First, a rant about US National Parks, at least the two I am rather familiar with. There are, of course, lots of wonderful things to see at National Parks. But if you are inviting millions of visitors to your park each summer season, and you charge them a substantial fee to enter and enjoy the park, you arguably assume the duty to make available some basic services to all these car trip visitors. In particular, provide enough parking for all the cars and RVs that you invite to the park, provide enough restrooms for the crowds (thousands and thousands of people) that flow to the popular sites at your park each day in the summer, and give them a place to buy food and drink. Parking, food/drink, and restrooms. Not a lot to ask.
But no. Every single parking lot is overcrowded, with many visitors parking along the highway leading to the sites for up to half a mile, with visitors, often with children, then walking on the side of the highway with traffic cruising by. There is plenty of space to expand NPS parking lots, they just don’t want to. Restrooms, when available, there just aren’t enough of them and they don’t get the necessary upkeep and cleaning to make them adequate for human use (I could add the ugly details, but you can figure it out). I’m sure just about every NPS executive would blow a gasket if you suggested sprinkling a few Burger King’s around their park. But honestly, if you parked ten food trucks in the Old Faithful parking lot, for every visitor who bemoaned the incongruity of a food truck in Yellowstone, you would have about 200 visitors who were eternally grateful to get quick tasty food to feed their family so they could move along to the next attraction.
Here’s the difference between a retail business (that has to keep the customers happy or go out of business) and government entities like NPS. Execs at NPS have a host of excuses to not provide the services that every visitor would like to have, as I noted above. But can you imagine your average retail establishment replying to their customers anything like this? “Parking is their problem, not my business’s problem. I just put products on the shelf.” Or: “We open the stadium to visitors to watch the game, but don’t expect us to sell them food.” Or: “We clean both restrooms once a week. People shouldn’t be so messy.” You know, a hundred variations on “not our problem” when, in the view of customers or visitors, it certainly IS the problem that the people running the establishment should fix. For-profit outfits fix them or lose customers. NPS ignores these problems.
What about the LDS Church? Is it more like a business that pays attention to customers, takes feedback into account, and tries to make the customers happy? Or is it more like NPS, that ignores obvious problems of insufficient and inadequate services, instead offering excuses or blaming visitors? Yes, that is essentially a rhetorical question. But it’s not parking lots and restrooms that are the LDS problem. In fact, ample parking lots and clean restrooms are one of the real achievements of LDS buildings. I’ll give credit where it is due. We have the best parking lots in Christendom, along with excellent investment fund managers and real estate advisors.
I don’t even have to give explanations, just list a few topics. Garment design and practice. LDS mission rules and experience (somewhat modified for the better the past few years). Long, boring meetings (somewhat modified with the two-hour church schedule). Overbuilt and underused temples. Curriculum, ostensibly based on the scriptures, is in reality always a variation on the standard LDS indoctrination checklist. Stubbornly sticking with early morning seminary to the detriment of sleep-deprived LDS students. I could go on. You can offer your own particular concern.
The bigger question is why LDS leaders take so little concern for these and other items that irk some or many LDS participants. They just don’t seem to care about the customer (the members). Like NPS execs, LDS leaders have a host of go-to excuses. People should do less complaining and be more faithful. It’s our job to say inspired things and their job to listen and do. Sacrifice brings forth the blessing of heaven. Don’t criticize LDS leaders, especially if the criticism is true and accurate. And so forth.
This is an even more pressing issue in light of current membership issues, with more people leaving and more units being merged and missionary work stagnation. The leadership is certainly aware of many of these problems, the issues and practices that bother many members. Some members leave, others stay and just grumble privately, others grumble publicly and sometimes get reprimanded or exed. It just seems like (as I often remark in my posts) like this is a prime example of leadership failure. The Church (apart from parking lots and investment portfolios) is not a well managed organization. Maybe they need a big leadership retreat where they candidly acknowledge some organizational failures and honestly reassess the mission of the organization.
What do you think? I won’t even give a list of prompts on this one. You can expand on my points and try to explain why this is so — or you can come to the defense of the Church as a well-managed institution with leaders that spend day and night worrying about the well-being of the members and how to better meet their spiritual and temporal needs. The floor is yours.
