, a
couple of years into the GAOA work. And the plan is very much
on a public-facing website. We can give you that link, or
constituents that link. And we have plans up through at least
Fiscal Year 2024 that I am aware of, park priorities and
investments that we are going to use this money.
The deferred maintenance number is very difficult to
explain and understand sometimes. There were some very large
changes in how that number was measured as part of the big
increase. But we are hoping to eliminate about $3.6 billion in
deferred maintenance, hopefully, in the next 2 years. These
projects take anywhere from 1 to 5 years to complete, and we
won't change the DM number until that project is fully
completed.
So, I realize that patience is thin, but we are really
working fast, and I think we could make a really good case if
you would welcome us to come up and brief the Committee at some
point about what these plans look like, if we haven't already
done so with your staff.
Mr. Westerman. Yes, I would like to get more information on
that, as well.
In the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, there was a half-
billion dollars given to the Park Service specifically for
hiring additional employees. How many employees have you hired
to date?
Mr. Reynolds. I know that some parks actually have started
the hiring process. We created a hiring team. I can confirm
that number. I don't have it handy with me, but I can just go
to HR and get you that number. I think that it has started, and
it is underway. And the parks are putting proposals in through
their regional offices, and we are approving those as quickly
as we can.
Mr. Westerman. Do you know how much of the $500 million you
have left?
Mr. Reynolds. I don't, but we can let you know that.
Mr. Westerman. And I do appreciate the Park Service's
efforts to work with us on our bipartisan bill on the giant
sequoias in Sequoia National Park. Hopefully, we will get that
bill on the President's desk sooner than later.
And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Reynolds. Thank you.
Dr. Gosar. I thank the gentleman, and I recognize myself
real quick for 5 minutes.
Mr. Reynolds, you have only been in your position as head
of the Congressional and External Affairs for a little over a
year now. You have had every job in the Service, from a ranger
to a regional director to acting director at one point. I read
you are actually a third-generation National Park Service
employee. Tell me, what do you think personally the Service
could do, from your vantage point, to be more efficient and to
reduce wasteful spending?
Mr. Reynolds. I am glad that you are asking a question
about the Park Service growing and changing and being a better
agency. It is something that we talk about and strive for. And
I think, if you have spent time with some of our folks, I know
there are different views of government these days, but the
people that I have known for 38 years, there are always a
couple, but most of them, of the 20,000, 19,998 of them are
some of the most dedicated people possible.
I think one of the things we can do is very much help the
employee's life, be invested in and to be appreciated. This is
true of any business that you are running. But I think for a
long time we have asked our folks to do some sacrifices because
they loved the work so much. So, I think that having a very
healthy, diverse, invested, skilled staff and supported and
empowered by good leaders, by an appreciation from Congress is
something that we keep striving to do.
I also think that that will then get to any kind of waste
and fraud issues if you have well-trained, good people running
your system. So, we are really investing in that.
I also think that listening to the American people and
involving them, and continuing to be approached about how these
parks fit their lives is something else that we can do that
helps to be less wasteful, right? Because we are fitting the
bill about what the people want.
Dr. Gosar. Would something like the bison issue on the
Grand Canyon, as you probably know, there were no historical
bison in that area, and these aren't really bison, they are
buffaloes. Some creative programs that you work with the state
of Arizona to allow the culling of that herd, where they could
pay money to an agency like the Arizona Game and Fish so they
could actually take a tag, are those some of the programs you
would be looking for?
Mr. Reynolds. We welcome partnerships where it makes sense,
and where we can legally support something like that.
And I recall those dilemmas. I recall the superintendent
getting engaged with the state, and it seemed to get a lot
better after they all came together.
Dr. Gosar. Well, I think there is room for improvement, and
I think that this is just the start of a dialogue. I thank you
very much for your answers.
I am going to see if the Vice Chair wouldn't mind taking
the Chair. I am going to see if I can catch a flight.
I yield back to the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Collins.
Mr. Collins [presiding]. The Chair will recognize Mr.
LaMalfa for 5 minutes.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Resuming where we were a little while ago, talking about
utilizing volunteers and keeping the trails open, we get a fair
amount of questions up in my area about the status of the
trails when they fall into neglect and you get behind, next
thing you know, you get a memo that says we can't recapture the
trail, it will be too expensive, which is a de facto closure of
the trail. And a lot of people feel like it is done fairly
deliberately because there seems to be more and more exclusion
from Forest Service lands for hiking, hunting, even off-road
vehicles and such.
So, can you disabuse that assumption that folks contact me
about?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes. The good news about the break, sir, is I
was able to look something up with the staff. There are about
75 percent of the trails open, so a quarter of the trails, I
guess, at Whiskeytown are still struggling, probably from
post----
Mr. LaMalfa. Are you talking Whiskeytown there?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, sorry.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK, yes, all right.
