Disney-fying’ park interpretation in our national parks?

Our current poll is "Should national parks have extensive cellular service?" This article at RV Daily Report adds a bit more information.

According to the article, the proposal is by the "National Park Hospitality Association (NPHA), which represents concessionaires who operate lodges, stores and other commercial outlets inside national parks, is leading the effort to dramatically hike visitor access to cell and Internet signals inside parks – signals from the concessionaires."

PEER, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, says that concessionaires "envision a capacity 'which could reduce the need for handing out printed materials and even facilitate fee collection through electronic devices.'" Of course, NPHA would charge fees for this.

Effectively, this would decrease the need for rangers - and a trained, live body who could provide information and interpretation about the park. And, in effect, ultimately "Disney-fying" our national parks.

I've placed our poll below, in case you want to vote. Or, please leave a comment. We love access to our phones for all kinds of reasons. Should we be going down a path where we lose the human element?

For me, the walks and talks by rangers and knowledgeable people in our ranger stations is one of the special things about our parks. Having worked as an interpretive ranger in Alaska, I know the trainnig the rangers get - and supervision - so what they share is accurate. When you look at information from commercial sources or commercially trained people, the stress on accuracy isn't always there. I would not like to see this happen, though I do think cell service is good for RVers and other visitors at visitor centers and along roads in a park. Jaimie Hall Bruzenak

Comments

[Ralph Guay]

For those of us who live in our RVs for several months a year, it's a matter of keeping in touch with friends and family. I would definitely miss the personal touch of the Rangers, however,

[Jaimie Hall Bruzenak]

I agree, Ralph. And, if you're running a business, a connection is necessary. I don't like the idea that the concessionaires are seeing it as a way to take over interpretation and then charge for it.

Jaimie

[Raquel]

I don't like the idea of taking the rangers out of the parks and using cell phones as a means of instructing/guiding visitors but, I do like the idea of increasing cell service within the parks. Why does one necessarily have to be tied to the other?

[Elliott Thomas]

Having seen video's of people walking into fountains and canals while texting, it's obvious they were unaware of their surroundings. Bears, bison, geysers, hot springs, etc. are not as forgiving as water. Animal and bird photography will be more difficult as ringing cell phones will disturb them. It's bad enough that you have to listen to cell phones in a supermarket checkout line, but it will be intensely annoying to hear them as you walk along a forest trail. If you are on the phone, you miss what's going on around you. Vacations should be that, not constantly talking to people.

[Jaimie Hall Bruzenak]

Raquel, I saw in that article that the concessionaires are using that thinking to justify getting money for providing wifi. Not exactly sure how it will work, but I do agree. One shouldn't preclude the other.

You have a good point, Elliott. Parks need some cell-free zones! I'm thinking of Yellowstone,in particular where we were last September.

Jaimie