Wheat & Tares 
I really like this comparison! The underlying similarity is monopoly. There’s only one of any particular National Park, so if you want to see Yellowstone, you have to see the one there is. Similarly, for many members and certainly for GAs, the LDS Church has a monopoly on the ordinances of exaltation. There’s no need in either case to be responsive to customers because they can’t go anywhere else if they want what you have. (Cue Elder Ballard: “Where will you go?”)
But of course, goods can be more fungible than they think. Maybe you don’t have to see Yellowstone, and could be happy with a state park, or even a non-park tourist destination. Similarly, maybe you decide that LDS ordinances aren’t all that important and maybe the afterlife is up in the air, if it seems likely at all, so you can choose a less controlling church without any risk.
Oh, and on the topic of garments, anyone who enjoyed this post might also appreciate April Young-Bennett’s classic post at the Exponent, “The Mormon Underwear Monopoly.”
https://exponentii.org/blog/the-mormon-underwear-monopoly/
I don’t go to church anymore. But I did for the first 55 years of my life. And here’s something about that I remember vividly: It was such a relief to have a week off for General Conference twice a year. It was like a holiday. I would be so happy the week leading up to that Sunday knowing there would be no meetings.
Isn’t that strange? Isn’t it strange that a fully believing active member of the Church would be so relieved to not have to meet? And why is that? What about the Sunday LDS routine is so bland or uneventful that would make us feel that way? (note: I don’t claim to speak for everyone but my sentiments were definitely not unique).
I think the Mormon Church has a military style of command.
The big shot General is at the top of this set up and he must be obeyed, nothing else is acceptable.
Mormon’s teach their young the song “Follow the Prophet” from the time they are three years old.
In many other Religions you can find the lower level ministers doing their own thing with their congregation, if evey one in the congregation sees it the same way.
But I have never heard of a Mormon Stake President or a Bishop doing any thing than what Salt Lake decrees.
If they try they are gone in a heartbeat.
Mormons are conditioned to accept this with very little questioning.
Mormons are told which ward they are to attend, who they will visit teach and who they are assigned to visit and home teach.
Mormons are assigned the Temple they are to attend.
Mormons will insist they can attend any ward or temple they want but rarely do so.
There is the tired old saying about being able to choose the ward we think is best for us and our families.
“No one should be able to choose the popular Bishop” is something I have heard.
Well why not?
There were three Catholic churches in my hometown.
The Catholics there could choose which congregation they wanted to be a part of.
My husband did not think this was a good idea at all.
He said “That sounds like complete chaos to me”.
I said it was far far from it.
One congregation was full of very young families, one the older people chose and one was a mix of young and older families.
The young family congregation looked and met the needs of young families, the older members have different needs and their parish focused on that.
If some one in the older senior parrish needed some volunteer work done on their property the younger members in the other congregations stepped in.
If the young family ward was having an activity the older seniors helped out and did a lot of babysitting.
It works well.
Mormon members seem to have no problem being treated like children and told where to go, when to go.
I wonder if Salt Lake really has such lack of respect for the adults in the Mormon church or is it is just a very long bad habbit they have fallen into.
Update: I somehow forgot to mention cell service in my opening rant. NPS stubbornly refuses to allow cell towers to provide cell service in the parks. It’s like they are locked into a 1950s technology mindset. I guarantee 99% of visitors would like to be able to consult Google maps to figure out where they are going in the park, to update friends and family about their whereabouts and activities and well-being, to find each other in the park when they have lost contact, and to contact emergency services in the event of an injury. Just fire whoever is running NPS and exclude any new candidate for the job who opposes this necessary feature of 21st century life.
I can even predict the NPS exec response to this obvious problem. “If they want cell service in our parks, they should buy satellite phones and subscribe to a satellite service provider.”
Don’t look now Dave B, but I think this may very well be one of the first W&T post I’ve ever read that’s highlighted a glaring inefficiency in Federal Government. Admittedly, NPS is one of the last government agencies I’d like to see go, but I’ve seen some compelling arguments that local states could do a better job running them. One advantage of homeschooling your children is that you get to visit these places during the off seasons, and I really am grateful for the time these employees and volunteers put in.
I can remember reading an article during Romney’s presidential campaign that highlighted just how good the LDS church actually was at taking and implementing feedback from the local level—better than a lot of organizations actually. I suppose there is always room for improvement. Our greatest revelations came from questions.
Your post brings up about three other points I frequently see here.
