Sumayyah Borders

8 May 2025

America’s national parks are being loved to death. As record-breaking crowds flood these iconic landscapes, the aging infrastructure meant to support them is crumbling under the weight. Years of chronic underfunding, staffing cuts, and deferred maintenance within the National Park Service have created a perfect storm: overcrowded trails, deteriorating facilities, rising emergency incidents, and severe environmental degradation. This article examines how the strain of modern tourism, mounted atop a historically neglected budget, is eroding not just trails and roads—but the very promise of national parks as accessible and protected public spaces. Without urgent policy reform and long-term reinvestment, the park system risks collapsing under its own popularity. 

Introduction

National parks, widely regarded as America’s “best idea,” offers millions of people the opportunity to experience the country’s most breathtaking landscapes; yet, as visitation numbers reach record highs, many parks are struggling due to overtourism—the phenomenon where too many people flock to one place at any given time [1]. Excessive visitation in national parks results in crowded trails, overflowing parking lots, and damage to fragile ecosystems—threatening both the visitor experience and the very landscapes these parks were created to protect. At the same time, federal funding and staffing cuts under the Trump administration have made it even more difficult for the National Park Service (NPS) to manage these challenges. With fewer rangers, reduced maintenance funding, and a growing backlog of repairs, many parks are being forced to do more with less. Policymakers must face the reality that without proper intervention, the balance between public access and environmental preservation may be lost. Addressing overtourism through strategic policies and sustainable management will be essential to protecting these national treasures for generations.

The Scope of Overtourism in National Parks

In 2024, the NPS reported a record 331.9 million recreation visits across its various sites, including national parks, monuments, preserves, parkways, and more. National parks alone accounted for 94 million visits, making up approximately 28 percent of the total. For comparison, in 2014, national parks saw 74 million visits out of 292 million total NPS visits, reflecting a significant rise in visitation over the past decade [2]. While part of this trend can be attributed to growing interest in outdoor recreation, many external factors have accelerated the surge. 

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 led to a 25 percent decline in national park visitation, with visits dropping from 91 million in 2019 to 67 million in 2020. In April 2020, national parks saw fewer than one million visits, compared to approximately six million visits during the same period in 2019. Despite widespread park restrictions, a few sites experienced a slight increase or stable visitor numbers between 2019 and 2020. For instance, Indiana Dunes National Park saw an additional 158,000 visitors in 2020, marking a 7 percent increase in visitation, while Cuyahoga Valley National Park in Ohio gained nearly 520,000 visitors, a 23 percent increase from 2019 levels [2]. As travel restrictions and health concerns limited international travel, the pandemic triggered a surge in outdoor recreation, with domestic travelers turning to national parks as a safer, socially distanced alternative to traditional vacations. Many of these visitors were exploring national parks for the first time, and trends continued even as restrictions eased [3]. By 2021, national parks experienced a strong resurgence in visitation, with many surpassing pre-pandemic numbers and recording their highest visitors counts in the past five years [2]. 

At the same time, social media has played a major role in promoting specific parks, trails, and scenic viewpoints. A study conducted by the Georgia Tech School of Economics found that parks with high positive social media exposure—such as Rocky Mountain and Joshua Tree—saw visitation increase by 16 to 22 percent compared to parks with less positive exposure, like Guadalupe Mountains and Voyageurs [4]. Viral videos on platforms such as Instagram and TikTok bring the national park experience to those who may not have the means to visit in person, including people with disabilities and historically marginalized groups. However, not all content promotes safe or responsible practices. In response, the NPS social media policies caution users to be mindful of their posts, stating “Be mindful of what your images portray. Do not promote illegal or unsafe behavior” [5]. Similarly, in 2017, Instagram introduced content advisory warnings for users searching hashtags associated with harmful behavior toward wildlife or the environment [6]. 

