easy to dismiss as absurd the Trump administration's ideas for plugging the chronic funding gap of our national parks. •Can anyone really think it's a good idea to allow Amazon deliveries to your tent in Yosemite or food trucks to line up under the redwood trees at Sequoia National Park? [2] SBut the administration is right about one thing: U.S. national parks are in crisis. •Collectively, they have a maintenance backlog of more than $12 billion.❷Roads, trails, restrooms, visitor centers and other infrastructure are crumbling. [3]
❶But privatizing and commercializing the campgrounds would not be a cure-all. •Campgrounds are a tiny portion of the overall infrastructure backlog, and concessionaires in the parks hand over, on average, only about 5% of their revenues to the National Park Service. [4]
❶Moreover, increased privatization would certainly undercut one of the major reasons why 300 million visitors come (27) to the parks each year: to enjoy nature and get a break from the commercial drumbeat that overwhelms daily life. [5] ®The real problem is that the parks have been chronically starved of funding.，We conducted a comprehensive survey examining how U.S. residents view their national parks, and we found that Americans place a very high value on them_ hether or not they actually visit them. The peer-reviewed economic survey of 700 U.S. taxpayers, conducted by mail and internet, also found that people would be willing to pay a significant amount of money to make sure the parks and their programs are kept intact. SSome 81% of respondents said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for the next 10 years to avoid any cuts to the national parks. [6] ®The national parks provide great value to U.S. residents both as places to escape and as symbols of nature. •On top of this, they produce value from their extensive educational programs, their positive impact on the climate through carbon sequestration, their contribution to our cultural and artistic life, and of course through tourism. •Fhe parks also help keep America's past alive, working with thousands of local jurisdictions around the country to protect historical sites—including Ellis Island and Gettysburg—and to bring the stories of these places to life. [7] The parks do all this on a shoestring. •Congress allocates only $3 billion a year to the national park system—an amount that has been flat since 2(X)1 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) with the exception of a onetime boost in 2009 as part of the Obama stimulus package. •Meanwhile, the number of annual visitors has increased by more than 50% since 1980, and now stands at 330 million visitors per year.
📝 全文释义（点击展开）
特朗普政府填补美国国家公园长期资金缺 口的想法很容易被认为是荒谬的而不予考虑。 有人真的认为让亚马逊送货到你在约塞米蒂国 家公园的帐篷，或者让餐车在红杉树国家公园 的红杉下排队是个好主意吗？ 但该政府在一件事上的判断是正确 的：美国国家公园正处于危机之中。总体上， 美国国家公园积压的维修工作所需费用超过 亿美元。道路、小径、卫生间、游客中心 和其他基础设施正在崩溃。 但将露营地私有化和商业化并不是万能之 计。露营地是整个积压的基础设施维修工作的 一小部分，公园的特许经营者平均只向国家公 园管理局上缴其约5%的收入。 此外，进一步的私有化肯定会削弱 每年3亿游客来这些公园的主要原因之一：享 受自然，暂时摆脱淹没日常生活的商业鼓吹。 真正的问题是这些公园长期严重缺乏资 金。我们进行了一项全面的调查，调查美国居 民如何看待他们的国家公园，我们发现美国人 非常重视国家公园——无论他们是否真的去参 观这些公园。这项通过邮件和互联网对700名 美国纳税人进行的经同行评议的经济调查还发 现，人们愿意支付一大笔钱，以确保公园及其 项目完好无损。(28)约81%的受访者表示， 他们愿意在未来10年缴纳额外的税款，以遍 免任何对国家公园的削减。 国家公园为美国居民提供了巨大的价值，其 既是世外桃源，也是自然的象征。除此之外，国 家公园的价值还源自其广泛的教育项目、通过碳 封存对气候产生的积极影响、对我们的文化和 艺术生活的贡献，当然还有旅游业。(29)这些 公园也有助于保持美国历史的活力，与全国数 千个地方管辖区合作，保护包括埃利斯岛和葛 底斯堡在内的历史遗迹，并让这些地方的故亨 鲜活起来。 这些公园都是小本经营。(30)国会每 年拨给国家公园系统的资金只有30亿美元， 这一数额自2001年以来一直没有变化(以通 货膨胀调整后的美元计算)，除了 2009年作 为奥巴马经济剌激计划的一部分进行了一次 增长。与此同时，自1980年以来，每年的游 客数量增长了 50%以上，现在每年有3.3亿 游客。 篇章结构 第一段：指出特朗普政府填补美国国家公园长期资金缺口的想法被认为是荒谬的 第二段：肯定美国政府对美国国家公园正处于危机中这一判断 第三段：露营地是积压的维修工作的一小部分，且特许经营者只 第三、四段：将露营地私有化和 美国国家公 商业化不是万能之＜ 向国家公园管理局上缴其收入的一小部分 园正处于危， 计的原因 第四段：进一步的私有化会破坏游客体验 机之中 第五段：指出美国国家公园面临的真正问题是长期严重缺乏资金，同时借用一项调查说明大部分美 国人同意为国家公园支付额外费用 第六段：列举美国国家公园为美国居民提供的巨大价值 第七段：分析美国国家公园长期缺乏资金的原因