“The Church doesn’t work for me with regard to principle or practice A, therefore there is something inherently wrong with the Institution.” I sometimes feel this is largely dismissive of the thousands of people the principle actually worked for. I get that those it doesn’t work for largely remain silent, and may be larger in number than some estimate. Looking at things as objectively as I can, I cannot bring myself to believe a silent majority pervades. That doesn’t mean there aren’t things we can’t learn from the minority, but I’ve found my mental health is not hurt by routinely asking myself if I’m beating myself against a sound principle instead of an unsound principle beating against me.
Stagnation. Church growth has obviously slowed down. It’s happening with every denomination. From what I’ve seen, most unit mergers are due do demographic changes, not people leaving, though that does happen. California’s drop in units pretty well correspond to Utah’s rise. Based on move-ins I’ve met, it doesn’t surprise me in the least.
Does a reaction that differs from my likely reaction constitute an actual reaction? This is a problem and question that goes beyond the Church and affects most every organization. I think the Church is aware of way more than you give it credit for. They are and will continue to implement changes. If it isn’t in the way you’d like or yield the results you want, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s out of touch. It just sees things differently than you do.
Josh H, my dad always said that one of the unofficial signs of the true Church was being able to worship Deity twice a year in your bathrobe.
Actually, considering what they charge, you are getting a huge bargain with the N Ps compared to the church. $30 to $75 dollar entrance fee compared to 10% of your total income, paying first the church, then you taxes, then your rent or housing, then food……
The National parks were never meant to be Disney land, and that is what it sounds like you want to turn them into. Yes, the one closest to me is WAY over crowded. They appear to be doing their best by shutting down entry to overcrowded areas once parking fills up, but they are turning hundreds of people away. And no, there is no more room for parking lots. That is why during peak season—-most of the year——-there is a shuttle bus you have to have reservations for. No more room for parking because it is in a narrow canyon. We have quit going because it is so crowded and so restricted, except in bad weather that keeps 60% of visitors away. But today is 110 F and the park will be overflowing, with the shuttle bus running, and the few food places with long lines. It was simply never build by God to accommodate millions per year. And God does try to discourage visitation by killing a few every year and having landslides, flash floods, and other disasters. So, make your reservations ahead of time, take a picnic lunch, expect delays, expect crowds, watch out for children or animals while driving, and enjoy.
And unlike the National parks, the church offers little of value, either educationally or enjoyment or spirituality. But yes there are problems with both.
@Ziff This is a timely comment. The Wall Street Journal ran an article last week about many good parks that aren’t being visited as much:
These Are the Best U.S. National Parks—and They’re Not Even That Crowded
One of the challenges in our algorithmically dominated world is certain spaces become amplified, magnified, and go viral. Then, those places become the “must-see” places and a certain winner-take-all mentality and FOMO takes hold. But really, there are good natural spaces everywhere, and sometimes the most magical places are serendipitous encounters you didn’t see on a website, Instagram story, or from a top 10 list (I note the irony of posting WSJ’s list above).
@DaveB As much as I appreciate your analogy and think it has a lot of merit, I don’t think more parking is the answer. The problem you’re describing is inadequate access, and that problem has a better solution than parking. Being in southern Utah, plenty of the most popular parks are “being loved to death.” What this phrase really means is that the National Park Services are not being funded adequately. If we want to keep these places pristine, special, and beautiful, more vehicles are not the answer. The parks can handle many more visitors, but it can’t handle the damage done by vehicles, especially if the expectation is that everyone can just drive right up to the most delicate ecosystems in our country.
I would humbly submit that more parking within parks is the wrong solution to an actual problem. Instead, let’s work together to procure and fund more shuttles. We have plenty of parking outside of parks we can leverage and probably too much (recommended econ nerd book: The High Cost of Free Parking). Incidentally, I like your idea of food trucks and take no issue with that suggestion so long as parks (state and federal) are adequately funded such that we don’t proliferate an expansion of trash. An increase in food consumption would invariably lead to an increase in litter, so we would need to educate and remediate the effects o those who purposely or accidentally drop trash in the most beautiful spaces in our country.
To tie this back to the church, what matters I think is that the members themselves get to particpate and craft solutions/changes they would like to see. This back-and-forth brainstorming could yield some good changes that we could see with the park system. But if the only innovations are those that can come from the top, I think the institution is ossified and sclerotic. I believe in top-down revelation, but I also believe in bottom-up. The wisdom of crowds (e.g., church membership) is too important to be glossed over.