To address the impacts of social media-driven tourism, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) enacted a federal law in 2000 requiring permits and fees for commercial filming and still photography in national parks [7]. However, this permit system sparked backlash from influencers and content creators, leading to its reversal by a circuit court in August 2022. More recently, in December 2024, Congress passed the Expanding Public Lands Outdoor Recreation Experiences (EXPLORE) Act, which includes provisions to relax permit restrictions and fees on filming and photography. The act became law in January 2025 [8]. 

The rise in popularity of national parks is not just a story about crowds—it is also a testament to our national commitment to the idea of nature as a public good. From their inception, national parks were envisioned as shared democratic spaces—open not just to the wealthy or adventurous, but to all people. President Theodore Roosevelt, a driving force behind the conservation movement in the early 20th century, believed in the radical notion that the “great natural playgrounds” should be preserved “for the benefit and employment of the people,” not sold, privatized, or limited to an elite few [9].

This philosophy stands in contrast to places like Aspen, Colorado, one of the most visually stunning mountain towns in the country—but one whose natural beauty is largely privatized, commodified, and controlled by wealth. Surrounded by ski resorts, gated communities, and exclusive lodges, access to Aspen’s mountains is filtered through economic barriers that prevent everyday Americans from experiencing the land firsthand. While Aspen is not a national park, it illustrates what can happen when natural beauty is treated as a luxury commodity rather than a public right [10].

Environmental Consequences of Overtourism

Overtourism is causing irreversible damage, from eroding trails and disrupting wildlife to overwhelming waste management systems. These pressures become more pressing when climate change is included into the mix, which is already straining the ability of parks to maintain their ecological integrity. Without intervention, many of America’s most beloved parks face a future of permanent environmental degradation.  

National parks contain some of the most fragile and biodiverse ecosystems in the country, yet many visitors unknowingly cause significant harm to these landscapes. Increased foot traffic has resulted in severe erosion, soil compaction, and the destruction of native plant life. At Wyoming’s Yellowstone, one of the country’s most popular national parks, visitors frequently stray off of designated trailways, throw debris into hot springs, or drive off-road, trampling delicate natural areas. Similarly, Zion National Park in Utah has seen extreme trail erosion on its Angels Landing trail due to overuse, requiring costly repairs and maintenance. At both Arches and Bryce Canyon, two other popular parks in Utah, tourists climbing on fragile rock formations have accelerated natural erosion, compromising the longevity of these landmarks [11].

Overtourism has also escalated conflicts between humans and wildlife. Known for its iconic bison herds, Yellowstone has seen an increase in human-wildlife interactions due to the park’s growing popularity. Bison, which can weigh over a ton and exhibit unpredictable behavior, are more likely to charge when they feel threatened. For example, in June 2024, an 83-year-old woman from South Carolina was gored by a bison that was “defending its space” [12]. These interactions often lead to tragic outcomes for the animals as well, with some bison being euthanized after becoming too accustomed to human presence, posing a risk to public safety. In 2023, a man was charged after he rescued a newborn bison calf from a river and moved it into a parking area. The calf was later euthanized because it had been rejected by its herd and posed a hazard to visitors [13]. Wyoming’s other national park, Grand Teton, is home to a prominent grizzly bear population and has also experienced its own share of human-wildlife conflict. The park’s famous Grizzly 399, the oldest known reproducing female grizzly in the Yellowstone ecosystem, was a beloved figure among tourists, biologists, and wildlife photographers. She was frequently seen with her cubs near roadways. However, in 2021, Grizzly 399 was struck and killed by a vehicle, making her the second grizzly to be hit that year. On average, about three grizzlies are killed annually by vehicle collisions, with 51 killed since 2009 [14]. 

Infrastructure Strain

The rapid increase in visitation to U.S. national parks has far outpaced the ability of their infrastructure to accommodate the crowds. Built primarily in the mid-20th century, the roads, parking lots, restrooms, and visitor centers in many parks were never designed to serve the tens of millions of people who now arrive each year. The result is a growing mismatch between public demand and physical capacity.

