E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe average age of visitors has skyrocketed over the past few decades, and some fear the future of these national treasures could be in jeopardy. NBC's Gabe Gutierrez reports.
By Gabe Gutierrez, NBC News correspondent
ESTES PARK, Colo. -- At Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado, rangers are seeing more than green this spring. They're also noticing a little more gray.
The average visitor to national parks is getting older.
Cyclist John O'Malley, 61, of Summit County, Colo., has enjoyed the trails for almost half a century.
"You do get close to nature," Malley said.
But apparently, not everyone shares that fondness anymore.
Back in 1996, at Death Valley National Park, almost a third of visitors were in their 20s. But in the last few years, that number has dropped to just 11 percent at Yosemite and six percent at Yellowstone, according to a University of Idaho analysis of Park Service attendance figures.
At Rocky Mountain National Park, the average age of visitors has risen to 46.
"Right now, we see a lot of youth not coming to the parks," said Larry Frederick, a park ranger for more than 15 years who has noticed the changing demographics. "I think there a lot of distractions right now for young people."
Frederick said the average age of visitors used to be late 20s and early 30s.
Overall attendance at national parks has dropped only slightly in the last two years. But with fewer young visitors, some conservationists worry about what could happen in the decades to come.
"If we do not do a better job of inviting young people to the national parks and providing the funding to be able to do that the parks will become less relevant," said Tom Kiernan, president of the National Parks Conservation Association.
So the Park Service is mounting a campaign to attract children and young adults -- the Connecting People and Parks program. On a recent Saturday this spring, dozens of kids toured a park outside Washington, D.C.
"They get excited [and] they discover things," said Jon Jarvis, the director of the National Park Service. "For them to know that not only they can come back, but they own this place, this is their park."
The Washington Post / Washington Post/Getty Images
Nearly 400 national parks can be found all across America, and feature breathtaking vistas, rock formations millions of years old, and more.
Back in Colorado, the Schafer family from Cleveland, Ohio, is bucking the trend. Three generations chose to enjoy their family vacation this year at a national park. While they are not part of the Park Service's recent outreach program, they fully support it.
"It's sad to see that the next generation will forget this," Jamie Schafer said, as she looked across a stretch of mountaintops.
She and her husband drove their kids and grandkids all the way from Ohio. Their goal: to leave their family's computers behind and nurture their love of nature for a lifetime.
"You can't capture it on a picture," her 12-year-old son, Tobin, said. "You have to be there to see it."
Leave a Comment:
Thank God, the parks already are too crowded. Stay home and play video games, kids.
Gee, encourage more couch potatoes. :-(
No cell coverage, no Wi-Fi and no Internet connection means a no go for most people these days. It is better inside anyway. Who wants to sweat outside when one can watch TV in the A/C while simultaneously texting their friends, reading the news, playing Words With Friends and managing their Fantasy Baseball rosters?
Did it not occur to anyone that with the economy in such sorry condition, young people have less money to spend on travel? My ex-husband and I saved our vacation time for two years so that we could take a six week vacation to see the major national parks when we were in our mid-20s. It took us over two years to save enough money for the trip, and could then afford to go only if we did a lot of camping rather than staying in motels and ate a lot of value meals.
Once young people mature enough that they don't have to be on thei cell phones 24/7, they will develop an appreciation for other activities, such as visiting the parks.
Let us not forget how dirty the place it. I mean its just full of things that are covered in germs. If you touch one you might get sick or worse. Heaven forbid we get a little dirty. Now where is my hand sanitizer, I feel dirty just thinking about it.
These are the kids WE raised... at least part of the blame is on us. Money is definitely a factor, just like preoccupation with technology.
As for the monetary side of this, they can afford to have the latest iphone/cell phone with 4G and unlimited data, but they can't afford to visit the park. Sounds more like a priority issue, must have latest electronic gadget but can't do anything remotely educational.
I actually think this is pretty serious. Kids that regularly interact with nature are completely different than those whose daily activity is jam-packed with some sort of media. The latter seem completely incapable of being alone with nature and their thoughts.
Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods" is a must read for any parent or teacher
We can laugh and poke fun at younger generations all we want but the fact is that we are raising a generation of youth who are growing in to an adulthood devoid of vacations away from home. With so little money flowing to this demographic is it any surprise they choose to stay home when they have time off? If they have time off at all?
Youth today are some of the most environmentally conscious people out there. They wouldn't just suddenly start ignoring it unless there is another reason: getting to that environment is expensive
ding ding ding, we have a winner.
National Parks are expensive, especially when one factors in transportation to get to them (as they're generally far removed from 'civilization'), and young people just can't generally afford it anymore.
to be fair, and Iphone these days costs far LESS than a trip to a National Park (again, when factoring in transportation) and lasts for years, not a single weekend.
Personally, I absolutely LOVED Yosemite national park and would recommend everyone get a chance to hike the falls (note, Vernal falls/mist trail is far nicer than Yosemite falls), but it's (a) not for everybody, and (b) expensive.
You've got to expose kids to things like this when they're young or they won't appreciate it later. When was the last time you took your kid hiking, biking, canoeing, or geocaching? But you bought him a computer, right?
Parents today demand a bland, safe, frustration-free existence for their children, who are treated like little nobility and are raised to be...what, exactly?
And remember the stupid mother on the news who posed her little kids against a fence with huge gaps in it on the edge of a cliff, then ranted about how "angry at the national parks" she was when one of the kids fell through that gap and almost went off the cliff? Nice publicity for our national parks system, mom, where kids have been going for decades without killing themselves! Why didn't you act like a parent and not stand them against an old fence with gaps?
Parents today are angry at everything and everyone, and instill paranoia in each other.
Well, instead of being shallow, self-centered, and wimpy, one could experience all that nature offers and perhaps gain an appreciation for the environment by visiting our national parks. So many seem to think our environment should be open to the highest bidder to pollute and exploit at will.
I noticed your haloed Ron Paul avatar. Perhaps if more young Ron Paul followers were to open their mind to new experiences, like state parks, perspiration, and the outdoors, maybe they too would understand why the vast majority of us think anti-EPA Ron Paul is a flake. The EPA was formed for a reason and I'm old enough to remember those reasons. Nothing has changed to make the EPA any less necessary. Corporations are still just as greedy and self-serving as ever, perhaps more.
gator:
Its not money, its that family priorities are whacked! I teach High school, and most of my students come from low income homes, yet they all have nice phones, Ipods, expensive shoes and clothing.
I took my kids hiking, kayaking, sailing, skiing, you name it. And they were raised in the country. All of them love nature and deeply care about it. But free time and money are in short supply. Besides, we vacation almost always on the beach.
young people don't have jobs they can depend upon, don't have benefits that they can afford, and they have very little left over for a road trip with $4 gas. Add in their college loans there cutting out the stuff that just isn't affordable
Dong,
No, they are not!! Talk to anyone who lived through the depression, these kids have no idea what having "very little left over" means.
Frugal; "Youth today are some of the most environmentally conscious people out there."