I’m a HUGE proponent of the national park system and I feel this is being perhaps a bit heavy handed with the assumptions on their part, which is fine on a blog trying to make a point. My brother works for the BLM and has insights into this sort of thing, namely that: the fees are not adequate for staffing, Republicans never fund the parks sufficiently (not because they hate the parks but simply have other monetary priorities), and Democrats want no park expansions due to environmental impacts (again not because they hate the parks but they get so caught up on protecting those earthworms). Add on the cost of international travel, appetite to be outdoors post-COVID, the annoying social media influencers getting too close to the wildlife, the issue that grown ass adults can’t be bothered to find a rubbish bin, and here we are with overrun parks with insufficient staffing and trash everywhere. When we were in Iceland three years ago they were SHOCKED that our national parks don’t have cell service given the type of activities that take place there. In Iceland, they have cell coverage over the entire country, and the earthworms can learn to deal, because people need cell coverage when they are lost in the wilderness.
I visited Yellowstone in summer 2020 (my favorite US park, though Banff is my all time pick) and it was incredible as it was empty. I’ll probably never go back as it’s now a nightmare. State parks aren’t much better. I was at Sand Hollow for July 4th. Similar issues.
Maybe there’s a Mormon angle here too. Perhaps the church is too bureaucratic for it’s own good. Spending money on temples instead of paying for youth camps. Focusing on the dead at the expense of the living. So similarly to the NPS their heart is in the right place but their priorities and policies are out of step with those they govern. They think we want more temples and early morning seminary when we really want is an actual youth program and a sense of community.
Unlike the NPS, there is nowhere to leave a one-star review. There is an Instagram account of someone posting one-star reviews at national parks and it’s freaking hilarious. If you are bored today, you’re now very welcome.
“Mormons are told which ward they are to attend, who they will visit teach and who they are assigned to visit and home teach.”
My neighbors who are not Mormon find this to be just about the most ridiculous aspect of our faith tradition. And they’ve seen the musical.
In defense of the NPS, there budget is not set by them, nor their fees, but is set by congress. Often the NPS ends up being a political football both sides use in negotiating, and as a result, is generally underfunded.
Also, as stated earlier, some parks are getting so heavily used, that the only viable solution is to start a reservation system to limit entrance into the park (off the top of my head, Zions, Arches, Yosemite all probably need to start limiting entrance during peak seasons). Last time I went to Zions, it felt like Disneyland with lines for hikes.
The LDS church on the other hand has control over their budget and their operations. They just don’t care for the opinions of average members. The only time I know of changes being implemented is when the person bringing the suggestion was a relative of a member of the 12.
Temple – even my TBM wife does not get much out of the endowment other than an occasional nap. I have not been in over four years and don’t feel the difference.
Temple steeples – as a former resident of North Texas, I stand with Fairview and not the sh*tshow seeking to achieve a height of 173 feet and looking like fools in the process and definitely undermining future missionary work.
I don’t see myself as a customer–where the establishment does all it can to satisfy my needs as a loyal patron in order to maintain a lasting business relationship with me. Rather, I see myself as a laborer in the Lord’s vineyard — a work that the Lord has called me to perform by virtue of the covenant that I’ve made with him — where I show up ready and willing to work in whatever field of labor his authorize superintendent assigns me.
Interesting discussion. I’m also a big fan of national parks, and prioritize such places when planning family vacations (I try to avoid theme parks as much as possible). The one time I visited Yellowstone several years ago, it was during winter, when most of the park’s roads are closed to regular auto traffic and I took a guided snowmobile tour, and it was an absolute thrill. This is the ONLY way I choose to experience that park. More recently, we visited Bryce Canyon during its “peak season”, which was well attended but not excessively crowded, as the park now has a very efficient hop-on-hop-off shuttle bus circuit for no additional charge that makes private vehicles almost unnecessary. That park is also very bike-friendly. As a veteran I get free annual passes, which I am very grateful for.
