National Park week reminds us of the enduring value of our country’s over 400 national parks, and their role in preserving our nation’s beauty, history, and natural heritage. These parks have long been cherished by visitors – over 325 million in 2023 alone. Yet as visits continue to rise, we have seen growing tension between visions of future park management.
“The National Park Service is authorized to fully reinstate 1,000 previously terminated probationary employees at national parks across the country,” read a recent National Parks Conservation Association press release. Directed by a court order, park rangers fired as part of the DOGE effort ended up back on the job. At the same time, many rangers conducted strikes and public demonstrations. One protest featured an American flag draped down the side of El Capitan, not in tribute to the country, but as a distress signal. The flag, placed by protesting NPS workers, flew in response to the layoffs and budget cuts. While visitors expressed mixed reactions to the act, workers defending the move have urged the public to “Think of it as your public lands on strike.” The protest may not be the right answer, but then again, neither was cutting numbers in the park service without taking a closer look at their roles and the impacts of any staffing cuts .
There’s no question that national parks are an essential part of America’s heritage, and supporting them doesn’t mean a blind avoidance of waste, fraud, and abuse. Still, the focus on personnel cuts was an example of every problem looking like a nail to someone holding a hammer – DOGE has been a largely one-note solution to a complex conversation around efficient government spending. Rather than treating every budget line as a threat, then, perhaps there’s room to see improved financial operations as an opportunity for the park service: How can we ensure our parks remain open, well-maintained, and financially sustainable without an ever-expanding federal workforce?
At its core, recent conversations around the parks have revolved around questions of staffing, which has been a key focus of the incoming administration across the federal government. Approximately 55-60% of the Park Service’s budget goes directly to staff salaries, making it an obvious target for budget reductions. Simultaneously, given that staffing constitutes a significant portion of the NPS budget, even minor funding reductions can disproportionately impact personnel. The 1,000-man layoffs recently implemented, combined with 6,000 seasonal staff with offers rescinded due to the hiring freeze, combined represent a significant portion of a park system with only 18,864 full-time staff.
Cutting staff is even more difficult given the growth in park visitation, and asking parks to sustain more National parks in the United States have experienced a significant increase in visitation over the past decade. In 2023, the National Park Service (NPS) reported 325.5 million recreation visits, marking a 4% rise from 2022. At the same time, this surge in visitors has not been matched by a corresponding increase in staffing. Since 2010, while visitation has grown by 16%, NPS staffing has decreased by 13%. This disparity poses challenges in maintaining park facilities, ensuring visitor safety, and preserving natural resources.
If there exists a solution to solve NPS’s budgeting issues without further reducing staff, it might lie at the ticket office more so than the HR department. Approximately 14 million international tourists visit U.S. national parks annually, accounting for more than one-third of all foreign visitors to the country. Implementing a modest surcharge for non-American visitors, whose tax dollars aren’t already supporting the parks system, could be a high-impact way to enhance the National Park Service’s revenue model. It’s an idea championed by the Montana based Property and Environmental Research Center. By their estimates, a $25 fee per international visitor could generate an estimated $330 million, nearly doubling the current recreation fee revenue. This alone would be the equivalent of around 5,000 full-time employees at current averages, more than closing the gap created by recent layoffs.
This approach would align with practices in other countries that charge higher fees to overseas visitors, ensuring that those who enjoy the parks contribute proportionally to their maintenance and preservation.
Parks belong to the American people, not to political movements in either direction. They should be maintained with the same conservative principles that have long guided land stewardship: fiscal responsibility, practical management, and a commitment to preservation. An upside-down flag at Yosemite may be dramatic, but real conservation solutions don’t come from protest—they come from smart policy. Working toward a national park system that is both financially sustainable and environmentally secure requires cooperation, not conflict.
One simple, commonsense step is ensuring that international visitors contribute their fair share to the parks they enjoy. Implementing a modest fee for foreign tourists would generate much-needed revenue without burdening American taxpayers. The best way to honor America’s public lands isn’t to put them on strike—it’s to enact policies that ensure they thrive for generations to come.
Alina Clough is a fellow with ConservAmerica