Visitors to popular national parks in the United States are facing new challenges when trying to enter these iconic destinations, as they are now being asked if they are U.S. residents. This shift has resulted in longer wait times at park gates and has caused some international tourists to reconsider their visits. Experts express concern that this “America-first pricing” reflects a broader trend of the Trump administration’s immigration policies targeting non-residents.
Mneesha Gellman, a political scientist at Emerson College, describes the situation as one designed to instill discomfort and anxiety among international visitors, potentially deterring them from entering these parks altogether.
In November, the Trump administration announced an increased visitor fee structure for non-U.S. residents, which now includes a $100 surcharge at 11 major parks. Additionally, nonresident America the Beautiful passes now cost an extra $170. Elizabeth Peace, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, defended the policy, stating it acknowledges the substantial taxpayer investment in these public lands while still welcoming international visitors who contribute to local economies.
The list of parks affected by these new fees includes renowned sites like Acadia, Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, and Zion National Parks. Since the policy took effect on January 1, it has led to significant entry delays as staff must verify visitors’ residency status, which can lead to confusion due to the diverse range of immigration statuses.
Staff at several parks confirmed that the questioning process has increased wait times, and many foreign visitors have opted to turn away rather than deal with potential higher fees. With continued visitor peaks anticipated during the summer months, the issue could worsen. While the National Park Service requires proof of citizenship or residency for purchasing passes, guidance indicates that not all identification needs to be checked, relying on visitors’ self-reporting of their status.
The intent behind this policy has raised questions among park staff, who often feel conflicted while processing visitors. This sentiment is echoed by employees across different parks, noting that the probing questions can lead to discomfort and unease as foreign tourists decide against entering due to potential fees. Language barriers further complicate the situation.
Experts point out that determining who qualifies as a U.S. resident is complex due to the multitude of immigration statuses in existence. This policy appears to align with the Trump administration’s wider agenda of prioritizing U.S. citizens over immigrants, a trend that includes curbing immigrant access to various public programs.
Furthermore, the increased scrutiny on residency status adds to the burdens already faced by park staff, especially as the National Parks Conservation Association noted a significant reduction in Park Service employees due to budget cuts last year. With a lessening workforce, implementing such a detailed residency verification system in a short timeframe could lead to increased confusion and operational strain.
Despite the challenges, there remains hope that as staff become more accustomed to the new policies, the negative impacts on visitor experience may lessen. The enduring beauty and significance of the national parks continue to attract both domestic and international visitors, reinforcing the need for accessible public spaces for everyone.