Happy Birthday, National Parks! It was 110 years ago today that President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Park Service Organic Act. The Act established the NPS as an agency in the Department of the Interior.
Its mission: ensure the preservation of America’s incredible natural resources for present and future generations. The “dual mandate” of the Park between preservation and visitation is an ongoing management challenge.
In early August, at his generous invitation, I sat down with RMNP Superintendent Gary Ingram, Public Affairs Specialist Kyle Patterson, and Deputy Superintendent Caleb Waters to discuss more regular and transparent communication between RMNP and Gateway Communities like Estes Park. Joining me were my brothers Brian who owns Bandit’s Bikes on Moraine Avenue, Robert, and David. Trustee Mark Igel of the Estes Park Town Board also joined us.
It was a great conversation. And I can’t thank the Superintendent enough for organizing and making time for it during the busiest part of his year. The conversation was friendly and cordial. Despite my best efforts, I was not able to change the Superintendent’s mind that Timed Entry in RMNP is unnecessary and should be replaced by better solutions used in Parks like Arches or Yosemite.
But after an hour-long conversation, I believe we agreed on three things that could happen before the end of the year. As this impacts all stakeholders in RMNP–including those who have passionate but opposing views on Timed Entry and other matters–I thought I’d share them with you here as we go forward.
First, RMNP will host the first of four quarterly engagement meetings with Gateway Communities in December of this year, probably in Estes Park, and with the assistance of Trustee Igel to find a suitable venue.
These meetings are required by Order 3434 from the Secretary of the Interior in July of 2025. They are organized by the Park, who sets the agenda and determines who is invited. These meetings constitute/require formal engagement with Park stakeholders on ongoing and important management issues, one of which is Timed Entry.
Second, RMNP has volunteered to share with the public the “Monitoring Plan” it promised when making Timed Entry a permanent visitor use management policy.
In a nutshell, this is the data on how Timed Entry is or is not working to achieve the Park’s stated goals. It includes the ‘indicators and thresholds” the Park outlined in its Environmental Assessment for Timed Entry.
It’s the data behind the policy and we all believe the public would benefit from seeing how the program is working–by the numbers–and how it might be improved or replaced.
Third, RMNP volunteered to provide — or look into providing — the Report it sent to the Department of the Interior last year about its level of engagement with Gateway Communities.
This report is required in Section 7 of the Secretary’s order. My understanding is that Order and the Report are, in part, designed to show that on-going Park planning about things like Timed Entry is done in the open (transparently), formally (at meetings which stakeholders have advance notice of), and prior to any recurring or long-term management decisions that affect the Parks and the public (not announced as new or recurring policy but discussed with the public first).
I was greatly reassured by the meeting that the Park is tracking the data which measures Timed Entry’s impacts. I was also reassured that the Park has regular, productive, and informal conversations with civic groups, tourist groups, and elected officials in and around Colorado.
I made the point that the instruction from the Department of the Interior is designed to make this communication more regular, bring it out from behind closed doors, and include the public as a meaningful stakeholder in long-term decisions.
No one wants to add a burdensome layer of process to the already difficult job the Superintendent has. And the Organic Act makes clear that, when in conflict, Park managers must prioritize preservation over visitation. The key phrase there is “when in conflict.” Under the Act, and in practice, making this determination is up to NPS managers.
I understand it was made in good faith, but I disagree with the management decision behind Timed Entry. I believe Timed Entry continues to be an unfair, unnecessary, and undemocratic impairment of the American public’s access to public lands today. But I also take the Superintendent at his word that the Park needs to think ahead about managing future visitation.
RMNP has full discretion over what to put on the agenda for Gateway Community meetings, and whom to invite. One thing I’d like to see discussed: the historical no-show rate of 28% on Timed Entry reservations.
Studies show that on-line reservations promote “digital hoarding — people “bank” reservations in case they might need them, only to end up not using them at all. This results in unused reservations which cannot be re-sold on the same day, which means ordinary Americans are turned away from the Park when there is plenty of room inside.
With a little collaborative thinking and public discussion, this seems like an easy fix, should Timed Entry return in 2027. RMNP is the only Park unit to retain Timed Entry as a Park-wide strategy. The other big parks got rid of it entirely this summer. How that worked, or did not, is also something we could discuss and learn from at the first meeting in December.
Moving forward on the three issues we discussed at our meeting would be a great start. And making future decisions based on data the Park committed itself to providing in earlier documents will ensure the public has confidence the balance between preservation and visitation is being fairly managed.
And in the meantime, Happy Birthday NPS!