The NPS is perpetually in the difficult position of having to protect the pristine natural state of parks (along with resident wildlife), while balancing the demands of making them accessible to the public, and do so with limited budgets and personnel. Some parks charge high entry fees, some parks restrict vehicle access and only allow access via shuttles, and others set up lottery systems to limit visitor traffic. And some of the less popular parks charge no fees and have very few visitors (e.g. Capitol Reef, which is not a bad park but understandably kind of “meh” after spending time at nearby Bryce Canyon. It’s fine to visit once, but also plan an afternoon activity.). The Church has the opposite problem, I think, with shrinking attendance while management is unwilling to adapt to the changing visitor demands, perhaps even being in denial that there is a problem at all. There is no shortage of resources for the Church, but they are focusing their “infrastructure” development on building dozens of temples that current membership (let alone future membership) will be unable to support. The NPS, by contrast, is definitely NOT expanding their reach recklessly, and barely has the resources to protect what they have. To modify this analogy slightly, you could think of the Church as the Capitol Reef of American religious sects; hardly anybody goes there, and it’s pretty obvious why since there are many more spectacular options within reasonable driving distance.
“To modify this analogy slightly, you could think of the Church as the Capitol Reef of American religious sects; hardly anybody goes there, and it’s pretty obvious why since there are many more spectacular options within reasonable driving distance.”
Agreed, Jack Hughes.
The thing about Yellowstone is that location possesses a longstanding tradition of tourists with questionable thinking skills shooting selfies with or approaching unfriendly critters… bison, bears, cow moose with calves, etc. In spite of warnings over the years, tourists insist on engaging in this silliness. “Mom, can I pet the badger?”
The Church has its share of dangerous critters as well. Every Utah ward has the old John Bircher conservative who when the world “liberal” is used, grunts and spews a rant about Gadianton robbers and secret combinations. While our local conspiracy theorists are not nearly as stimulating as watching a tourist get tossed into the air by a bull bison, the Church has its dangerous critters that should come with warning labels for the innocent and naive.
Perhaps I’m taking the analogy too far, but I can imagine what would be more spectacular than a tour of the cosmos. Other options might be more glitzy and whatnot–but nothing is more spectacular than the Kingdom in all of its splendor and beauty.
@Old Man wrote:
You’ve described the majority of my entire ward in Southern Utah! Thanks for the laugh.
For those interested in going to Zion, this we will have a public bus shuttle from St. George to Springdale with stops in Washington, Hurricane, LaVerkin, and Virgin. The plan was for this route to start at the end of this month, but due to a labor shortage (drivers), it may be delayed a few months.
This route almost didn’t survive some far-right MAGA local politicians who ran on a platform to kill the public transit option (nevermind that the pesky fact that this isn’t being funded by local taxes, but by a state DOT grant), but thankfully they were defeated by sane GOP local officials.
More info on this route here:
https://www.kuer.org/business-economy/2023-08-25/next-summer-a-bus-straight-outta-st-george-hopes-to-help-zion-out-with-its-traffic
@Jack I think one should not underestimate or discount the majestic nature of God’s creations. There is a reason why even the scriptures and prophets refer to the holiest places of God as mountains. I’ve had some peaceful and spiritual experiences in the temple, but I’ve had many more sublime moments in God’s creations and in the literal mountains of the Lord.
@Jack, I agree that it would be hard for something to be more “glitzy” or “spectacular” than a “tour of the cosmos”. To return to the OP, garment design (or wearing), boring meetings, inadequate sleep due to early morning seminary, the highly masonic endowment ceremony, and terrible lesson curriculum hardly seems like things that are required to receive a “tour of the cosmos”. Rather, these things appear to be largely manmade, bureaucratic artifacts that could be improved or eliminated. I don’t think the OP intends to remove the core of the gospel from the Church (which, I would remind you, is very small and compact, and doesn’t include things like garments, boring meetings, etc.)–he seems to be asking for improvements to the organization/programs/bureaucracy. The thing that makes me personally feel more in touch with the cosmos is pondering Christ’s charge to “love my neighbor” while out hiking up a mountain (thus my “mountain climber” handle). Most of this other stuff is just a negative distraction for me.
As Eli said, most people are never going to be completely satisfied with the Church programs/organization/bureaucracy. That said, it seems to me that there are a lot of manmade things that have calcified in the Church over the years that didn’t originate from God and that distracts a lot from people’s spritual progress. The fact that there is no defined channel for rank and file members to communicate their issues is a big problem. I believe that the evidence is overwhelming that not everything that your “authorized superintendents” ask Church members to do represents the will of God. In fact, it seems to me that if God is somehow involved in the Church, He seems to be making things happen largely in spite of his “authorized superintentents” as opposed to directly through them. I often envision God just shaking his head whenever Nelson, Oaks, or some other Church leader goes quixotically chasing after yet another meaningless windmill.