One of the most visible signs of this strain is congestion. Parks like Yosemite and Zion regularly experience miles-long traffic jams, where visitors may spend hours waiting to enter or navigate main roads. At Arches, the situation became so unmanageable that rangers had to begin closing the gate by mid-morning during the summer season—sometimes as early as 8 a.m. and for up to five hours—once parking lots were full and most trails had reached capacity [15].  But beneath the surface of this overcrowding lies a deeper problem: aging and neglected infrastructure. The NPS reports a deferred maintenance backlog of over $22 billion, which includes decaying roads, collapsing bridges, faulty sewage systems, and under-maintained lodging and visitor centers [16]. Additionally, the condition of basic amenities such as restrooms and waste disposal continue to deteriorate. Many older visitor centers lack sufficient space, digital infrastructure, or accessibility upgrades to support today’s diverse and digitally connected travelers. Others have been temporarily shuttered due to disrepair or lack of staff. In many parks, visitor volumes have led to overcrowded facilities and sanitation issues, especially in remote areas where infrastructure is sparse and maintenance resources are stretched thin [15].

One of the clearest examples of overcrowding outpacing infrastructure is Angels Landing in Zion National Park, a harrowing, high-altitude trail that has become a bucket-list destination for visitors despite its risks. Since 2000, at least 13 hikes have fallen to their deaths on this exposed trail, which winds along a narrow rock spine perched over 1,400 feet above the canyon floor. The last half-mile is especially treacherous: hikers must climb up steep, slick cliffs aided only by metal chains drilled into the sandstone. The most dangerous stretch includes a thin ridge with steep cliffs on both sides—there are no guardrails, and not all sections have handrails [17]. 

This is not a trail built for high-volume traffic. Yet in the summer months, hundreds of hikers attempt the route daily, creating congestion on an already dangerous path. Hikers must inch along in both directions, often having to pause on exposed ledges to let others pass. The sheer number of people on the trail heightens the risk of accidents—not just from falls, but also from heat exhaustion, panic, or simply pushing beyond one’s limits. Weather further exaggerates the danger: summer temperatures in Zion routinely top 100 degrees Fahrenheit, and sudden rain or snow make the trail’s rock surfaces perilously slick [17].

Despite these hazards, Angels Landing remained open to all visitors until 2022, when the park finally implemented a permit system to limit daily usage [18]. While a necessary step, the permit system is a reactive solution. In other words, it does nothing to physically upgrade the trail’s infrastructure, provide additional safety installations, or increase emergency response capacity.  

Angels Landing is a prime case study of how overcrowding, underfunding, and outdated infrastructure collide. These challenges are not just inconveniences—they pose real risks to public safety and threaten the sustainability of the National Park System. The national parks may remain iconic in name, but for many visitors, the experience is increasingly defined by delays, decay, and danger.

The Impact of Federal Funding and Staffing Cuts

Under the Trump administration, the NPS has faced significant funding and staffing reductions. In 2019, the proposed budget sought to reduce the DOI’s funding by 14 percent, bringing it down to $12.6 billion. This reduction decreased the NPS appropriation to $2.7 billion, continuing a trend of diminishing financial support [19]. 

Even in 2025, continued budget cuts have caused major operational difficulties across U.S. national parks. On February 14th, over 1,000 probationary park employees were laid off as part of a sweeping reduction of the federal workforce under the Trump administration and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. Additionally, more than 1,700 permanent employees were dismissed, with at least 700 accepting buyouts that allow them to receive salaries and benefits through September. Thousands of seasonal workers were also laid off, though the administration has since reversed its decision to eliminate these positions. The DOI now plans to hire 7,700 temporary workers this year [20]. 

The combined effects of budgetary and staffing reductions has led to noticeable declines in park operations. Visitors are encountering long lines, reduced access to facilities and compromised safety standards. The lack of adequate staffing has hindered the NPS’s ability to maintain cleanliness, conduct habitat restoration, and monitor environmental hazards [21].