Bull, they have been taught to be afraid of it. Common sense "environmentally conscious people" are the ones who appreciate it, venture into it (Muir-like). Todays kids have no clue what they are supposedly "environmentally conscious" about, we've taught them that man is evil and needs to stay out of nature.
@onemanvolt
You just don't understand sarcasm do you.
Have you ever been to a National Park? Or are you a "do what I say and not as I do " liberal? Personally I really enjoyed the Grand Canyon. The helicopter tour was tremendous. I also enjoy the fact that I can walk from my house to the Adirondack Park. I know it's not a "National" park but it is beautiful and can fit all of the National Parks within its borders.
It is not technology that is making young people stay away. It is the economy. I am a 20 something year old that would love to go on vacation and enjoy the beauties of America but I cannot afford it. I graduated from college in 2008 and I am still currently looking for a full time job. I am currently working a part time job that works me as full time job. What are you complaining about then Sweetbasil? Well I may be working full time hours but I am not getting full time pay, I am not getting full time benefits and I cannot take my vacation time and get paid as if working full time. So if I did have the money to go to these parks (a dream of mine) I would have to lose 20 hrs and only get paid for what I was hired for, 20 hrs a week. It is not just me. I have many 20-30 something friends that would love the opportunity to visit the National Parks but the economy and the employers are not allowing us. We do not have any extra money to use. I am lucky, at least my employer is giving me 40 hrs, many of my friends are working 2-3 jobs to pay bills and loans. With 2-3 part time jobs when can someone go on vacation? Most part time jobs do not even give vacation time. I just hope that in the next coming years the economy will pick up and I will find that full time job. It is easy to point fingers and I do agree technology is distracting but it is not the main cause. Trust me, many of us 20-30 something’s would like to get off our parents couches and away from their TVs and explore these beautiful national parks. Give us time. Give us Full time work.
Tod,
Calm down a little. Yes, compared to the Great Depression, we all have it pretty good. But there are still a lot of people who cannot afford to take vacations at all. I'm not pitying them and neither was Dong (I think), but that's just the fact. With stagnant salaries, many jobs with no benefits (including vacation time), etc. many people just cannot afford to go to National Parks. Why do you think the horrible portmanteau "staycation" has risen in popularity?
We're not comparing young people's financial problems to those of the Great Depression, we're just attempting to answer the question of why so many young people don't go to National Parks.
Basil; "We do not have any extra money to use"
Again, I gotta call bull!! Cell phones, cable, expensive clothes, eating out. We have been conditioned to think that, what used to be luxury, is now neccesity. Kids will not remember their stuff, they will remember the timethey spent in awe of the wonders of nature.
ham:
I actually think I'm not animated enough. Our youth are a mess, and I beleive that one of the core reasons is this topic. Family priorities are way, way, way out of whack!!
Good point, Tod. It doesn't seem to matter what the family income is. Most was too focused on material possessions and keeping up with the Jones. The rich always want to appear richer.
Tod,
I'm one of the lucky few in my generation to have the means to do this kind of stuff. I was introduced to mountaineering in college, and as a professional with a good job, I've been able to make several trips with my buddies. But it is EXPENSIVE. The gear alone cost me a few thousand, plust climbing permits, airfare, camping permits, and used vacation time (yes that does have a monetary value attached to it), it doesn't suprise me more people my age can't do it.
I just climbed Grand Teton a few weeks back, and it was a fantastic experience. I shared the summit with 3 other young climbers, and you know what the best part about it was? Fat old farts like you couldn't make the climb and spoil our view with your constant whining about us darn kids. Grow up.
By the way, I took the summit pics with my iphone.
Tod - You're right. As a 26 year old who works a full time job (that I've had for almost 6 years) I do spend money on a cell phone bill. Then again, I don't have a house phone, so I do need a cell phone. I go out to eat for dinner a couple times a week with my husband. My clothes are hardly designer or expensive (though I don't shop at Walmart either) Mostly Old Navy which I wouldn't call expensive.
I'd LOVE to travel to National Parks, but I can not afford it. With a house payment, insurance, car payment (nothing extreme, I bought a mid range used car), electric bill, water bill, gas bill, and groceries (I cook the nights we don't go out, because I love to cook) there isn't much left over for traveling.
Oh, and as far as family priorities go, I turn down overtime at work to be home with my husband, because there is nothing more important than spending time with the people you love.
The "youth" aren't a mess, people who think like YOU are. I can show you plenty of "old" people that have the same issue.
Rem; "Fat old farts like you couldn't make the climb and spoil our view with your constant whining about us darn kids"
Typical brain-dead labeling of someone you have no clue about. I'm 52, and in the past 15 years I've done Whitney twice, all the Southern California peaks, mutiple Colorado peaks, (and even the Tetons, though just hiking, not summiting) and spent 10 days hiking throughout the Andes, topping 16k near Salkantay. I don't rock climb, I simply hike and camp and enjoy nature on a budget. If you want to spend loads of money on gear and permits, thats your decision. I do it frugally (my whole Peru trek cost under $1000. So seriously kid; don't say stupid things!
Ris and rem, You are posting in ignorance; do some research and then gimme your blatherings. Richard Louv's "Last Child in the Woods" would be a good start.
"Typical brain-dead labeling of someone you have no clue about"
You mean like what other posters are doing to younger people in the rest of this commentary? Pot, meet kettle...
James beat me to it, but I figured you'd say something like that. Sucks to be grouped in with a stereotype, doesn't it? Here's hoping I never share a summit with you.
I call BS. Sure, maybe when you went to Peru (a decade ago perhaps) it cost less than $1,000 total, but today you'd be hardpressed to even find a flight for less than that.
Atlanta <--> Peru (round-trip) = $850.
Philly <--> Peru (round-trip) = $1,200
Here, try it yourself: http://www.cheapflights.com/flights-to-peru/
Ya know what folks, here's the deal; if you want to speak intelligently about any subject you have to generalize. Those who get their panties in a wad about comments about our youth are taking it personal. If it does'nt apply to you, it does'nt apply to you! So don't get defensive. I am actually calling out parents who make material decisions over nature for their children. Youth are a mess because parents do not prioriitze, it is not a financial issue!
As a kid, I was not allowed in the house (nor were any of my friends) until dinner. We were made to play outside (no cost). We took local trips to camp (cheap) and to National Parks close by.
Again, this is not a financial issue, its priorities!
Drowning: San Diego to Lima $550, treking company $375 8 years ago. Don't know what it costs now, never said I did. Got a point?
Tod - Last Child in the Woods you say? Nah, I prefer reading other kinds of books. I don't really need to hear about how I should go visit a forest in my hometown, seeing as I live in the UP of Michigan and do spend my weeknds traveling around.
You seem to know every place in the world about nature, so you should know what an amazing area it is. Have you ever been?
I think I don't really need any research, but thank you so much for your concern.
Speaking of posting in ignorance, blanket statements about an age group is a wonderful stereotype. And everyone knows stereotypes aren't 100% true.