“To modify this analogy slightly, you could think of the Church as the Capitol Reef of American religious sects; hardly anybody goes there, and it’s pretty obvious why since there are many more spectacular options within reasonable driving distance.”
Interesting. I’ve always thought Capitol Reef was the most criminally underrated national park I’ve ever been to, but I suppose that could be due to the fact it’s the only one I’ve ever traversed on bicycle. I’m sure that changes up the analogy a bit as well.
I don’t know that Jack is way off with his original point. Too many U.S. citizens, including members of the Church, are consumer driven. At the risk of sounding self-righteous, I stopped asking what I was going to get out of Church a while ago. It’s actually made all the difference and has led to some rather interesting experiences.
I would imagine I give more heed to the brethren and sisters in leadership than a lot of people here, but I tend to think of them far less as intermediaries with the “product” I’m working to consume, and more as fellow laborers. I can understand how some might think these fellow laborers get in the way or are working the wrong fields, but I’d like to think I’ve been shown brief glimpses into their methods from time to time. There are also members who are downright close to worshipping them. That’s clearly not helpful either.
I would argue that national parks should provide less services than they do, and continue to reduce services until the crows dissipate. The parks were designated to protect the wild and beautiful parts of the country. Providing exhilarating experiences for the public is a secondary goal, and convenient experiences a tertiary one. A nice side affect of this is that cottage industries spring up around (but safely outside) the park boundaries to provide all the conveniences of home.
Edward Abbey argued decades ago that motor vehicles shouldn’t be allowed in the parks at all, except perhaps for park staff. Access would be by foot or by horse, with park staff available to assist with shuttling equipment or handling emergencies.
Bringing this back to the church, I’ve heard some folks talk about taking the church back to it’s roots. Make mormons weird again. The (intended?) side affect seems to be that there will be fewer but more zealous people in the church who aren’t embarrassed by kolob, polygamy, lamanites, treasure-hunters, or secret handshakes. As with national parks, a less convenient experience would lead to fewer but more engaged visitors. From my position now outside the church, I honestly think this is OK, as long as it leads to easing up on the pressure for kids growing up in the church to stay if they’re turned off by the hokey stuff.
Yellowstone hacks:
1. Offline maps. Maybe this is obvious to everyone, but if you haven’t used offline maps with Google Maps, Yellowstone is a great place to try it out for the first time. You just pick a rectangle inside of Google Maps while you still have internet access before entering the park, wait a minute or two for the map data to download, and then you can navigate all around the park (and beyond, depending how much mapping data you downloaded) using Google Maps just the way you normally would when you do have internet access.
2. Xanterra wifi. If you stay in a Xanterra managed property, whether it be one of the fancy lodges or a basic campground in the park, you are entitled to wifi access at any Xanterra location in the park that has it. For example, if you stay at the Madison Campground, Grant Village, Old Faithful Inn, etc., you can walk up to the front desk at any of the Xanterra locations in the park that has wifi and you will be given a passcode to access the wifi there (even if it’s not the place you are staying at). One Xanterra property I know for sure has wifi is the Old Faithful Snow Lodge (not the Inn, not the Lodge, but the Snow Lodge). In fact, my wife and I camped at the Madison Campground just a few weeks ago, and we used the wifi at the Old Faithful Snow Lodge to video with her on her P-Day. I believe that a few other Xanterra properties have wifi as well, but not sure which.
3. Free wifi provided by the NPS at the Mammoth Visitor Center.
Yeah, I know it’s not the same as having internet everywhere like you do as soon as you get close enough to the park boundaries, but our family has gotten a lot of mileage out of these hacks over the years. It’s saved us from having to make a long drive out of the park just to access the internet for something important that can be accomplished in 30 seconds if we could just get a signal!
How do I know? My wife loves Yellowstone. The crowds don’t bother her. It’s just her kind of camping. The crowds do bother me, so it’s not my kind of camping at all, but we typically go visit there a few times every year because my wife likes it so much. The geothermal features just fascinate her, and she loves the “glamping” possible in the campgrounds (to her, having a generally clean campground with running water in the bathrooms is good enough to be considered “glamping”).
Comparison between the NPS and the LDS church seems strained but I understand what the post is getting at. One of the explicit goals of the park system is to preserve. Yes the Grand Canyon could build a tram to the bottom and yeah the average person would see more of the Grand Canyon that’s not the (entire) point.