A Comparative Perspective: How Other Countries Approach National Park Management

While the United States contends with the consequences of underfunding, a comparative look at other countries provides a valuable perspective of how governments manage public lands under financial pressures. In Canada, for example, the government has taken a more proactive approach. Recent budget recommendations from the Green Budget Coalition include $2.9 billion over five years, followed by $500 million annually for land and freshwater protection. A significant portion of this funding is allocated to Indigenous-led conservation initiatives, which prioritize ecological restoration and sustainable management practices. Additionally, Canada has committed $675 million over five years to establish and maintain new national parks, marine conservation areas, and urban green spaces [21]. Additionally, Parks Canada has maintained a steady workforce. In 2024-25, the agency projects its full-time equivalent employees will rise to 6,014 to support park operations. Though reductions are anticipated in later years as temporary funding programs end, the agency’s emphasis on increasing personnel during peak conservation efforts reflects a clear commitment to environmental stewardship. Unlike the U.S., where layoffs have disrupted park operations, Canada’s investment in both staffing and infrastructure has strengthened its park systems [22]. 

In contrast, the United Kingdom faces funding challenges more closely aligned with those in America. England’s national parks have experienced significant financial strain over the past decade. The Dartmoor National Park Authority has faced a 50 percent real-term funding cut since 2010, forcing it to consider controversial measures such as introducing entry fees and hiking licenses. Without sustainable funding, park authorities are also preparing for staff layoffs and the closure of visitor facilities [23]. This lack of financial support has also compromised conservation efforts. Many parks struggle to restore ecosystems damaged by intensive livestock grazing and water pollution. Only 26 percent of Sites of Special Scientific Interest within England’s national parks are currently classified as being in favorable condition. With environmental degradation accelerating, park authorities warn that without increased government support, further damage will be difficult to reverse [24].

These funding challenges across the U.S. and U.K. point to a broader global trend of declining public investment in natural resources. Governments often prioritize short-term economic interests over long-term environmental protection, especially in the face of budget deficits. The economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic created further challenges for this trend. As government budgets shifted to healthcare and economic recovery during this time, funding for environmental conservation diminished. Simultaneously, domestic tourism surged during lockdowns, placing additional strain on park infrastructure and accelerating the degradation of natural spaces. Moreover, globalization and urban expansion have contributed to the neglect of national parks. As urban development and infrastructure projects compete for government resources, public lands are increasingly deprioritized. The challenges seen in the U.S. and U.K. exemplify how conservation efforts often fall victim to broader economic and political agendas [25]. However, Canada’s model demonstrates that sustained investment and partnerships with Indigenous nations can strengthen park management while preserving ecological integrity. By combining increased funding with Indigenous stewardship and sustainable development programs, Canada has shown that it is possible to protect natural landscapes without sacrificing accessibility or economic opportunity. Perhaps, the U.S. could look to Canada’s approach as a model for reform.

Policy Approaches to Address Overtourism

Addressing the challenges of overtourism and underfunding in U.S. national parks requires a multifaceted approach that balances public access with conservation. In recent years, many solutions have been proposed and, in some cases, implemented.

One strategy to control overcrowding in national parks is the implementation of visitor reservation systems and timed entry quotas, which require visitors to obtain permits for specific time frames during the busy season. For instance, Yosemite introduced a reservation system during peak seasons to combat severe congestion and reduce strain on park resources. In 2024, California Senator Alex Padilla urged the DOI to approve a permanent reservation system, arguing that it would improve visitor experiences and protect fragile ecosystems. Amidst recent budget and staffing cuts, however, the future of Yosemite’s reservation system remains uncertain for 2025 [26]. Currently, eight other national parks have also implemented timed-entry reservation systems, including Acadia, Arches, Glacier, Haleakalā, Mount Rainier, Rocky Mountain, Shenandoah, and Zion [27]. While these measures help regulate visitor flow, they remain controversial among parkgoers who prefer unrestricted access. But given the growing strain on popular national parks, expanding reservations systems may be a necessary step to control crowds. 

