[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 4, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 4, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
  NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ENTREPRENEURIAL MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 1994

                                 ______


                               speech of

                           HON. PATSY T. MINK

                               of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, October 3, 1994

  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I cannot vote in favor of H.R. 4533 
today, which includes an increase in entrance fees to our national 
parks. Our country's parks were established for the use and enjoyment 
of all people. To bar those less advantaged in our communities entrance 
to our national parks is a violation of the open-park policy. I realize 
that the National Park Service has to find funds to better meet its 
growing demands for park maintenance and operation; however, the fee 
changes which are before us today are unwise deterrents to public use. 
It converts our park policy to a user-fee base.
  Notwithstanding the fee-per-vehicle cap of $20, the substitution of 
per vehicle fees for per person fees could increase entrance costs by 
three or four times. Especially in Hawaii, this is an abrogation of the 
intent of those who originally donated the land for the parks, which 
was that the public would be granted free and full enjoyment of the 
parks. The Park Service could consider Hawaii Volcanoes National Park 
in my district as a prime park, which may translate to fees of $6 per 
person or $20 per vehicle, where it now is $3 per person or $5 per 
vehicle, whichever is lower. For Haleakala National Park on the island 
of Maui, the legislation could increase park fees to $4 or $5 per 
person or $20 per vehicle; current fees are $2 per person or $4 per 
vehicle. Such fees are proscriptive and will discourage local residents 
from visiting the parks.

  In addition, the legislation before us establishes a new fund in the 
Treasury into which our park fees will go. This National Park Renewal 
Fund is later purportedly to be returned by the Secretary of the 
Interior, without the appropriations process, to park units depending 
on how much these parks collected in a previous fiscal year. I question 
whether or not the new fund will really be able to do this. The Park 
Service already fails to account fully for its current distribution of 
user fees as mandated by current law--a simple formula of 10 percent by 
the Director based on need, 40 percent to all units for operating costs 
and 50 percent to collecting parks based on amounts collected. To 
return the amount of money over and above amounts collected in fiscal 
year 1993 to every single park seems a monumental burden based on the 
Service's current accountability problems.
  Huge park entrance fee increases are not the answer to the needs of 
our parks. Every family of four wishing to enjoy our Nation's prime 
parks could be required to pay $20 in entrance fees. High fees will 
hurt concession operations. And the National Park Renewal Fund is 
plainly a bad idea.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation today. Vote against 
H.R. 4533 because it could cut into the healthy streams of visitors 
into the parks in your district, and deprive many families of access as 
they currently enjoy.

                          ____________________