Changes at Mt Rainier -- road closed Tues, Weds

I agree that the actual savings may not be as much as they hope.

Are those budget figures adjusted for inflation ?   If they are -- then I would agree that NPS isn't being very efficient.   But if the figures aren't adjusted -- i.e. their operating budget now is only four times higher than it was in the '70s -- it is pretty amazing that the park is able to be open at all.

Many other things are 10-25 times more expensive than they were in the '70s  -- My college education in the late '70s was $2K year -- but for my kids it has ranged from $32K to $50K per year.

I remember paying $0.28 a gallon for gas back then

In terms of getting an actual copy of the Mt Rainier current (and past) operating budgets. Just asking the supervisor for a copy probably won't work all that well. However NPS is required by law to respond to "freedom of information act" requests

www.nps.gov/foia.htm

Randy, those figures aren't adjusted, except perhaps by my memory, but I think they speak for themselves regarding NPS 'efficiency'.  Twice the number of employees and far superior equipment have resulted in twice as many closed days and ever-later average opening times. This outfit is so disorganized they can't even mark the lower limit of chains required for descending traffic or communicate the lifting of the chain requirement when leaving Paradise.  The far superior performance of previous decades shows it's a matter of twisted priorities and lack of will, not lack of money. 

James Hamaker has nailed it; details of the NPS budget are treated like military secrets and are often kept from even NPS employees.  In my case, repeated calls, e-mails, and letters to the superintentent were ignored.  I filed a FOIA request and six months later got back a single photocopied page with the previous year's total figure, which I already knew from news articles.  My requests for the budgets of various park departments, or even the nature of those subdivisions, were completely ignored.  If stalling doesn't work, then they can redact most of the information and/or charge you for the search time required  The NPS attitude seems to be that it's none of the taxpayer's business how they spend money.  As far as I'm concerned, that information should be posted on their website, if not every campground bulletin board.  The fact that it is not shows what a sick organization we are dealing with.

I think if their budget currently is really only four times the amount that it was in the '70s -- not adjusted for inflation -- that means that in "real dollar terms" they are working with less actual money they had back then.

According to www.usinflationcalculator.com/ $1 in 1970 is equivalent to $5.96 today and $1 in 1979 is worth $3.19 today.

Dear TAY er's
I am sorry.  For years I argued that if Mt. Rainier could be open why not Hurricane Ridge.  Apparently, they agreed, but instead of opening HR, they closed MR. 

By the way, check this out: As these decisions are being made, Denali is considering opening an additional 9 miles of road.  parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=39554 for about 5,000 visitors all winter.

Would also note that the HR closure started as Tuesday/Wednesday, and as visitation declined ended up losing Mondays and Thursdays also.

Lots of information at freehurricaneridge.blogspot such as the Director's Orders violated and lack of public process should be just as valid at Rainier. Feel free to use as you see fit.

I've always wondered why the road has to be plowed to perfection before opening? I can see why they would want the parking area completely clean but other ski area access roads allow vehicles way before they have completely finished plowing.

Now that everyone is all (justifiably) hot and bothered about access issues, it seems like a perfect time to bring up what I see as an glaring problem for BC skiing: we're a rapidly growing user group with fairly straightforward needs and no organized voice. Without a voice, and an understanding of what that voice should be saying for us, I believe that we can yell until we're red in the face and still not get anywhere. I would hope that everyone could agree that individual emails, localized groups like FHR and echo chamber debates like this are simply never going to make things go our way, and that public outreach, outreach to land managers, and the support of businesses will ultimately be required to get the attention of parks and the elected officials that oversee them. As most of the land managers we'd deal with are at the federal level I think that it would be important to build a group that represents at least the entire state if not the broader region.

I'd be willing to donate a considerable amount of my time and energy to establishing a voice for us but would need the help of others, particularly those who've been here longer than I, in getting the ball rolling. I'm hoping the interest is out there.

To throw out a few talking points and hopefully get a debate started, I would propose several long term goals:

1. Full funding for NWAC
2. Continued full-time plowing of paved high elevation roads that are currently being plowed.
3. Eventually opening more paved high elevation access points as funding and interest levels allow.
4. The eventual establishment of a respectable (well-built, toilets, etc), low-impact, winter hut system in WA to help facilitate deeper access to the nearly limitless WA backcountry.

Anyway, food for thought. I'm open to any ideas, critiques, or advice anyone feels inclined to offer.