Collaborating with Indigenous communities offers a historically informed and ecologically sustainable approach to managing national parks. Many Native tribes have lived on and cared for these lands for thousands of years, and recent co-management initiatives have shown success in preserving ecosystems while respecting Indigenous sovereignty. In 2022, the NPS began expanding co-stewardship agreements with American Indian and Alaska Native tribes, allowing ecological knowledge to inform park management decisions. Currently, the NPS has over 80 co-stewardship agreements, four of which outline co-management of parks [28]. Furthermore, returning lands to Native tribes has led to successful conservation efforts, as traditional stewardship practices often prioritize long-term ecosystem health over short-term tourism profits. For example, in areas where land has been transferred back to Indigenous control, biodiversity levels have remained stable or improved [29].  

Adjusting entrance fees and promoting sustainable tourism are other key strategies to manage overcrowding and preserve the integrity of U.S. national parks. Increasing entrance fees during peak seasons can help regulate visitor numbers and generate additional revenue for park maintenance and conservation efforts. In 2017, the NPS proposed raising entrance fees at 17 highly visited parks to address budget shortfalls and address overtourism, increasing the price from $35 to $70 per private, non-commercial vehicle. Under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, about 80 percent of the fee would go towards the park itself, and the other 20 percent would be spent on projects in other national parks [30]. 

However, fee increases may have implications for accessibility. National parks are popular among middle- and upper-income groups, but increasing prices could disproportionately affect families from low-income backgrounds and marginalized groups, who historically face systemic barriers to nature and outdoor recreation. A 2020 study from the Center for American Progress highlights that Black, Latino, and Indigenous communities have less access to parks and nature-based activities, not just because of financial constraints but also because of historical and systemic exclusion from outdoor spaces. The study found that 74 percent of communities of color and 70 percent of low-income communities in the contiguous U.S. live in nature-deprived areas, compared to 23 percent of white communities and 50 percent of those with moderate or high incomes, respectively. When these two factors are combined, we see that over 76 percent of people who live in low-income communities of color live in nature-deprived places. Without climate mitigation, biodiversity, air and water purification, and other natural benefits, these communities experience higher levels of air pollution and environmental hazards, making them more susceptible to developing immunocompromising illnesses. Furthermore, low-income individuals are 25 percent less likely to live near national parks compared to wealthier individuals, and Black and Latino households are even less likely to engage in outdoor recreation than white households. As entrance fees rise, underrepresented communities may be priced out of enjoying national parks, increasing the nature gap [31]. 

The NPS is working with tourism organizations to develop sustainable tourism practices that support both conservation and equity. Efforts like diversifying the outdoor recreation community and promoting inclusive park programming aim to create environments where all visitors, regardless of race or economic background, feel welcome and engaged in park experiences. Encouraging off-season visits and implementing reservation systems at more parks can help distribute visitation more evenly while also allowing underrepresented communities to experience parks during times when access is more manageable and affordable [32].

There is no single solution to the challenges of overtourism and underfunding in U.S. national parks. The success of these policies depend heavily on public awareness, government support, and responsible tourism practices. If trends continue—with record-breaking crowds, infrastructure strain, and underfunded park operations—the U.S. risks drifting toward a system where pristine environments become less accessible, more degraded, and increasingly reserved for those with the means to bypass cross or access private alternatives. Addressing these issues now is critical to ensuring that America’s national parks remain a treasured resource for future generations.  

---

Special thank you to Dr. Rory Carroll from the Department of Biological Sciences for reviewing this piece and giving valuable feedback.

Image courtesy of the author.

Works Cited

[1] UNWTO. “‘Overtourism’? – Understanding and Managing Urban Tourism Growth beyond Perceptions, Executive Summary.” “Overtourism”? Understanding and Managing Urban Tourism Growth beyond Perceptions, September 17, 2018. https://doi.org/10.18111/9789284420070. 

