As Election Day approaches, Oregonians and people around the country can see how their members of Congress voted on issues related to national parks.

The National Parks Action Fund's 2024 Congressional Scorecard grades members based on votes, on things like an amendment to cut park funding by 13%.

Don Barry was assistant secretary of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks in the Interior Department under President Bill Clinton, and lives in southern Oregon.

He said the state has an abundance of public lands that are important to residents, and thinks cutting the park service by 13% would be devastating.

"People move to Oregon now not to cut timber and make two-by-fours," said Barry. "They move to Oregon because of the beauty of the natural resources that are here. And so, how Congress votes on the funding for the federal land-managing agencies - the Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service - matters."

Barry said unfortunately his member of Congress, Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, received a failing grade on the scorecard.

Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, R-Happy Valley, received a 'C.' The rest of state's representatives - all Democrats - received 'A's.'

House Republicans proposed national parks cuts in government spending negotiations to decrease the national debt.

Kristen Brengel, executive director of National Parks Action, said people across the country love visiting national parks - and so, it matters what happens to them in Congress.

"If you want to judge how a member of Congress has voted on national parks," said Brengel, "it's sort of similar to making sure the values of this member of Congress line up with your own and your family's."

The scorecard grades were based on other votes as well, including oil and gas development around certain national parks and weakening protections under the Endangered Species Act.

Supporters of public lands will gather in Santa Fe next week to oppose pending legislation that would sell off millions of acres in 11 Western states, including New Mexico.

The Monday afternoon rally is scheduled during this year's Western Governors' Association annual meeting. The event includes U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who backs the legislation - while New Mexico's entire congressional delegation opposes the land-sale provision.

"As written, the bill would put more than 100 million acres of public land up for sale," said Kate Groetziner, communications manager for the Center for Western Priorities, "and it would actually mandate the sale of at least 2 million acres."

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has long advocated for public land sales, arguing only "underused" parcels would be considered. But data from the Wilderness Society show more than 250 million acres could qualify - roughly equivalent to the land mass of California, New York and Texas combined. Only Montana would be excluded from the sales, after Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., carved out an exemption.

The second Trump administration renewed the effort to sell public lands to boost oil and gas production, increase logging and mining, and accommodate data centers for artificial intelligence and computer networks. That messaging was expanded in March, when Burgum announced a task force to explore building "affordable" homes on Western public lands to ease the nation's housing shortage.

Groetzinger said the way it's written now, the bill is a giveaway to private developers and the ultra-wealthy who could build luxury homes near U.S. forest land.

"Some of the lands that will be most at risk are those close to Western towns and cities, the lands where people like to get out after work and recreate," she said. "Another concern we have is that there's no affordability requirement; the text of the bill does not include any requirements that the housing be affordable."

The Interior Department is also considering reversing protections for more than 300,000 acres surrounding New Mexico's historic Chaco Canyon, according to a letter sent to tribal governments last month. The reversal would open the lands under mineral leasing laws.


get more stories like this via email

International tourists visiting U.S. national parks may pay more at the gate starting next year.

Advocates have called it a "common-sense policy" that could raise needed revenue for maintenance. In its 2026 "Budget in Brief," the U.S. Department of the Interior has included a surcharge for the 14 million foreigners who visit America's national parks annually.

A 2023 report from the Property and Environment Research Center found a $25 surcharge would just about double fee revenue to the National Park Service, adding $330 million to its coffers.

Tate Watkins, research fellow at the center, said the revenue could go a long way.

"With a relatively small increase in fees for visitors from abroad, you could raise a really significant amount of revenue that many parks really, really need," Watkins pointed out. "Especially the ones that are bigger, attract more visitors and have seen booms in visitation over recent years."

Watkins noted routine maintenance at Yellowstone, the nation's oldest park, costs about $43 million annually, while the park has a maintenance backlog totaling $1.5 billion. The Interior budget comes as the U.S. Senate's reconciliation bill proposes moves which could hinder park operations, including pulling $267 million in remaining Inflation Reduction Act funding earmarked for the Park Service.

Watkins stressed current park fees make up a small slice of travel budgets for those visiting from outside the country, usually less than 3%.

"When you think of the types of visitors who are able to pay multi-thousands of dollars for a big, often bucket-list trip to some of the incredible sites that we have at our national parks, most wouldn't blink at paying a little bit more, or even potentially a decent amount more," Watkins asserted.

According to the report, it is common practice around the world to charge international visitors more. Torres del Paine National Park in Chilean Patagonia, for example, charges foreigners $55, almost four times the citizens' rate of $14.


get more stories like this via email

California took a big step Tuesday toward the goal of conserving 30% of land and waters by 2030. The Ocean Protection Council adopted a roadmap to decide which protected waters will count toward the goal.

"We're now at 21.9% of coastal waters conserved," said Michael Esgro, the council's senior biodiversity program manager and tribal liaison, "so more than three-quarters of the way to our 30 by 30 goal, here at the halfway point of the initiative. We have another almost 300,000 acres to conserve by 2030."

The Council refined the roadmap over the past year in a series of public workshops and consultations with tribes. The next meeting in September will delve further into the specific criteria for evaluating improvements in biodiversity in protected waters.

Rebecca Schwartz Lesberg, president of a conservation consulting firm, Coastal Policy Solutions, said advocates are pleased that the final draft of the roadmap zeroes in on threats specific to estuaries, where the rivers meet the sea.

"On the open coast, we're worried more about things like fishing and oil and gas extraction and impacts from shipping," she said. "In bays and estuaries, we're more concerned with impairments to water quality from urban runoff and lack of space for marsh migration under sea-level rise."

At Tuesday's hearing, tribal leaders praised the state and tribal cooperation that resulted in the new federal Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. However, Violet Sage Walker, chair of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, said the sanctuary needs more state support if it is to be counted in the 30 x 30 initiative, citing cuts at the federal level.

"I am concerned as national leadership has removed so much of the funding," she said, "so much of the staff and potentially co-management directives from marine sanctuaries and all protected areas."

The roadmap allows for some commercial fishing within the marine sanctuary. Council staff will report back on biodiversity in those waters over the next year.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.


get more stories like this via email