Previous Entry Share Next Entry
National Parks Suck
You know, this is exactly why I hate the Grand Canyon. It's an absolutely horrid tourist destination, despite the zillions of tourists who go there with the explicit goal to behave like tourists. The place is completely unprepared, understaffed, and underdeveloped for the continual influx. Disney, Marriott, Starwood, and Hilton would absolutely pay top dollar for long-term leases at Yosemite, Yellowstone, and the Grand Canyon...exactly why don't we let them?

  • 1
Yellowstone does a fine job of catering to tourists and not sacrificing the backcountry. The Smokies are dying under the assault of exhaust fumes, though.

Outside most national parks there is a ring of commercialist crap -- ticky-tacky shops, wedding chapels, various other eyesores. Only the park boundary keeps this awfulness out. If that's what you want, then go stay at Gatlinburg or West Yellowstone or someplace like that.

=0_o= Cuz the whole feature of National Parks is the nature?

Idaho has no national parks, but more wilderness than any lower 48 state except California (and the largest wilderness area in the lower 48). It's a mixed blessing, I think. National parks get more federal money for trails and rangers and stuff, but also attract a lot more visitors. In Idaho, it's a whole lot easier to find wilderness empty of people. (I have no desire to go to Yellowstone or Yosemite or the Grand Canyon in the summer. If I wanted to see traffic jams, I'd go to LA.)

Because to start charging for nature would be a further erosion of our humanity. You may feel different however I don't want our nations landmarks branded.

  • 1

Log in

No account? Create an account