Tod, I agree. "Last Child in the Woods" is a fantastic book. I think a percentage of kids just don't have much chance to interact with nature to begin with, for a variety of reasons. That book delves into many.
Actually San diego - Lima - Cuzco.
No ris I don't know it. The book is about our future generations, not about you! perhaps you should re-read my post concerning generalizations (very differnent than stereotypes) and taking them personal.
With the depreciation of air fare since the 70's are way more likely to visit the Caribean than we were when I was a kid. Seriously, I don't remember a single kid when I was in school talking about vacationing in Cancun or Jamaica but that is common these days. Combine that with declining number of vacation days available these days thus limiting those 2 week road trips of yesteryear and you have fewer people visiting the national parks.
umm, generally speaking, those that speak intelligently on topics DON'T generalize, again, in general...
again, it's a huge financial issue and has relatively little to do with familial priorities. I've been to three national parks in the last 3 years (volcano, yosemite, and Redwood) and I'm going to the Grand Canyon with my wife next month. Each and every trip costs a pretty penny.
I've seen people post crap like "it costs $20 per day, sheesh, why can't you afford it?" Nevermind that renting a tent in Yosemite costs $48 per night (http://www.yosemite.national-park.com/lodge.htm)...
I admitted that years ago, when you likely went to Peru, you may have been able to do it for less than $1,000. I didn't argue this. What I did argue is that you can no longer do so.
FYI, it's about $1,200 just for the flight today from San Diego to Peru (http://www.cheapflights.com/flights-to-peru/san-diego/)
You have no idea what you're talking about. That's actually the quickest way to make yourself look like a prize idiot.
I would *love* to go visit all these national parks. I went to many when I was a kid, and I was raised with a healthy appreciation for the great outdoors, as were most of my peers. Your stereotypes are just that--stereotypes based off a small percentage of nerdy indoor kids who ruin it for the rest of us. You really don't have a clue.
As a mid-twenties adult, I struggle to just pay my bills--and I don't have many. I don't have a car. I don't have a computer (at home) or the internet or TV. I listen to the radio. I don't have a credit card (I buy things when I can afford them). I buy my clothes used, and I rarely, if ever, eat out. I have my student loans (put MYSELF through college working 3 jobs, no help from mommy or daddy), my cell phone (inexpensive, I pay my share on a family plan), utilities, rent, and groceries. If something unexpected comes up, like a trip to the doctor, it means top ramen for a week. And I have a good job working for a University (it just doesn't pay @!$%#)! I bust my ass year 'round, and when I do get time off, the last thing I can do is afford to go on vacation. Even your trek to Peru for "under $1000" is COMPLETELY unattainable for me and many of my peers.
As a 52 year old, you're clearly out of touch with our generation, and your ignorance means you've made no attempt to even try. WAKE UP. We don't have the same opportunities you did, and probably never will. I'm sure back in "your day", all you had to do was work hard and you'd get a raise and a promotion. NOT THE CASE ANYMORE, my poor friend. It's not laziness that keeps the youth out of parks, as you would love to think, since you clearly love to hate us, I can guarantee you it's lack of funds and lack of time off, reasons 1 & 2 right there. You are a misinformed, unfortunate hypocrite, whining about how entitled kids are these days, while at the same time spouting off that you were able to go on a vacation to Peru for "only $1000", as if that weren't a monumental sum of money for most of us. (Which by the way, I'm calling BS on, since plane tickets to Peru alone are more than $2000 now).
exactly. His posts sound exactly like the "back in my day, we walked uphill to school, both ways, in a blinding snowstorm, on shoes with no soles, and my books cost a nickel."
Same crap the older generations have been saying about younger ones since the dawn of time...
The article is about how "generally speaking" youth are not visiting our National Parks. Are you guys really so dense you cannot see that? I made a general statement concerning parent's priorities and the effect it is having on our youth, and I get some bonehead calling me a "fat old fart". And the rest of you whiners chime in about me personally because I dared to post generally about a general article.
Of course you cannot speak intelligently about a general topic without speaking in generalities (duh?). Your personal experience has no bearing in an article whose whole topic is general . I only shared mine because I was "personally" attacked. Sheesh, people try and use a little common sense.
drowning; your johnny-come-lately comments either reveal your ignorance or the fact you have not read my contentions.
we're not attacking you personally.
We're just shooting down your untested and clearly biased hypotheses that the youth aren't going to national parks because they're spoiled and have poor parental priorities when in fact it's far more likely that the decline in 20-something attendance at national parks has more to do with it costing a small fortune to go to many of them today. And I'm aware of your contention (i.e. "Family priorities are way, way, way out of whack!!"), I just don't think it's correct and many have pointed out it's flaws (i.e., national parks can be very, very expensive vacations).
Thread synopsis:
You: "Kids these days are victims of poor parenting and skewed priorities, they just don't appreciate nature cause they can't get cell-phone service. Family priorities are way, way, way out of whack!!"
Others: "well, to be fair, to go to Yosemite for example, it costs $600 for the flight to Cali (say Dulles to San Fran), a couple hundred $$'s more for transportation to the park, $50 per day to camp, $25 bucks for the park access fee, and this doesn't include food and gear to actually GO hiking. All-in-all, it could cost easily more than $1,000 for someone not already living near Yosemite to go hike there for a few days."
You: "hogwash, kids these days are victims of poor parenting and skewed priorities, they just don't appreciate nature cause they can't get cell-phone service. Family priorities are way, way, way out of whack!! {insert 'back in my day' rant here}"
Others: "uhh..."
Aside from the expense, the idea of nationalistic pride and reverence for our nation's great natural assets has been both degraded by big businesses who want to erode American protection for such resources, and the right-wing nutjobs who think that patriotism and love for national treasures is a concept known and held only by them...thereby hijacking (and often ruining with their ridiculous behavior) the experience from those who wish to see our national monuments and parks.
It's not just younger people. My aunts and uncles (all in their 50's or later) have lost all interest in the national parks. They cite the same reasons I do...none of us want to go to Mount Rushmore and essentially be drenched in the tea party attitudes we've been encountering, and the constant rallies being held in these public places. We're a politically active family, but we have enough respect to set our politics aside in these places for our enjoyment and the enjoyment of others.
I never mentioned "cell phone service" the article did however. I also never mentioned Yosemite or spending any money at all. Outdoor activities don't always take money, it does however take parenting (remember the article is about our youth). I went to Peru when it was cheap, I did not go to Kilamanjaro last year or the year before, because it was too expensive, maybe someday.
Your general premise is that the economy is what is keeping our youth from going to National Parks. There is probably some validity to that. My premise is that our culture is trending away from hands on time spent in nature, and that is not a good thing. I wish (generally speaking) that parents would prioritize more and spend more time with their families away from technology out in nature (local woods, day trips and hikes or national Parks).
This whole argument began with ren "personally" refering to me as a "fat old fart" for a general statement I made. From that point forward your ilke has put words in my mouth (read your post above) making me out to be some out of touch old man who has no clue about our youth. I have been teaching that current youth for 7 years (High School), now that does not make me an expert, but it does give me a great deal of understanding of where they are coming from and the issues parents are going thru.
