The Unkindest Cut

cadia National Park must cut 20 to 30 summer positions-about 15 percent to 20 percent of its seasonal workforce. Even before this sobering news, Maine's most popular natural destination had been operating at 47 percent of funds needed to meet congressional park management standards, compared with 68 percent at most other national park units. Paradoxically, the layoffs come despite a slight increase in Acadia's base budget.

One reason for the cutback is the annual pay raise that Congress mandates for permanent federal employees. To upgrade salaries, Acadia must take funds from other budget items. This and various Park Service internal assessments mean that summer positions and certain programs will have to be sacrificed.

The park's shortfall would be worse but for the strong pro-Acadia commitment of Maine's delegation: Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Reps. Thomas Allen and Michael Michaud, and Gov. John Baldacci when he served in the U.S. House of Representatives. But the problem exceeds what the delegation-a numerical minority-can accomplish by itself.

It is the full Congress-the majority-that has never embraced national parks as a significant funding priority, despite the self-evident obligation of federal government to pay for U.S.-owned real estate. Instead, park-bound money is siphoned off to fund ever larger appropriations for nonpark priorities. Thus the fate of Maine's tiny home park, which injects a bully $130 million into the state's economy each year, is perforce a part of the grand national debate on spending policies.

The Acadia situation symbolizes broader questions of how to advance social equity issues amid the turmoil and daily tragedy of international terror during an election year. In these lean times, the Maine delegation has been particularly successful in funding Acadia's construction projects and other nonrecurring needs. This money, however, cannot be moved to operations. Park officials end up trying to explain to a mystified public how Acadia can afford a new restroom but can't afford to maintain it. To its considerable credit, Congress created in 1997 the recreational fee demonstration program, and Acadia so far has collected $11 million in fees beyond the base budget, a tremendous help. But, again, the money goes to special purposes and can't be used for operations.

A Senate bill to make the fee demonstration program permanent was sidelined in the ferment of recent larger national issues. The Senate bill deserves to pass, but it could tempt some in Congress to shirk their basic responsibility to fully fund national park operations from appropriations. To keep parks accessible to all income classes, entry fees-which can always be raised-should not replace taxes, but augment them.

Another funding backup that shouldn't be abused is private philanthropy. Friends of Acadia has granted the national park $2.9 million since 1995, built up $14.4 million in endowments whose interest will fund projects in perpetuity, and has contributed $778,000 to Mount Desert Island community projects, including the Island Explorer propane buses. Friends' grants make possible the employment of 35 to 50 park workers and 60 to 65 bus drivers. The summer staffing cuts partially erase those gains. This is truly disheartening and a terrible precedent.

Nationally, friends groups and other park philanthropies raise about $100 million a year. Although Congress and the Bush administration did not intend it, the Acadia cuts mean, in essence, a park donor is taxed twice: once by the Internal Revenue Service, and once in the form of his or her donation to cover the loss of appropriations. This reduces the value of every donated dollar, and the government risks collapsing the motivating force of private donors, which is to add value to America's great national parks.

No one knows where, exactly, the forgone park funds end up. Absent a flowchart to trace the money, it is fair to view a vanished $500,000 portion-huge for this park, but a pittance in the federal calculus-as Acadia's contribution to the war in Iraq and the federal deficit.

As the government works out spending decisions, people who love Acadia must remind policymakers that global issues affect even the remotest corners of the nation. Further erosion of operating support can severely curtail the desire of citizens to add voluntary contributions to the funding mix that keeps this magnificent public asset economically vital.