That said, both organizations are similar in that they said “these are the rules and if you don’t like them, bye.” I was in a privileged leadership position in the church and I still felt like my opinion didn’t matter. I can’t imagine someone on the margins.
There are a lot of national parks besides the well known ones like Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Zions. I once heard one a head of the park service interviewed on NPR. He said they refer to the famous, expansive park views as nature porn which can do a disservice because the public can think that all of nature should be equally exciting. Most of nature is plain and even boring. Most of the parks are to protect and preserve. In that sense the NPS and the LDS are unilaterally trying to preserve nature and God’s will, respectively.
I just read a book complaining that hikers and rock climbers are allowed in national parks, but no base jumpers. Please, the last thing I want to see with my family is a wingsuit jumping off Angels Landing and smashing into a cliff.
“Zions” makes my teeth hurt. Ugh.
Dude, ignoring for now the comparisons to the Church, you are weirdly mad at National Parks for being National Parks. Yes, I suppose they could pave way more of it into parking, erect cell phone towers and bring in some food trucks, maybe set up a light-rail and ski lifts and a splash pad for kids and air conditioned strip malls while they’re at it; but then you wouldn’t be in a Natural park anymore, but just another overpriced resort.
The whole point of National Parks is to get out in nature and see some unspoiled wilderness for a change; if the idea of being out in nature and seeing unspoiled wilderness that hasn’t yet been completely paved over annoys you, then just go to Six Flags or whatever. And I like Six Flags, btw! Roller coasters are fun! But when I go to a National Park, it’s because I want a different experience entirely.
I’m in your boat JB. Nature should be natural. There’s a mountain in North Wales that is absolutely RAMMED with people. Causes havoc with bad street parking, littering and anti-social mountain behaviour.
Mountains are meant to be untouched paradises. Bring your lunch, leave the place as you found it. Untouched.
Or, go to a different less frequented mountain.
Church: My ward was recently merged with 3 others. The leadership are in havoc and so a lot of the community stuff has just been left. But then, surely its for the community to create community stuff. I really think that we underestimate how much we can mold our local wards into what we want them to be. That includes the community stuff, and also the feel of your ward.
The regional and national stuff is well out of our hands. But quite frankly, my main interaction is with the 250 Mormons local to me, rather than everyone else.
The Heritage Foundation’s RWA Project 2025 maps out a plan to gut the Antiquities Act, which would allow the government to turn some of our most scenic and important public lands over to energy extraction interests. So no need to worry, there will be plenty of roads. You just won’t want to see the wastelands they will lead to.
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got
Till it’s gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
National Parks are not amusement parks. They have a mandate to conserve, not to entertain visitors. If hordes of clueless tourists want to trample all over nature, then the National Parks should severely limit visitors. (Unfortunately they are not wilderness area’s and allow some development for recreation) National Parks should preserve the environment, not pave it over for people who can’t be bothered to get out of their air conditioned cars.
Also Capitol Reef is a more interesting park than Bryce.(and Cedar Breaks has better views). Great hiking, prehistory and history, varied geology, wildlife, and the rampaging hordes can pick fruit. Oh wait, there are not rampaging hordes. Even better.
While there are too few parks and way too many visitors, the church seems to have the opposite problem Though at the local level, they both seem to be underfunded.
The church could take a public relations page from the NPS and their official Instagram account. Imagine the most talented, church-broke, comedic writer or two, wryly promoting the most sensible and appealing parts of the party line and, without addressing any of the actual problems, making the peculiarities endearing, poking holes in some of the more inflated nuttiness, … and giving the unsanctified hordes a gentle nudge toward behaving themselves — if not more wisely, at least less batshiz. But in addition to the challenge of finding an above average level of talent, they’d have to be properly compensated, and Kirton McConkie would have to be kept at bay.
Seriously, go check it out and see if you don’t end up following. Then return and report the best quips worthy of emulation.
And then carry on with the scrutiny of second anointing minutiae if we must, as if seeking after such a thing in this place and time was essential to our salvation and exaltation.
Here ya go, Wheaties.
Sorry about conflating my comments on another post. I am not good at mornings anymore.