Give it a rest guys, I'm sure you have fantastic personal stories, but the article is not about you personally, nor were my comments.
really Dustin? Tea partiers are taking over our National Parks? MSNBC posters; a great source of comedic relief.
Well gee, it seems pretty crazy in this argument! Back to the basics, not enough "young" people are using the National Parks... Well, America is AGING, Duh! The Baby-boomers, are pretty much 50 & Older (ok...technically 48 and older) so that is most like the largest number of people traveling! AND they get Sr. Discounts! There is not "Middle Age" discount! I know! I tried! After 30 years in banking, I have little to show for it. Raising kids has gotten VERY expensive! The cost of divorce, and keeping a home afterward, it's not easy! Statistics show we now have more SINGLE adults then ever! Less "pooling" of expenses, and savings! My goal is to take my son to every state of the nation (contiguous, so we can drive, and keep it cheap)... But with gas at $3.75/gallon, it isn't easy to do! I have spent my "vacation" budget in excess gas costs for the last 2 years! Stay-Cation? Day trips is all I can really do now... Went to Valley Forge (National Park) and many state parks, Thank God I live in PA! Went to the New Jersey shore, sat on a free beach in South Jersey; Went to the Delaware River and floated in my own inner-tube (went with friends so we could park at N/S points) for free, saw lots of wildlife and nature! Went to Daniel Boone Farmstead (state park) went to French Creek State Park... There are plenty of opportunities if you want to find them, if you have the time to find a good deal. If you are pressed for time, that is when it costs more money, save time or save money, it is hard to do both! Remember America is "aging" our "average age" is increasing, families are decreasing, so of course the numbers do not match previous decades! Oh! Also went to DC on the cheap! Had a good time, saw lots, but the hotel with the cockroaches had to go! I did spend a little more to get a non-buggy room!
When I was a child my family went camping a lot and I visited quite a few National Parks. I suspect that in those days they were inexpensive or vary nearly free. When I was a single mother with young children I had NO money and could not afford the entry fee to National Parks, but we camped often in National Forests because they were free. (In those days I couldn't even afford to take my kids to a movie because it was too expensive.) I know there was talk about charging to use National Forests several years ago, and I don't know if that ever happened because now I live where there are no National Forests, but one can experience Nature in National Forests and once one has that experience of nature, they are probably more likely to visit National Parks when they do have enough money.
Then give us a break with your personal stories. Which brings me to...
You thinking that $1000=cheap means you clearly have no idea of the reality youth are facing today.
Travel is getting pretty expensive these days, even a cheap motel is 80.00 and gas will kill you. Personally I recommend the National Parks in Utah, they are pretty close together and each one offers something different. My personal favorite is Arches Nat. Park in Moab, and though not a Nat. Park, Monument Valley is pretty cool too.
Old people: "Young people suck, they are ruining our nation!!"
Young people: "Old people suck, they are so out-of-tune with the nation!!"
... If I had a nickle for every time I read something like this...
You're kidding, right? You're not seriously trying to equate a weeks long family vacation to a national park to full blown mountain climbing are you? Talk about being out of touch.
It's just like I own a Trek bicycle. So does Lance Armstrong. The difference is that I'm not a pro cyclist doing something like Tour de France and my bike costs less than 1% of what Lance Armstrong's does. So for me to claim that bicycling is expensive because Lance Armstrong owns a bike that is worth more than some homes in my neighborhood is pure foolishness. If I haven't illustrated this point well enough you may want to seek professional help.
could it possibly have something to do with the fact that baby boomers are older now and still make up a large portion of the active population in America? Every year the average age for anything seems to rise... lifespan, entering retirement, etc... Older people are more active, have more time, and have better health than they did 20 years ago. Not to mention, with the baby boomers where they are, the older population itself has grown in comparison to younger generations. Pretty obvious, but apparently the author of this article didn't find the facts as entertaining as the theory that younger people are just not enjoying the national parks like they did in years past.
I spent two months in the summer of '09 touring the National Parks of the west coast and Rocky Mtns. It was the best vacation I ever had. I slept in a tent the whole time. I can't wait to do it again.
Kids, you better hurry up and take the opportunity to see these National Parks now while you can, because if the Repubs have their way, all of our country's natural beauty will turn into oil fields and uranium mines.
UMGator,......."The rich only want to appear richer ?"..You mean like Romney talking about his wife's two Cadillacs, betting $10,000 or about his close friends who own sports or racing car teams
I have noticed this trend, too. I was recently at Yellowstone. Traffic through this park is bad enough anyway, but making it worse, there was not one single RV going more than 5MPH.
It is almost enough to make a "younger" person want to stay out of the national parks.
Seriously people, when did visiting a National Park turn into a mountain climbing expedition?!
And when did visiting a National Park become somewhere you have to get on an airplane to get there?! There are more National Parks than just Yellowstone, Yosemite, and the Grand Canyon!!
Indeed there are 397 and that's not including National Seashores and National Historical Sites and Monuments. Without researching a bit more, I would venture to say that there is at least one National Treasure on practically everyones own horizon.
Now admittedly fuel prices are still taking a big chunk of change and vacation days are becoming more precious, but still it doesn't have to cost a small fortune to visit a National Park IN YOUR AREA. It might take some preplanning, which should be a snap for the "computer generations". What you do have to have is the inclination in the first place.
Four friends or two couples sharing the costs, sleeping in a tent, hotdogs & beans, make it an adventure or even a 3 day weekend trip.
What can tip the scales is visiting a National Park which has an Entrance Fee of $25. Then you have to aim for the FREE days or head to one without an entrance fee or look into visiting a National (Scenic) Monument or National Seashore instead.
http://www.nps.gov/findapark/feefreeparks.htm
But now we're back to having the inclination in the first place, because where there's a will, there's always a way.
One only has to look out the window to note that there are very few kids even playing outside anymore. Hectic lifestyles, busy schedules, structured activties - we've been raising a generation of kids who think going to the mall is an "expedition".
Heavens you don't have to buy out REI or invest in LLBean to visit a National Park!! A comfortable pair of walking shoes will take you almost everywhere you'd want to go. And there are awesome hikes for every taste, ability & time frame. Not to mention lots of free Ranger programs. Borrow "your parents or your grandparents" tent, sleeping bags, and camping gear. Heck you could even take "one" (or two) along with you ;-) And if they just happen to have a $10 lifetime Senior Pass - guess what - YOU can get in for FREE, too.
'
some of you guys are turds, how is a teen supposed to go to yellowstone if his parents cannot get time off to take him, regardless of what they make? how does a minor control what the parents choose to allow him to spend money on? perhaps they are fine with an iphone because it can be ordered online and delivered and all they have to do is throw a credit card at them instead of taking time away from themselves to take their kids on vacation. the only vacation people 18-30 get to see is a tour in iraq.
oops that should have said 397 INCLUDING National Seashores, etc.
There are indeed only 58 NATIONAL PARKS, but again most National Sites are still NATIONAL TREASURES.
