Grant’s Farm a National Park?
An article in the Post-Dispatch reports that the National Park Service is considering converting the St. Louis treasure that is Grant’s Farm into a national park. One of the great things about Grant’s Farm is that it is run privately by Anheuser-Busch, Inc., and the Busch family, at no cost to taxpayers. The park has been run for 55 years without charging an entrance fee, all while losing $3.5 to $4 million annually.
It is not clear who approached whom with the proposition to make Grant’s Farm a national park, but one can only hope it was not the National Park Service. The budget for our national parks is already strapped, and the lack of funds is evidenced by deteriorating infrastructure. The last thing needed is to add one more park to be maintained with public funds. Furthermore, the growing national debt makes it unlikely that the NPS will be receiving a significant increase in funding in the near future.
I believe Grant’s Farm has the potential to become sustainable if it were to charge an entrance fee. The 273-acre animal preserve is visited by 550,000 people a year, more than enough demand to allow the parks owners to cover costs — or even turn a profit, if management operates the park efficiently.
I hope the Busch family and Anheuser-Busch continue to run Grant’s Farm, even if that means charging an entrance fee. Grant’s Farm provides a unique experience that will be lost if it falls under government control.
So Grant’s Farm could break even by charging adults $10 and children $5 each for admission – and they could probably manage this even while offering reduced-price or free admission to the economically disadvantaged. That’s a heck of a lot cheaper than, say, a Cardinals game, or even a trip to City Museum.
Comment by Dave Roland — July 23, 2010 @ 4:06 p.m.
So we should sell the Archgrounds and Forest Park to Peabody Energy?
Comment by Douglas Duckworth — July 23, 2010 @ 4:37 p.m.
With all the visitors to all the National Parks there is no reason for taxpayers to pay anything towards the parks. Make them self-sufficient!
Comment by Dave Bertelsen — July 23, 2010 @ 4:59 p.m.
You’re equating a privately-run facility that is a demonstrated money-loser under its current operational model with two public facilities that were designed to be money-losers. My comment pointed out that Grant’s Farm could easily pay for itself as a private facility. And besides, Mr. Bertelsen makes an excellent point. In fact, most national parks (believe that Great Smoky Mountains NP and Rocky Mountains NP are the only exceptions) DO charge an admission fee to help defray the cost of their operation. It’s worth noting that these admission fees can also help reduce the human impact on these natural wonders – a goal that I imagine Mr. Duckworth might appreciate.
Comment by Dave Roland — July 28, 2010 @ 7:38 a.m.
“I believe Grant’s Farm has the potential to become sustainable if it were to charge an entrance fee. The 273-acre animal preserve is visited by 550,000 people a year, more than enough demand to allow the parks owners to cover costs — or even turn a profit, if management operates the park efficiently.”
If only this were a private enterprise…wouldn’t it turn a profit? or actually, if only it were managed well…wouldn’t it turn a profit? maybe the state should own it because we could do all of these better…wait, isn’t this central planning?
Comment by Eapen Thampy — July 31, 2010 @ 3:01 a.m.
I beleive Grant’s farm charges a substantial fee for parking. But the real change is that the new breed of businessmen have no sense of an obligation to the public like previous generations did.
Comment by dempster holland — August 7, 2010 @ 7:30 p.m.