HikerDeals' Best-of-the-Best Outdoor Gear Deals:


I Vote for Less Technology at National Parks

In “Too much technology at the national parks?Tom Mangan wonders about how more cell phone coverage and automated recordings of National Park tours will impact the Parks’ experience. He figures that it can’t hurt too much, “though I’d insist that any savings in ranger salaries go toward essentials like habitat preservation and trail maintenance.”

Grand Teton reflection by Jay Galvin, FlickrThis isn’t the opinion I had expected from Tom, who somehow hikes almost every weekend and blogs about it all with great trail reviews and pics. Not that I had expected him to be against technology, like he says, “I find it odd to see rants against technology on a blog,” but I would have expected he’d know how the political process treats Parks and their funding. After all, the cost of all the ranger staff in all National Parks is probably lower than the cost of DoHS luggage screeners and x-ray equipment at a single LAX- or JFK-class airport - but those parks staffing costs are still frequent targets of budget cuts proposed in D.C.

Whether it’s cost savings from cutting Parks staff or earnings from leasing land to wireless tower operators, the money saved or made on National Parks operations just goes back into the general budget fund. Once that money is in the general budget fund the National Parks don’t stand much of a chance of seeing much of come back when they’re competing with legitimate national issues like anti-terrorism or social security (… note, I said they’re legitimate issues - but don’t want to get into what side of those issues I or any readers may fall on).

Regardless of where the funding goes, if technology replaces park rangers the National Parks will be drastically changed. Go ahead and add some cell towers, but a much bigger part of the National Parks experience than a view free of camouflaged cell towers is the people who work there and know the area and can tell stories about the backcountry and the legends that grew out of it; all far beyond what’s just on the placards or in the guided tour pamphlet. I think automating those jobs is as good as building roads and driving trams throughout all areas of the National Parks - a sure way to kill the spirit that may turn 1 of 10,000 children into a hiker, backpacker, or even a park ranger.

Since our government doesn’t get compromises very well, especially when money is remotely involved, maybe keeping the cell towers out is the only way to ensure that park rangers don’t go downhill the same way that tech support on the phone, now outsourced to India and China, has.

Photo credit: Jay Galvin on Flickr


   
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 8th, 2006 and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to “I Vote for Less Technology at National Parks”

Eamon O'Byrne Says:

I wholeheartedly agree with Mike on the response to Tom Mangan. What’s worrisome is about Tom’s comments aren’t the points he’s making (they are perfectly reasonable points of view, even if I disagree with them). The Park Service is serious trouble, despite having done all that’s been asked of them in terms of fiscal restraint, cost cutting and efficiencies. What’s at stake is the continued existence of the National Park system as we know it. The problems besetting the Service are almost invisible to the public, and while the debates rage about conservation vs. access, the fact is that the agency which is charged with caring for our environmental and cultural heritage is being bled white.

Park Superintendent’s aren’t talking any more about the best use of the tax payer dollar, they are planning for the catastrophe. They are organizing what’s left of their resources to ensure that there will be some kind of caretaker function, in the hope that someday the voters will wake up to what’s going on, and demand that Congress take action.

August 18th, 2006 at 9:14 am

Mike Says:

Excellent point Eamon and very well put.

I’ll even suggest that the National Park system is entirely in danger, and not just as we know it. Especially since you point out that Park superintendents are “planning for the catastrophe,” the conclusion I draw from your reamrk is that we may lose the entire Park system if they refuse to step away from an idealist view to find other sources of funding.

August 19th, 2006 at 7:45 pm

Leave a Reply