I have to chime in here. I can see this from both sides, because I am 55 and I have 19 & 25 yr old daughters. They don't do nearly the things I did in my 20s. Our country is so much different for them than it was for me 30 years ago. I traveled all over the east coast as a college student. We piled into vans and went to away football games or chartered buses. We jumped into cars and went on road trips to other colleges and universities. these yooung people today can't do that as easily. Rental companies don't want drivers under 25. Gas is too costly for many. They do not have jobs that pay very well. They do not have job security, either. They cannot take vacations as we did because most do not have vacation time and do not make much money either. It is very easy to say "we did it, they can too", but that isn't always true. Young people perhaps choose to do different things with their time than their parents do. What is wrong with that?
I can see that the point of seeing our national forests is big business and too expensive has not been lost on this message board. We went to Yellowstone last year and I was disturbed by the cost of things. We had saved up for this trip for a long time..... 25 bucks right off the bat just to drive in to the place.... per car......and there was a line of cars behind me as far back as the eye could see. I mean.....I sure don't mind paying for playing...but come on!!! 25 bucks??? How many grizzly bears, (of which we saw none btw) can you feed with 25 dollars??? What are they doing sending them to grizzly bear colledge???
We had two nights reserved at the Yellowstone inn. We Had the room reserved a year in advance. My wife got one that faced "Ole Faithful." It cost almost 300 bucks a night for a room with no TV, no wi-fi, no radio, no inter-net at all, a bed hard as a rock, with a coffee maker in the room that staff had forgot to re-supply the coffee fixin's, and no water pressure in the shower. Plus, because of a no-trim policy...."Ole Faithful" was obscurred from view because of a tree that had grown up enough to block the view years ago right in front of our window. The inn itself was a beautiful building.....our one night stay was miserable. We cancelled the second night. I was throwing out money hand over fist in that place.
I saw my one National Park thank you very much. The rest if they're anything like Yellowstone, I'll just wait and catch the next episode of "Our National Treasures" on the travel channel. That's about all I'll be able to afford for the next decade or so. The people taking our money at the gate to drive through the park shouldn't be wearing national park uniforms.....they should be dressed in black and wearing masks!!!!
With gas approaching $4.50 a gallon and most N.P. not really in your backyard, along with kids who can't afford the new 35-40 mpg cars I can see why they aren't driving 1000 miles to see water squirt out of the ground or a waterfall. Besides they have more important things like video games to worry about.
Where are The Kiddies???????? Well, with All the Digital/Electro/Gizmo Ology, these kids do not have time for A Natural Normal Life. When We were kids there was no electro/digital ANYTHING. Read the Newspapapers, Saw my girlfriend, gave her A Rose and A BabyRuth, took her for a ride in my convertible, Then I took her to yellowstone and we toured the place, it was great, really in touch with the Planet and What She Needs. Maybe that is why?? To make room for More/MuchMore then 7Billion people; Oooh So What.. there are NO rain forests, yellowstone got developed out of existence, We got wall to wall people living to age 180.....Eating the Mechanically separated and ReProcessed remnants of those of US who "passed on"....like in the movie soylant green with Charleton Heston and Edward G. Robinson.....Lemme' have Yellowstone ANY day of the Century!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
...the kids don't want to go because there is no cell phone service out there and tents don't come with air conditioning.........
Exactly.
OMG I CANT HAZ FACEBOOK?!?
Actually, Yosemite does have tents for rent with air conditioning. If you can get a room at all, the motels in side are $200+ a night since they are full of foreigners on tour buses. Who wants to stay in a tent.
I fall into the late 20s demographic. The main reason why younger people are not going to national parks is nothing more than simple economics. I love the outdoors but I can't afford to drive halfway across the country with the high price of fuel. Not to mention that all national parks charge admission, plus getting a camp site cost money, and a zillion other things that cost money as well.
When my kids were younger, we took them camping at least once or twice a year. Some of the best memories we have were the disasters resulting from being in a tent during some of the worst storms to hit the area in decades (doesn't it always work out that way?)
Over the years we've also seen meteor showers, a group of 20 wild deer, captured 1000 fireflies, and eaten enough hot dogs, hamburgers, baked beans & grilled corn on the cob to feed an army of boy scouts. I'm sure, as full blown teenagers, neither of my children want to go camping. They are too interested in seeing their friends, talking on the phone and, yes, being on the computer. However, I hope that my wife and I imparted enough love and knowledge of the great outdoors to our children so that they take their children to see beyond the screens in their rooms.
not to mention like a 2 year wait list...
No, Ruken, you can not haz Fasbuks oar Twtitur oar teh PronTuebs. But u can haz lotsa chipmunches and burdees n bbq lotsa cheezburgers in teh campsaits.
I have news for some of you. I live in the Colorado mountains and we've camped all over the place. There are places you can go where you don't have to pay to get in, and you don't have to pay for a camping spot. Its called public lands, and some of these areas are just as beautiful as the state parks. You can find these areas using topo maps that show borders of public lands, and all you have to do is bring your camping gear. These maps even note whether or not camping is allowed. My husband and I never pay a fee to camp in the Rocky Mountains, and we camp often.
I find this story interesting, because whenever my husband and I camp or hike in the Colorado mountains we see young families in the national forests all the time. I have a feeling that young people enjoy being outside in nature, they just don't want to pay the fees associated with national parks. As illustrated above, you don't always have to pay to enjoy being outdoors in the Rocky Mountains. It just depends on where you go.
We'd like to go, but can't afford to go out there!
Dirp- Exactly. We can expose our children to nature and try to make it a positive experience for them when they're young and hope they'll appreciate the experience and "pay it forward" with their own families. I grew up vacationing in National Parks, but we lived in the west with easy access, so investing in an annual pass and camping gear still made for budget vacations .
As has already been pointed out, getting to the parks is time-consuming and expensive for many, and lodging inside the parks isn't cheap either- even tent campsites can be $40/night. But there are cell phone towers!
I am in my early 20's, and am lucky enough to live within a few hours drive of Everglades National Park. I am an annual national park pass holder, and try and camp in the park a few times a year, and get up early to get there before dawn a few more times in the winter for migrating bird photography. I also like to fish in the park. I also like to visit other parks in Florida. I WISH I had the money or time to take a real National Park tour, so does my wife, but we both work full time and are working too hard to take the time off for that kind of trip. Hopefully one day.
As others have mentioned, many campgrounds in big parks are extremely busy, and must be booked months in advance during peak season. I am fortunate to life close enough to wait for off weekends and check on availability and weather conditions the day before I plan on going.
I think one can enjoy technology and equally enjoy leaving it at home, switched off, and bask in the sheer simplicity of nature, it is one of my favorite activities. I would love to be able to do it more.
Smlfry, another good point, from my perspective at least, is that you can usually take your dogs to the National Forests. That is definitely not the case with National Parks; they are profoundly hostile to dogs, although they do have reasons for their various prohibitions.
DrowningGrover,
Seriously a two year wait list -- overexaggerating a bit, huh?!
