Natural resources programs hit hard in push for fiscal austerity

The National Park Service has had to absorb more than $300 million in fixed costs over the last six years, including new homeland security requirements, leading to cutbacks on daily operations like visitor services and buying supplies.

Despite broad bipartisan support, programs funded by the Interior-Environmental Protection Agency spending bill, including national parks, are facing cuts for the second year in a row. With major entitlement programs and discretionary programs such as defense, veterans and homeland security off limits for cuts, natural resources programs have emerged as a target for GOP lawmakers seeking to demonstrate fiscal austerity.

In the first week of May, the House Interior-EPA Appropriations Subcommittee is expected to consider a bill coming in close to the White House's $25.4 billion request, which would be a 1.6 percent cut from fiscal 2006. Overall, including construction, maintenance and other accounts, the Park Service request is $2.16 billion, a $100.5 million cut from last year.

The $1.74 billion parks operating request is a $23 million increase from last year, which at 1.4 percent would not cover inflation. Also, 30 percent of that increase would go to automatic, fixed costs such as pay raises and security, meaning of that increase, only 70 percent would accommodate everyday operating costs.

Members in both chambers have written to the Appropriations Committees seeking a $150 million increase for parks operations, led by Sen. Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., and Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind. At a hearing earlier this month, House Interior-EPA Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Charles Taylor, R-N.C., and ranking member Norman Dicks, D-Wash., expressed concern about the budget request.

Taylor said the committee was "troubled" and that "we seem to be losing ground in this budget." Park Service Director Fran Mainella said the request will "assist the administration in meeting its goal of cutting the federal budget deficit in half by 2009" while enabling parks and visitors centers to remain open.

However, Mainella told the committee that "we will have to make some management decisions" under the proposed funding levels.

The Park Service has had to absorb more than 30 percent of its fixed costs annually since fiscal 2002 as part of its operating budget, which means it has had to defer spending on services such as visitor center hours, educational programs and custodians, according to a GAO report to appropriators earlier this month.

The National Parks Conservation Association puts the annual shortfall at more than $600 million a year, arguing that even before new fixed costs over the last six years, parks were operating on about 65 percent of what was needed to cover daily costs.

Homeland security costs have accounted for $30 million annually the agency has had to budget for since Sept. 11, 2001. That includes the cost of security at the major park "icons" such as Mount Rushmore and the Statue of Liberty.

Across-the-board cuts have been another factor, totaling about $52 million over six years. Interior-EPA programs actually endured a nearly 1.5 percent across-the-board cut in fiscal 2006, including the major 1 percent cut applied at the end of the budget cycle last year and an earlier 0.476 cut applied to their own bill earlier in the year to make it fit within budget caps.

The cumulative cost of salary increases the Parks Service has had to absorb has been $82 million, according to agency estimates.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.