Mr. Reynolds. But there should be no on-purpose actions, if
you will, to keep something closed. And there should be an
accountability about why something is closed. Is it a resource
problem? Is it the fire damage? Is it a lack of funding or
safety?
So, we will be happy to follow up with you all and with
that park to find out what might be happening. But there
shouldn't be actions to keep something closed just to keep it
closed without justification.
Mr. LaMalfa. I would hope not. Again, we have a volunteer
force that is just raring to go on that. I know that personally
about Whiskeytown. So, if we can reach that 100 percent open
milestone, that will be really great.
Let me continue here on the issue with concessionaires. So,
parks often are in very remote areas, there are a limited
amount of concessionaires that are either allowed to have the
contract or that take them. So, pretty much you are looking at
monopolies in a lot of these cases here in the park's lands.
So, people, they are reporting that what they are finding
out is that, in order to visit these public lands, it is about
as costly as, approaching even Disneyland they might say. Now,
maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration, but it is getting very
costly for folks because of what the concessionaires seem to be
able to get away with, and which really kind of comes down to
kind of an elitist way of doing business.
And it pushes people to actually go to the Forest Service
and BLM lands, instead of the national parks, which is what
they are set aside for, is that purpose, especially. What is
the quality control that we are looking at for concessionaires
on how they are performing, on what they offer?
And then is the pricing commensurate with normal people,
not like baseball game $12 beers, and stuff like that?
Mr. Reynolds. Right. We have concessions management
specialists. If the park is large enough, there is usually a
concessions division that does the accountability. There are
inspections. And in order for their contract to be either
renewed or continued, these things have to happen.
And we can make those reports available, if there is a
particular problem area that you are hearing about, to talk to
you about what the concessions team is doing.
And yes, prices have gone way up, and there is a constant
conversation with concessionaires with pricing approvals. But
the Park Service does have an opportunity to ask them about
pricing and to regulate that.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Because it hits hard. We heard for a long
time how it is low income. Well, these days, with inflation,
middle-income people are starting to feel like low-income
folks. And these things hit really hard, the price of
everything, the fuel to get there, the meals you might get on a
restaurant along the way, everything is so much higher. So, we
need to find how we can keep the concessionaires being
competitive with what people's perception is.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Mr. LaMalfa. When we are looking also at a massive influx
of international visitors to our parks, they hit Yosemite very
hard, and they are welcome and such, but have you considered a
raised entry pass price for international visitors to help
carry that additional burden, something a little more in line
with that load in order to have American citizens be able to
have a better shot?
Mr. Reynolds. I don't believe we have any consideration of
that at this point.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Maybe that is something you should take
back, and we can talk with you about that, too, if you would.
There is a push for pay increases of 5 percent for Park
Service employees. Do you think that is actually enough, or
such that it will make more employees want to be there? We are
dealing with that with Forest Service, as well.
Mr. Reynolds. I think some pay gap resolution, as I
mentioned earlier, would be very helpful where we can, and of
course----
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Maybe we should look toward housing being
more affordable. That might be incentive.
Mr. Reynolds. Yes.
Mr. LaMalfa. All right, I am being told no, the gentleman
from Georgia. I yield back.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Collins. Mr. Rosendale, 5 minutes.
Mr. Rosendale. I won't need 5.
Mr. Reynolds, I have one last question for you. When we
start talking about the experience at the park, it is also very
critical that you feel safe in that environment.
And Montana just experienced yet another death of a camper
from a grizzly bear attack. The population of grizzlies in
Montana right now far exceed 2,000 between the Yellowstone
population and the greater northern continental divide
population. What additional steps are you taking to protect
visitors as the grizzly bear populations grow, and the
endangered species protections have rendered many of them
completely fearless of humans, and very habituated, causing
danger to the campers?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, I was very sorry to hear about that
tragedy, and we continue, with our bear management folks, with
our rangers, to try to help people understand how to be bear
safe in these environments, and we work with the partners up in
that area, of course, in Montana.
As you know well, it is a whole combination of landowners,
right? The Forest Service, the Park Service.
So, we are working hard to basically keep an education
program going with the visiting public, but also to manage
these bears if they do become habituated or they are in town
and in communities and that kind of thing, removals or whatever
actions need to be taken.
Mr. Rosendale. What kind of actions are you taking with the
visitors? What kind of additional education are you sharing
with them?
Mr. Reynolds. Yes, as far as I know, we still have, for
instance, in the evening, in the campground, you might have a
roving ranger or a volunteer a lot of times that comes around,
and we will talk to people about the hygiene of their camp,
perhaps, or how they are going to store their food that night.
The more we can personally touch people, rather than just
hand them a pamphlet at the entrance gate, the better.
Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Collins. The Chair recognizes Ms. Stansbury for 5
minutes.
Ms. Stansbury. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am just going to
make a brief remark.