The National Park service has recently started to address the "scalping" of campsites in popular Parks like Yosemite, but I do believe that their system doesn't take reservations more than a year out!!
AND having to "drive halfway cross country or way out there" to visit a National Park?! Just WHERE do people think a National Park is??
There are 58 of them and at least one in every region. But there are also National Seashores, National Historical Sites, and National (Scenic) Monuments which brings the total to almost 400 NATIONAL TREASURES.
http://www.nps.gov/index.htm
Well, I'm in my early 40's, and we've been to Sequoia NP and Acadia NP. It cost us $20 per night camping. We reserved a few months in advance (I think Yosemite opens its reservations six months out, other parks between five and six months out) but nowhere did I encounter a two year waiting list. We traveled for two years on the same pass by staggering our vacations. The gas cost to get out to the parks from the Midwest was horrendous, but we budgeted for it. We picnicked for lunch every day travelling...
These parks are national treasures. I count myself as a socially progressive liberal and I never had any problems with "tea party types" that someone mentioned in a previous post. I appreciate anyone who appreciates the beauty of these places regardless of politics. But, truthfully, we met more Europeans--especially out west--than Americans of any stripe. People come from all over the world to see what makes America great and unique. It's not our politics any more...it's the unique and beautiful places that we have preserved for posterity.
Hopefully being exposed to these places while they're young will make my kids want to go back when they are adults. That's what happened to me. My kids want to see Yellowstone, but also Bryce Canyon, Grand Tetons and Isle Royale.
No, it's not free to travel to these places, but it's not as expensive as a trip to Disney World, or Europe, or the Caribbean either. Our country is amazing. We should see it as worthy of exploring as the rest of the world.
"It's the economy stupid"
Maybe for the large nationals, it could be, but I've seen state parks in the middle of populationed areas that seem to be in decline as far as the number of people and the age of people. I guess exercise is just for old people anymore.
Can't afford to visit the park or the local hotel, but can afford all the technology and that annual visit to Disney.
Grumpy, you have no idea what you're talking about. Besides technology is very cheap, a new laptop cost less than what I would spend on only gas going to Yellowstone and back.
^this. And the laptop lasts longer to boot!
Phil,
The trip would be money better spent! (and you forgot all the other crazy gizmos, and expensive clothes and amuzement park, and movies. Your argument is seriously flawed; families have whacked priorities, its that simple.
That's exactly what I said.
I love how you presuppose that you're the resident expert on American family priorities...
You may be a nice guy, but in this thread, you're coming off as the bitter old-man yelling at the neighborhood kids to "get off your lawn."
Between Groupon and Living Social, my husband and I have been able to stay at various motels near National Parks, that are within driving distance. Between having a Fit, and staying at inexpensive places, we have gone on several mini-vacations. We also pack most of our own food, so that we don't spend anything there, with the exception when a gift certificate comes with the deal. And, if you go at certain times of the year, you can avoid park fees. We went to Rocky Mountain National Park, and it was the last free week, before the season hit. What was even nicer, was the fact that it was before prime season, and it wasn't crowded.
Another issue could be that most national parks are alcohol free. While I personally do not drink, some people would like to relax around the campfire with a glass of wine, or a cold beer. This is no longer allowed.
Also, Reserve America, which handles most reservations in national parks is horrible! Not only does it cost more to reserve a camping spot through them - their website leaves a lot to be desired, especially for those people who are not very good with computers.
My last laptop was $125 used. It originally was an expensive one and fairly new. I suppose some guy like you would look at it and assume I waste all my money on gadgets. It's the same story with all the other little gizmos that I have which when you add it all up is maybe 300 bucks. It's called shopping for stuff on sale or clearance and buying used. The same strategy also works pretty good with clothing too. But then I guess someone like yourself wouldn't think of that. And I did go to a national park this year, the Grand Canyon. It's obvious by looking at most of the kinds of cars driving into the park that most of those people had plenty of disposable income. And while it was a good experience it was also a costly one. When you work at Wal-Mart even a 20 dollar admission fee really takes a bite out of your budget.
Facts or it didn't happen.
Silly me, of course you are right: Today's families have their priorities all together since you found a laptop for $125 (or maybe it did'nt happen). Does the cable TV, internet and cellphone service come cheap also? Kinda expensive babysitters if you ask me.
Todd, I have been reading your comments up to now and you really do seem like a person of the "older" generation who is resistant to the changing ways of our society. I am in the late 40's demographics and have two teenage sons. Believe me, computers, cell phones, etc are pretty much a need versus just a want these days. Do you realize computer tablets are taking the place of actual hard covered books in schools? My kids use the family computer to research and complete their homework. Yes, we have a set of encyclopedias but they rarely get used because they are so out of date. But the computer is up to the minute and has information that my kids can actually use. As far as cell phones, each member of my family has a basic cell phone to keep in touch with each other. We are an extremely busy family with sports, work, etc, and more than once the cell phone has been a blessing! Besides, try finding a pay phone on any street corner these days.
So what suz. I'm a high school science teacher, of course I know that tablets are replacing books (I'm actually fine with that). Your "need" for cell phones does'nt really jive with all of human history though, not to metion the psychotic materialism we are prone too . My point; Purposefully take the kids out of techno-world once in a while. Let them experience (hands on) the wonders of nature. Research is pretty clear; a child who is regularly exposed to nature is less prone to many of today's learning disabilities.
i think it's a combination of things: People can't travel as easily due to economy, that is true, however, going to a state or national park is easy and cheap! People just don't WANT to be out in nature like they use to. People are too use to getting instant contact with others via internet and texts and in most parks, that is not available. Too bad we don't slow down and smell the roses anymore. we keep our lives 'full' of nonsense we don't need and things that are not important. very sad... Get OUT, HIKE, Exercise, smell the fresh air, enjoy nature!! Pray, meditate, THINK.. it's a beautiful thing!
Most kids can't afford food, clothes, health insurance, etc. and are living with their parents. They're not likely to spend the money for a trip outside the house. As long as they stay indoors mommy and daddy pay for food, clothes, do their laundry, cook their meals, etc. You couldn't get them to leave with a stick of dynamite.
I see a lot of young people in Las Vegas wearing expensive clothes and paying high cover charges. I know several National Forest campsites that you can get for free or under $15.00 per night. They all have a picnic table, a fire ring and outhouse nearby.
but you probably could with a decent paying job, something that is few and far between for young people in this economy...
Or perhaps it's just the opposite: They are living on their own, working hard to pay rent, bills, buy food, etc. and cannot afford gas to drive to such places. This is my problem. I occasionally go to local parks and this and that, however, I cannot afford to get to Yellowstone or Yosemite or wherever because I am on my own, pay my own rent, my own bills and work two jobs. No time and no money to travel.
Hmmmm, maybe it has something to do with all the articles about teens and students not being able to get summer employment. Seeing as the economy we are left with is a train wreck, thanks to the actions of my generations parents, and their kids. At 36 I dont have the money to spit on let alone travel and I went to college and got a degree and I work 60 hours a week, sorry charlie, this is just another symptom of the continued revolution of lowered expectations here in America...