[2] National Park Service. “Visitor Use Data – Social Science (U.S. National Park Service).” National Park Service, October 17, 2024. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/socialscience/visitor-use-statistics-dashboard.htm. 

[3] Kruczek, Zygmunt, Adam R. Szromek, Miłosz Jodłowski, Katarzyna Gmyrek, and Karolina Nowak. “Visiting National Parks during the COVID-19 Pandemic – an Example of Social Adaptation of Tourists in the Perspective of Creating Social Innovations.” Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 9, no. 2 (June 2023): 100062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100062. 

[4] Wichman, Casey J. “Social Media Influences National Park Visitation.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, no. 15 (April 1, 2024). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2310417121. 

[5] National Park Service. “Social Media – Digital (U.S. National Park Service).” National Park Service, September 11, 2024. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/digital/social-media.htm. 

[6] Instagram. “Protecting Wildlife and Nature from Exploitation.” Instagram.com. Instagram, December 4, 2017. https://about.instagram.com/blog/announcements/protecting-against-harmful-wildlife-and-nature-content. 

[7] U.S. Department of the Interior. “Filming in National Parks.” doi.gov, December 12, 2007. https://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/110/FilmingInNatlParks121207. 

[8] “H.R.6492 – 118th Congress (2023-2024): EXPLORE Act.” ‌Congress.gov, January 4, 2025. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6492/text. 

[9] Roosevelt, Theodore. “Remarks at the Laying of the Cornerstone of the Gateway to Yellowstone National Park in Gardiner, Montana.” Speech, Gardiner, Montana, April 24, 1903. American Presidency Project. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-laying-the-cornerstone-the-gateway-yellowstone-national-park-gardiner-montana?utm_source=chatgpt.com 

[10] Groh, Sarah. “How Aspen’s Private Clubs Drive Exclusivity – History of Skiing & Snowsports.” Emory.edu, April 7, 2022. https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/historyofskiing/2022/04/07/how-aspens-private-clubs-drive-exclusivity/. 

[11] Robbins, Jim. “How a Surge in Visitors Is Overwhelming America’s National Parks.” Yale Environment 360, July 31, 2017. https://e360.yale.edu/features/greenlock-a-visitor-crush-is-overwhelming-americas-national-parks. 

[12] Taylor, Derrick Bryson. “Want to See Bison at Yellowstone? You’re Likely Not Prepared.” The New York Times, June 5, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/05/us/bison-attack-yellowstone-gore-safety.html. 

[13] Levenson, Michael. “Man Pleads Guilty to Moving Bison Calf, Calling It an ‘Act of Compassion.’” The New York Times, June 2, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/02/us/yellowstone-park-bison-calf.html. 

[14] Gruver, Mead. “Grand Teton Grizzly Bear No. 399 That Delighted Visitors for Decades Is Killed by Vehicle in Wyoming.” AP News, October 23, 2024. https://apnews.com/article/famous-grizzly-399-killed-grand-teton-wyoming-3e13c4b5234926cbd799dbb3db1ffac8. 

[15] Siegler, Kirk. “An Explosion in Visitors Is Threatening the Very Things National Parks Try to Protect.” NPR, July 9, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/07/09/1014208160/national-parks-crowds-litter. 

[16] National Parks Conservation Association. “New Legislation Brings Proposed Chesapeake National Recreation Area One Step Closer to Reality.” National Parks Conservation Association, July 27, 2023. https://www.npca.org/articles/3559-new-legislation-brings-proposed-chesapeake-national-recreation-area-one. 

[17] Visit Utah. “Hiking to Angels Landing.” Visitutah.com, 2025. https://www.visitutah.com/places-to-go/parks-outdoors/zion/outdoor-experiences/angels-landing. 

