Isle Royale Forums

Should the much reported 'sequester' of federal funding take place, all NPS Park Superintendents are required to report what they would do to make up the budget shortage. For IR, closing Amygdaloid and Malone Ranger stations would occur, along with numerous interpretive changes.
Details (so far) can be found at http://www.twincities.com/minnesota/ci_ ... r-stations

Interesting that they would even consider closing Windigo (they decided not to), given (as they note) how many people come via that dock. That indeed would have been shortsighted, in my opinion.

Is it just me, or is something wrong with that photo?

I got a kick out if the comments at the end of that article.

One fellow implying that there are 78 other ranger stations out there, where are they all?

I'll never get to work out there.

Tom,
Thanks for posting.
Of note also, the Park will not have the Ranger III after 10/19 as it is going into dry dock for service. Amygdaloid and Malone Bay Ranger Stations will be closed and will make getting help much more difficult this summer, particularly for paddlers.

johnhens wrote:Not having Amygdaloid and Malone Bay will make getting help much more difficult this summer, particularly for paddlers.

All the more reason to carry a handheld marine VHF radio.

If there are boaters nearby, they can be just a helpful as the Rangers.

Hey, what happened to the original sequestration thread?

Closing Windigo? Emergency services only there? $50,000 cost savings didn't justify its closing? What about the long-term impact on minnesotans left with a bad taste in their mouth, on account of having to travel to Rock for the orientation? So much for getting dropped off at mccargoe or belle isle either.

What will be the long-term impact of minnesota having closed all of its state parks over last july 4th? Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode: "You know how to take the reservation."

With the price of fuel causing less people to consider isle royale as a vacation destination, risking alienation of park visitors by even entertaining the analysis of closing windigo as a viable option just doesn't add up.

Sad to hear that the invasive species program will fall under the axe. We have to save tax dollars for a future invasion of Iran, is probably what it all boils down to. Kind of like the sacrifices one makes when saving up to send your kid to college, or some other such laudable cause.

Without trying to get too political, I find it a bit strange that everywhere I look in the federal budget (not just ISRONP), the proposed or announced sequestration cuts are generally from front line costs where they are most visible (read most painful) to the public or user of services.

With ISRO NP's annual budget of slightly more than $4.5 million, a 5% cut amounts to approximately $225,000. Nationally, the salaries for a park ranger is about $55,000. The burdened rates would be substantially higher than $55,000 (benefits, expenses, fuel, etc) so over one-half of all reductions are coming from cutting two positions that are closest to the visitor's experience?

One a different note, given annual visitation of about 15,000 and 3 to 4 day average stay, a permit fee increase from $4 to $6 might just about cover the cost of these two positions.

Then again, the total sequestration cuts of $85 billion per year is what we BORROW every 21 days and it's really not a true cut because even with the "cuts" total spending is still going higher this year.

Some insight into national park budgeting:
http://www.doi.gov/budget/appropriation ... enbook.pdf

Midwest Ed wrote:Without trying to get too political, I find it a bit strange that everywhere I look in the federal budget (not just ISRONP), the proposed or announced sequestration cuts are generally from front line costs where they are most visible (read most painful) to the public or user of services.

With ISRO NP's annual budget of slightly more than $4.5 million, a 5% cut amounts to approximately $225,000. Nationally, the salaries for a park ranger is about $55,000. The burdened rates would be substantially higher than $55,000 (benefits, expenses, fuel, etc) so over one-half of all reductions are coming from cutting two positions that are closest to the visitor's experience?

That seems to be the MO every time something like this is brought up, regardless of which party is in power. At the rate we're going, I'm afraid there is a possibility of a remote park like ISRO being shut down completely if we don't get our budget act together soon.