HELLO the reason there are less and less young people in the parks or anywhere is because THEY CANT AFFORD IT. These days parents are both working their butts off to make ends meet. They have no time for such things and if they find the time they cant afford it... PERIOD
There might be declining attendance but also we're talking about the BABY BOOMERS that are still out in full force (50-60 year olds). Thats a HUGE generation. Gen X'ers are working their butts off after the fall of the housing market, the tech bubble and all sorts of great stuff. And the current Gen Y- can't afford trips as they've moved back in with their family.
Exactly, there's an enormous population of baby boomers who have just retired and have money to travel.
Did you mean to say... There are a large number of baby boomers that got laid off from their jobs OR their jobs were "eliminated". They are not enjoying an abundance in wealth. They are "just getting by".
And a visit to any National Park CAN be enjoyed fairly reasonably... depends where you go and when.
And sorry.. but I do not think most of the younger generations have time for nature. They are too busy with all their electronic toys. Too sad for them. But great for the rest of us.
I resent this. I am 25, which I suppose makes me in the "Generation Y" category. I work very hard for what I have, I have a house, which I pay for by myself, pay all my bills by myself, buy food and support myself 100% with no help from anybody. My point here is that I work very hard and do not have time or money to go to a National Park as much as I would love to. I do occasionally go to local area parks inside and just outside of my city. It is just not possible for me to travel to the beautiful National Parks. Simple as that.
Maybe it is the higher cost of admission.
The price of admission is a bargain compared to the price of admission to other events, such as concerts. The higher cost of admission is insignificant compared to the price of gas needed to drive to the parks or the cost of lodging and meals.
Cost of admission??? I bought a year pass for all the parks and I think it was just over $100.
it's $80 per year actually
Kids don't go because parents don't take them. Whatever the reason - legitimate or not, isn't it that simple? My parents didn't have money, but made sure we had plenty of field trips with baloney sandwiches and no expectation of souvenirs, etc. Family time is a dying experience.
Amen to that. Just pay someone else to was the little rug rats.
Considering parks are still cheaper than anything else, you would think people would be more willing to go. But these parents are just as narcissistic as their children and don't want to have to do anything that might cause them to do something for someone else. I didn't necessarily grow up going to parks all the time, but my dad and I did a lot of fishing growing up, both saltwater and freshwater. For a while it seemed like we went fishing every weekend. People need to get outdoors more often. I start to feel like crap when I'm stuck indoors all the time. When I get out and go hiking, biking or fishing I tend to feel better and see things more clearly.
yes, it's been replaced with unpaid (or salaried) OVERTIME...
Older people are doing more things than they ever used to. They are getting out and enjoying life. The young people will figure out as they get older that being outside relieves a lot of stress.
I don't understand why U. S. park service or the media always complaining about the visitors. For a while, the complaint was there are not enough minorities, meaning blacks, visiting U. S. Parks; now it is not enough young people. Have you checked lately how much U. S. Park service charges to stay in Yosemite, grand Canyon etc. not to mention ultra expensive lunch and dinners. You have to have upwards of $250,000 annual income to stay at the Parks. Obama calls these folks super rich and wants to tax them to poverty. IN future years, there will not be enough of those folks, so U S Park service will have to do with super rich Chinese, Japanese, and Europeans.
20 dollars per night means you need to have upwards of 250,000? Wow.
Total B.S., Shyam. Cite your source for that statement. Oh, you can't because it is right out of your head. You are merely trying to politicize this discussion. Besides, why do you care how much the rich are taxed if you are not one of them?
Visiting a national park is not the same as flying to Paris and staying at five-star hotels. You must be visiting national parks that no one else had heard about.
Shyam, you're seriously misinformed. I would suggest you turn OFF FoxNews and ditch your subscription to the New York Post. Rupert Murdoch has seriously skull-bleeped you.
Read the (admittedly somewhat dated) white paper prepared by the National Park Service:
http://www.nps.gov/tourism/ResearchTrendsandDatainfo/gwustudyofinternationalparksandvisitors.pdf
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL TO U.S. NATIONAL PARKS
VOLUME III: IMPACT OF INTERNATIONAL TOUR VISITORS ON THE NATIONAL PARKS
AUGUST 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. This study reports on information collected from a sample of foreign tour operators to estimate the volumes of tour purchasers who visited individual National Parks in 1998 and how much was spent in or around these parks on their behalf.
2. Tour operators from 10 countries representing 881 thousand foreign tour visitors to U.S. National Parks (76 percent of all such visitors) participated in the study. These tour operators generated 2.7 million visits to National Parks in 1998, and 3.5 million visitor-days in them, according to this study.
3. Tour operator expenditures in or around the Parks visited totaled $208 million, for an average of $60 per visit per day.
4. Grand Canyon National Park dominated this activity with about 18 percent of the visits, visitor-days and expenditures in or around the National Parks. Yosemite National Park was second.
5. In all, the study identified measurable foreign tour visitor activity at 43 of the 50 National Parks.
6. The highest average spending per visitor per day was posted for Denali National Park at $131.
7. The United Kingdom tour operators generated the largest number of Park visits at 700 thousand. France was a close second, followed by Germany. The United Kingdom tour operators produced one-quarter of the expenditure in or around National Parks estimated in the study.
8. Foreign tour operators consider scenic beauty and other natural features the most important feature when deciding whether to include and individual National Park in a tour package, followed by visitor safety and security. Preferences differed somewhat among countries.
It cost $300 to $500 to get a room at Yosemite National park, that is if you can get a room. It costs about $100 per person per day for food not to mention airfare and car rental. $20 does not get you anything perhaps breakfast. Tent inside the park costs $70 to $100 per night. It is cheaper to go to Paris even with high Euro than going to any national park in US. I do not believe young people or average people can afford. Taxation, unemployment, low employments are getting the housing market down and it is affecting every thing else including going to the national parks. This is reality, nothing political about. But politics touches everything.
Warren Levine,
Go to National Park Service reservation and find out how much it costs per night to stay inside the park. Government or park service reports are prepared by bureaucrats whose job depends on it. It is fabulously expensive and very poor and minimal service at least at Yosemite and Grand Canyon.
FYI: I am a registered New Jersey Democrat. I am just telling Park Service is screwed up just like the U. S. Govt.
Shyam, I went to the website. I don't need to guess...
http://www.us-parks.com/yosemite-national-park/camping.html
As for hotels and such... I guess if that's what you want but we don't all get what we want. Camping can be done on a budget. That's the bottom line. Sorry if you need everything to get 100% your way. That doesn't mean that it can't be done.
If there weren't so damn many Japanese there in tour buses then more Americans could enjoy our National Parks. You can't see anything for all of them taking pictures in front of you. You can't get a motel room, they're all full of tour bus tourist. Over $200 a night outside Yosemite a night with rush hour traffic inside.
American's can't enjoy what their country offers anymore.
