Commentary: State parks must be kept open | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Opinion

Commentary: State parks must be kept open

The Sacramento Bee

June 15, 2009 12:11 PM

California may have to rewrite its "Official Visitors Guide 2009." It invites people to visit redwoods, sea coast, mountains and historic sites in the most diverse state park system in the world.

But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed eliminating all general fund support for state parks beginning in July 2010. That would result in 223 of 279 state parks closing.

Since the parks charge fees, closing most state parks also would mean losing about $100 million of $125 million a year that state parks currently collect from the public and concession operators.

The Schwarzenegger administration seems to believe that you can simply shut the gates and reopen them "when the budget improves." They're in la-la land. Closed parks will go feral – expect graffiti, fires, illegal camping, dumping and crime.

Further, the Schwarzenegger administration believes that closing parks would not have a significant economic impact statewide, because people will spend their recreational dollars elsewhere. That's true as far as it goes.

But particular communities would suffer disproportionate impact. For example, in Toulumne County, Railtown 1897 accounts for an estimated $15 million in tourism revenue. Closing that park would save the state $300,000 a year, but would devastate local businesses.

In Sacramento, the Downtown Partnership and the Convention and Visitors Bureau believe that closing Sutter's Fort, the State Capitol Museum, the Governor's Mansion, the Stanford Mansion and the State Indian Museum would have a huge impact on tourism.

To read the complete editorial, visit The Sacramento Bee.

Read Next

Opinion

This is not what Vladimir Putin wanted for Christmas

By Markos Kounalakis

December 20, 2018 05:12 PM

Orthodox Christian religious leaders worldwide are weakening an important institution that gave the Russian president outsize power and legitimacy.

KEEP READING

MORE OPINION

Opinion

The solution to the juvenile delinquency problem in our nation’s politics

December 18, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

High-flying U.S. car execs often crash when when they run into foreign laws

December 13, 2018 06:09 PM

Opinion

Putin wants to divide the West. Can Trump thwart his plan?

December 11, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush, Pearl Harbor and America’s other fallen

December 07, 2018 03:42 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush’s secret legacy: his little-known kind gestures to many

December 04, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

Nicaragua’s ‘House of Cards’ stars another corrupt and powerful couple

November 29, 2018 07:50 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service