I suppose there's a certain comfort in knowing a ranger or other park employee could be there if you ever needed it, but I feel a heavily staffed wilderness loses a bit of what wilderness was intended to be. I've done trips in remote areas of Canada where you're dropped off by float plane and it's 200 miles of paddling and portaging to get yourself out. But Isle Royale is one of our national parks, and I accept that it is more intensely managed than the remote boreal forests of our neighbors to the north. I'm just one of those people that doesn't feel the need for a "backwoods babysitter." So if budgets are cut, it won't bother me much. Sure, I might feel differently laying beside the trail with a broken ankle, but I'm ready and willing to take that chance.

The below article claims that Daisy Farm Campground will be closed; hopefully they simply misunderstood and meant that the ranger resident at Daisy Farm won't be present this year as opposed to the entire campground being shut down.

http://www.miningjournal.net/page/conte ... l?nav=5001

It is my understanding that the Park Service is having a meeting this week and the details of the affects and consequences will be made known .

Midwest Ed wrote:Without trying to get too political, I find it a bit strange that everywhere I look in the federal budget (not just ISRONP), the proposed or announced sequestration cuts are generally from front line costs where they are most visible (read most painful) to the public or user of services.

Could be that nobody wants to read an article about them dropping maintenance contracts on their computers. Front line is what people understand, it's real to them. My guess is it goes across the board.

Midwest Ed wrote:Without trying to get too political, I find it a bit strange that everywhere I look in the federal budget (not just ISRONP), the proposed or announced sequestration cuts are generally from front line costs where they are most visible (read most painful) to the public or user of services.

It may be a matter of gaming the system to protect ones turf. Let us say that Department / Agency / Park ‘A’ manages to make a 2 ½ % cut with little pain and drama. But, Department / Agency / Park B announces the world is going to end, access will be denied, safety will fall apart, and the local tourism industry is going to suffer. With "B", local papers will jump in, along with the chamber of commerce, business leaders, community members, state representatives, national representatives, and retired grandmothers and grandfathers who will start writing letters. The end result will be that someone higher up in the food chain will decide that the Park B cuts are bringing too much heat and they’ll look around to ‘rebalance’ the budget cut. "A" didn’t cry, their community didn’t protest and their Congressperson doesn’t want you to testify in a hearing so just perhaps, "A" had too much money in the first place. So their share of the cut goes up. The lesson learned here is not to swallow the budget cuts too easily because nothing good will come of it. So, you test the waters by making your preliminary cut projections painful. Plus, any recovery from your original worst case "doom & gloom" cuts makes you look good for your next annual review.

Personally, I'd be happy to pay more for the daily use fee if I thought it would keep IR fully functional. In Michigan, the most undeveloped state forest campsite goes for at least $14 per day for a bit of ground, pit toilet and a hand water pump. There's generally no IR quality view or ambiance to go with it. After paying for gas to get to Copper Harbor and back home, ferry fee's, and the latest 'got to have it' backcountry device, the currently low IR daily fee is just an after thought.

johnhens wrote:Tom,
Amygdaloid and Malone Bay Ranger Stations will be closed and will make getting help much more difficult this summer, particularly for paddlers.

I suspect the closures would impact more than just paddlers. Using Amygdaloid as an example, I’m just guessing that the rangers there provide service support as far as Todd Harbor, McCargoe, W. Chickenbone, E. Chickenbone, Birch Island, and Belle Isle. Everything from providing toilet paper to providing emergency response capability and everything in between. If Amygdaloid closed down then someone still has to provide services. So now are they going to send a ranger (likely two) in a boat from Rock Harbor every few days? It would probably be a two day supply and patrol event as a minimum. That’s a lot of man hours. Add to that the price of gas for the boat on that long of a trip. I don’t know what IR pays for gasoline, but the delivered price of fuel to such a remote location has to be high. If you add everything up, I can’t see how closing Amygdaloid would save much money. Also, once you can't support a backcountry site adequately, it won't be too long before someone starts to consider just closing it.

Gimp wrote:... it won't be too long before some starts to consider just closing it.

Some times that isn't always bad.