The park service should not allow so many large blocks of rooms to be sold to tour companies. More should be reserved for individual travelers who don't use travel agents or tour companies.
I love the photo on the front page of the website...except that it is Lower Yosemite Falls (California) in the picture. This is not in Rocky Mountain National Park.
Clearly the editors need to visit the parks themselves....
I recognized it as Yosemite, as well. MSNBC has never been very big on editing or checking facts before publishing.
That's because they outsource their editing and proofreading to the freakin' Chinese for two bucks a day. I can't tell you how many times I've criticized their shoddy reporting, writing, and editing (check my comment log on Newsvine. Dozens, maybe hundreds).
Warren - I do the same thing, but we seem to be butting our heads against a brick wall. The vast majority of people who post here after reading (or partially reading) articles don't know when to use "their, there, they're" or 'to, too, two" or "your, you're" etc. Considering the level of education of most of it's readers, I can almost understand why MSNBC doesn't go the extra distance to do a better job. Nevertheless, it's frustrating that the writers can't write.
All the young people are broke. The gas price has trip[led since 1996. We blindly accept and blame ourselves. Stockholm Syndrome of the Soul.
oopss wrong place
If your social network lives in cyberspace, who needs literal space? As long as you've got a power supply and access to a 3G network (or better) you can share monologues with all your "friends" in real time whenever you want, without having to share any space with them. And you can always download HD images of any of the national parks anyway, including places almost no one gets to see because it requires too much effort like hiking and sweating and planning, and maybe even carrying water and food for great distances. And virtual hiking is a lot safer, too. I read about all those people who fell into the waterfall at Yosemite last year; staying home and watching a webcam of the falls involves no such risks.
I didn't see how they collect this data. Perhaps the younger visitors don't fill out survey forms.
I love the outdoors and I'm in my 20s. No cell phone coverage (that's great! no one can bother me), little contact with annoying people (that's also great!). I've lived in the city my whole life and I'm tired of all the people constantly surrounding me. It's like you are locked in a cage with a bunch of rats just scurrying around. I'm moving from Florida to east Tennessee and I love that area. The mountains are far better than beaches and no more cluster**ck. I'd rather live in the woods alone than be surrounded by all these morons in the city.
They found something new to do. It's called the internet.
There is the pass called golden pass for the older. But there is not similar one for the young. No wonder they did not go and they could not go!
That's a good point. The ones who can actually afford it (middle class retired folks) are given essentially a free pass.
You neglect to mention that many of the retired people who visit the parks have worked hard their entire lives and had no time to travel until they reached retirement. Once they hit retirement, many are on fixed income, so don't begrudge retired people a savings of a few dollars. If you are lucky, you will be retired yourself someday.
The annual pass, allowing unlimited access to all National Parks is $80. If one plans to visit more than 4 parks in the upcoming 12 months, it's a bargain. Otherwise admission to each park is $20. Admission fees really aren't the issue-cost of food and lodging within is. Shyam is being disingenious quoting the price for the Aphwanee hotel in Yosemite-it's a hotel well-known for it's 5-star luxury. More reasonable lodging, though never cheap, is available in most of the parks.
The camping equipment is the huge cost factor. I would also like to add.
Camping has a reputation for something people do who are on drugs and drinking.
The older generation would also go camping to have sex with a bunch of different women and wife swap.
Lets not forget the older generations who smoked illegal substances and did LSD at the parks.
And the older generation also does heroine at the parks and thats why hepatitis and liver failure are a big helth problem for them..
Yes what nice girl would want to tell her friends and family she went camping. Sarah palin's daughter lost her virginity camping so underage kids also still go there to have sex and drink beer illegally.
Thats the kind of reputation parks have.
I find it hard to believe all of the so called wonderful older people talking about parks foregt these places are drug infested beer drinking orgy festivals for the retired...We saw what you folks did at woodstock in your youth now all of you have viagra and botox its just disgusting...
Camping is expensive and it is something people do who like to drink and do drugs.
I am glad to here so many seniors value the parks and use the parks because now when they have to make a choice between a ss and medicare increase (to buy more oxycodone and viagra) they might decide to fund the parks ? Since its a fact they use the parks and get senior discounts to do so..
It is the economy! People would rather take trips closer to home. National Parks are great, but the drive and the admission into the park not to mention lodging and food are so expensive. For a senior like me, I do have a 'golden pass' which lets me in free. Doesn't cover food or lodging however.
more like their too busy saving all the whale species of the world, while simulaneously protecting the rain forests of South America, not to forget the spotted owls, baby seals, adult seals, walruses, polar bears "that eat walruses and seals", African elephants, black rhinoceros, white rhinoceros, Africa's wild dogs, and they're especially busy supplying heavy humanitarian aide to help protect the tortured Muslim radicals rotting at GITMO (still there!). they're also pretty busy putting an end the exploitation and development of American's trying to produce her own natural energy resources, while at the same time protecting the people in oppressing governments that eagerly strip America of her wealth and freedoms..
in a nut shell, they're sooooo busy protecting the world, that they simply don't have enough time to enjoy it.
"No it's not, dumbasss"
Yes, it IS the economy and the overall cost of travel.
If so many people were doing those things, those things would have happened by now.
Nice litany of knee-jerk "anti-librul" fantasies, though
I think its high gas prices. I think our society will become less and less mobile as gas prices increase.
The reason why the average visitor is older is because these people have more disposable income to spend on vacations. The cost to bring a family of four to one of the nation's great parks isn't exactly pocket change, so most families take local vacations. There are still plenty of young people enjoying the outdoors, but the cost of travel is just too expensive for many. It has nothing to do with technology.
People can't afford it? Oh please people! I'm sorry that you're having problems with your finances, but the fact is, MOST people aren't. Just ask places like Disney that have raised their prices yet AGAIN with no slowdown in attendance.
The only logical explanation is that today's spoiled little brats just can't put down their addiction to electronic toys and their parent/friends won't make them either.
Well, while they're all busy outfitting their virtual caves, dragons, and wizards, and playing around with their no-strings-attached-ever casual "f**kbuddies," I'm gonna take to Olympic National Park and North Cascades National Park, both within a couple of hours' drive, and enjoy the fact that they're not clogging up the roads and attractions and go commune with nature. I've damn well paid for it with a lifetime of taxes. I might as well enjoy it before future generations drill-baby-drill the crap out of them all.
I resent this, too. I am just going to copy and paste my earlier comment: I am 25, which I suppose makes me in the "Generation Y" category. I work very hard for what I have, I have a house, which I pay for by myself, pay all my bills by myself, buy food and support myself 100% with no help from anybody. My point here is that I work very hard and do not have time or money to go to a National Park as much as I would love to. I do occasionally go to local area parks inside and just outside of my city. It is just not possible for me to travel to the beautiful National Parks. Simple as that, it has nothing at all to do my "electronic toys", I work hard and cannot take the time off work, nor can I afford to travel to a national park.
Young people have to earn a living . No time for trekking through parks . Where we are headed in this economy leisure time will be for the wealthy only .
Just the way Republicans like it!