I do want to thank you, Deputy Director, for being here
today. I had hoped to take a moment before the Chairman had to
leave for his flight to address a comment that he made directed
at me about a comment that I made.
And one thing I do appreciate is the bipartisanship of my
colleagues who are here, my friendship with all of you, our
professionalism. And we really are a model for the American
people. The behavior that we engage in here on this dais has
impacts and implications for people out there, especially young
people who watch us. So, I just wanted to raise that, and that
I appreciate you all.
I appreciate the comments about bipartisanship, but I do
not appreciate the comments that were made by the former
Chairman that were a bit threatening. So, with that, Mr.
Chairman, I do yield back and thank you again.
Mr. Collins. All right. The Chair will now recognize myself
for maybe 5 minutes.
Mr. Reynolds, these questions are really not coming from
me, they are coming from my chief of staff, who is a big hiker.
So, he enjoys the outdoors, and he makes it a point whenever we
are not here, he is usually somewhere in the woods, hiking. And
he was actually my GC on my campaign, so we had talked about
this a little bit during the campaign. So, I know a little bit
about what he is talking about, just enough to probably mess up
the question how he would want to ask it.
But could you please speak, and you may have addressed this
earlier, can you please speak about the use of public-private
partnerships to address the maintenance backlog facing the
National Park System?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, sure. As you know, Mr. Chair, a lot of
our projects, our maintenance backlog, will be contractors. And
that is probably not what you are asking. But I just wanted to
point out that it is the private sector that basically
implements our construction, building, and the on-the-ground
projects, supervised by us.
In public-private partnerships we have a philanthropic, the
National Park Foundation. We also have hundreds of other
friends, organizations helping most parks nowadays, especially
bigger parks. And we welcome and are trying to be as innovative
as we can, working with those boards and those donors to match
money. So, the Centennial Match process is really helpful with
that, where we can put up 50 percent of the money that they
would raise. Apparently, that is really great for fundraising,
for donors.
So, we work a lot with our philanthropic organizations.
They can do a lot of things, sometimes, quicker and faster for
us, for the American people. And then we can, as part of a
donation, perhaps they can purchase a piece of land for us and
donate it over. So, we do utilize the public-private
partnerships a ton.
We also have the ability through general agreements to work
with somebody, perhaps to share housing, as I mentioned
earlier.
Mr. Collins. How do you use the philanthropic partners with
Great American Outdoors Act projects?
Mr. Reynolds. We are just in the planning stages of a lot
of them. So, we haven't gone all the way, but we ask them a lot
of times to help us add onto a project.
I often joke about it as gunmetal gray if you have ever
seen U.S. Government desks, right? We use the basic investment
money to fix that sewer treatment plant that we were talking to
Congressman Rosendale about, and then the philanthropic
organization adds something that might be a really nice
addition for the visitor experience, and they can fundraise for
it, and sometimes build it with us, or donate something to us
that adds to the experience that we wouldn't be able to build
with public funding.
Mr. Collins. Right. I know my wife and I, we have had a
home in Gatlinburg for years, until recently, and she has been
a Friend of the Smokies forever.
Mr. Reynolds. Great organization.
Mr. Collins. Yes, they always have different projects or
things going on.
What can be done to streamline the approval process for
individuals who would like to, say, repair a picnic table or
trail shelter, for example, in one of the local national parks
they live around?
Mr. Reynolds. Well, we want to try to empower each park
unit to deal with a project of that kind of scale. So, what I
would recommend is the organizations that want to do something
like that, go ask for an appointment with the superintendent,
and talk to them directly about what they are trying to do, and
then they can work with us. We want to welcome, as I said to
Mr. LaMalfa, as much help as we can, and as much as we can
manage.
Mr. Collins. Right. And I think that is pretty much what he
was getting at when we were talking earlier, my chief, I think
he was out hiking and there was a shelter and picnic table, and
there was a local Boy Scout group that actually had wanted to
repair it, but they couldn't get permission to do it.
Mr. Reynolds. Interesting.
Mr. Collins. And it was rather confusing when people were
willing to donate supplies and labor.
Mr. Reynolds. I am happy to look into that particular
subject if it is still burning. But I would guess that somehow
the right connections haven't been made because the parks would
probably welcome that kind of help.
You asked me how we use the philanthropic organizations. We
can insert them into that process right away with perhaps the
Eagle Scout or something, and they can help host it, or help
facilitate it.
Mr. Collins. Right, OK. Well, those are all the questions I
have. I don't think we have anybody else lined up, do we?
OK, I want to thank Mr. Reynolds for his valuable testimony
and the Members for their questions.
The members of the Committee may have some additional
questions for the witness, and we will ask you to respond to
those in writing. Under Committee Rule 3, members of the
Committee must submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5
p.m. on Tuesday, August 1. The hearing record will be held open
for 10 business days for these responses.
If there is no further business, without objection, the
Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:16 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]