Not really relevant to any of the comments but the NPS discussion reminds me of the opening of the great book “Confederates in the Attic.” The author quotes an NPS tour guide at Fort Sumter who said park visitors ask “why were so many civil war battles fought in national parks?” That funny observation has stuck with me for 20 years. Probably works at a church angle too.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Let me reply to those who think that in the OP I am advocating making National Parks into something like Disneyland. Look, there are already parking lots despoiling the pristine beauty of these parks. I’m just suggesting making them bigger so as to better serve the tens of thousands of visitors they admit each day. There are already various sorts of restrooms at popular sites. Making them adequate in no way adds a layer to the un-naturalness of the sites. If anything, *not* providing restrooms where needed invites some to head off and take care of things behind the nearest tree.
Please note that US law provides for the establishment of “wilderness areas,” and there are hundreds of them scattered throughout the country. Generally these have no motorized access and few or no improvements of any kind — just the kind of protected area many above are calling for. Well, you’ve already got it in designated wilderness areas, but National Parks are not wilderness areas. Parks are designed to be accessible to cars and accommodate lots and lots of visitors. My point is those who run the parks are, in some ways, doing a poor job of doing that accommodating.
They’re are also National forest lands which are multi-use. The National Park mandate is to preserve the park, and provide for the education and enjoyment for the public while leaving the park unimpaired. They are not National forests. The mandate is not to be accessible to cars or logging trucks. It’s preservation.
Most National Parks are not vast flat lands. There’s a lot of vertical space. There are only so many pristine meadows available for vast 20 story parking garages. Seriously, the NPS is to avoid building roads or facilities that will degrade the park as it goes against the mandate to preserve. Because of overcrowding causing degradation, many area’s are restricting vehicles and removing roads in a restoration effort.
Late to the party, but I just have to add my voice to say that the idea of building more parking lots inside of crowded national parks is a terrible idea and I am grateful NPS staff ignores such suggestions. Shuttles are a much better plan.
I do hate that some parks have become super expensive, because that limits access by those in the lower income brackets. The parks should be free to US citizens and paid for by heavily taxing industries that spoil our land and water like oil and coal and Kennecott as well as through a progressive income tax. I also don’t have a problem charging foreign tourist high entrance fees.
I will also say that building premier toilets is a bad idea. Look, I am a person that because of bladder and GI tract issues probably has to use the toilet 2 to 3 more frequently than most people, but the standard national park pit toilet is much more environmentally friendly than a flush toilet and is still an awesome luxury compared to digging a hole, squatting, and carry out used toilet paper that is required in the back country for most backpacking trips. Dave B says he isn’t asking for Disneyland, but it sure seems like it.
I went to Yellowstone about 8 years ago in April (during GC weekend, it was first time I gave myself permission to completely ignore conference and to hike on Sunday) because I had just finished a scientific conference nearby. It is still winter in the park then. I have hated Yellowstone in the summer because of the horrific over crowding. But in the winter, I could spend three hours all by myself hiking on closed roads and it was magical. We need preserve these places and I don’t see how building more parking lots and concessions inside the parks accomplishes that. (I would be in favor of being able to rent bear spray at the entrance gate since you can’t fly with it and then returning unused bottles for a refund when you leave.)
I would love a shuttle system in the Great Smoky mountains as that would make back packing routes like the AT trail logistically much easier since it avoids the problem of needing to figure out how to get a car to the end of the trail if you are doing point to point trails. The Cades Cove Loop is closed to cars on Wednesday, and I think that is a great idea. On other days in the summer it’s bumper to bumper. Open sided shuttles would carry a lot more people and give a better experience while massively cutting down on traffic and pollution.
Ironically, I’ve missed the discussion because I’ve been through 5 national parks over the last 8 days. (Admittedly, 4 were Canadian.)
There is no better deal than a years worth of unlimited trips for my entire family to every national Park and site in the country for only 80 bucks. Today’s park was Glacier. Parking was extremely difficult, but I’m not sure where the lovely flat real estate is that is primed for more parking lots. US population has doubled since 1950, and there remains but a single old faithful. I’d personally love a doubling of the parks budget, better bus systems and cleaner bathrooms. As others have mentioned, the NPS’s primary mission is conservation, not entertainment.
As for the church, what is their primary mission with regards to members? I don’t doubt that leadership thinks their primary task is to keep members in the boat by telling them this is the only safe boat in a dangerous sea. My favorite phrase these days is that they run a simplified “middle school” church, where we are often treated like 8th graders. I don’t doubt that the crowd here at W&T doesn’t like this approach at all.
NPS is run out of Washington, D.C.
The Church is run out of heaven.
So, there are going to be differences.