[18] National Park Service. “Angels Landing Permits & Hiking – Zion National Park (U.S. National Park Service).” Nps.gov, 2019. https://www.nps.gov/zion/planyourvisit/angels-landing-hiking-permits.htm. 

[19] Dolan, Jack. “Amid Staff Cuts and Budget Chaos, More than 700 National Park Employees Take Buyout.” Los Angeles Times, February 26, 2025. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-02-26/more-than-700-national-parks-employees-take-buyout. 

[20] Damon, Anjeanette. “Curious How Trump’s Cost Cutting Could Affect Your National Park Visit? You Might Not Get a Straight Answer.” ProPublica, March 14, 2025. https://www.propublica.org/article/national-parks-staff-cuts-talking-points#:~:text=On%20Feb.%2014%2C%20at%20least,Musk’s%20Department%20of%20Government%20Efficiency. 

[21] Green Budget Coalition. “Delivering on Nature Commitments – Green Budget | Budget Vert.” greenbudget.ca, October 26, 2024. https://greenbudget.ca/recommendations/2025/delivering-on-nature-commitments/delivering-on-nature-commitments/. 

[22] Parks Canada. “Departmental Plan for the Fiscal Year 2024 to 2025.” pc.gc.ca, March 7, 2025. https://www.pc.gc.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/plans/dp/coupdoeil-2024-2025-glance/plan-ministeriel-departmental-plan. 

[23] Humphries, Will. “National Parks May Charge for Entry as Funding Cuts Bite.” thetimes.com. The Times, March 24, 2025. https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/national-parks-may-charge-for-entry-as-funding-cuts-bite-m2w9wkbbg. 

[24] Carrington, Damian. “How National Parks Failed Nature – and How to Fix Them.” The Guardian. The Guardian, September 13, 2024. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/sep/13/how-national-parks-failed-nature-and-how-to-fix-them. 

[25] Miller-Rushing, Abraham J, Nicole Athearn, Tami Blackford, Christy Brigham, Laura Cohen, Rebecca Cole-Will, Todd Edgar, et al. “COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts on Conservation Research, Management, and Public Engagement in US National Parks.” Biological Conservation 257 (March 26, 2021): 109038–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109038. 

[26] Harrell, Ashley. “Calif. Senator Wants Yosemite Reservation System Approved Now.” SFGATE, March 11, 2025. https://www.sfgate.com/california-parks/article/calif-senator-wants-yosemite-reservation-system-20215898.php. 

[27] Averill, Graham. “Timed-Entry Reservations Return to Our National Parks This Year. Here’s the Scoop.” Outside Online, January 6, 2025. https://www.outsideonline.com/adventure-travel/national-parks/national-parks-reservations-2025/. 

[28] National Park Service. “National Park Service Issues New Policy Guidance to Strengthen Tribal Co-Stewardship of National Park Lands and Waters – Office of Communications (U.S. National Park Service).” National Park Service, September 13, 2022. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1207/national-park-service-issues-new-policy-guidance-to-strengthen-tribal-co-stewardship-of-national-park-lands-and-waters.htm. 

[29] Robbins, Jim. “How Returning Lands to Native Tribes Is Helping Protect Nature.” Yale e360, June 3, 2021. https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-returning-lands-to-native-tribes-is-helping-protect-nature. 

[30] National Park Service. “National Park Service Proposes Targeted Fee Increases at Parks to Address Maintenance Backlog 2 – Office of Communications (U.S. National Park Service).” National Park Service, October 24, 2017. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1207/10-24-2017-fee-changes-proposal.htm. 

[31] Rowland-Shea, Jenny, Sahir Doshi, Shanna Edberg, and Robert Fanger. “The Nature Gap.” Center for American Progress, July 21, 2020. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-nature-gap/. 

[32] National Park Service. “Final Tourism Recommendations: A Framework for Managing Tourism in U.S. National Parks”. December 23, 2024. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/Final_Tourism_Recommendations_12-23-24.pdf.