Updated September 22, 2023
National Park Service: Government Shutdown Issues
Like other federal agencies, the National Park Service
although “no visitor services will be provided.” By contrast,
(NPS) has halted most operations during occasional
park “facilities” or areas that typically would be “locked or
government shutdowns resulting from lapses in
secured during non-business hours” were to be closed “for
appropriations. In the past three decades, such shutdowns
the duration of the shutdown.” Park concessioners
occurred in late 1995/early 1996, October 2013, early 2018,
(privately owned businesses such as restaurants and hotels
and, most recently, from December 22, 2018, to January 25,
in parks) could continue operations at the discretion of park
2019. Although government shutdowns have affected many
superintendents.
agencies and programs, public and congressional attention
has focused particularly on certain impacts, one of which is
During the 2018-2019 shutdown, some park units
the effect of a shutdown on the National Park System.
consisting solely of buildings and/or other lockable areas
were entirely closed. One estimate suggested that roughly
Agency actions during a shutdown are governed by the
one-third of National Park System units may have fallen
Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. §§1341-1342, §§1511-1519)
into this category initially (although certain units later
and related guidance, including Circular No. A-11 from the
operated with mandatory appropriations; see below). The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). One OMB
majority of parks—including units such as Yellowstone
requirement is for agency heads to develop and maintain
National Park, Grand Canyon National Park, Yosemite
shutdown plans, known as contingency plans, detailing how
National Park, the Statue of Liberty National Memorial, and
each agency is to prepare for and operate during a funding
the National Mall in Washington, DC—remained at least
gap. During recent shutdowns, NPS has executed
partially accessible to visitors throughout the shutdown,
successive versions of its contingency plan that have
with varying levels of services and law enforcement.
remained consistent in some ways and varied in others.
Issues were reported in some of the park units that remained
For example, during the two most recent shutdowns with
accessible during the 2018-2019 shutdown. These included
durations of more than one week—those in October 2013
trash buildups, restroom waste problems, and accidental
and December 2018-January 2019—NPS executed
and intentional damage to natural resources, among others.
contingency plans that were similar in some respects. Under
The January 2019 NPS contingency plan provided that “if
the plans in both shutdowns, approximately 21,000 NPS
visitor access becomes a safety, health or resource
employees were identified for furloughs, and approximately
protection issue (weather, road conditions, resource
3,000 employees were required to continue to work to carry
damage, garbage build-up to the extent that it endangers
out essential activities. However, the plans diverged in
human health or wildlife, etc.), the area must be closed”
other areas, particularly with respect to the extent and types
(emphasis in original). Some parks, and areas within parks,
of visitor access planned for parks in a shutdown, given that
were closed for these reasons as the shutdown continued.
the bulk of NPS staff would be furloughed. As of
September 21, 2023, NPS had not publicly released any
The general accessibility of most national park units during
update to its January 2019 contingency plan.
the 2018-2019 shutdown differed from the overall NPS
approach in the shutdown of October 2013, when all parks
During both recent shutdowns, the NPS policies on visitor
were “closed to public visitation and use.” To implement
access to parks were subjects of debate in Congress and
the closures in 2013, NPS required all visitors to leave the
among other stakeholders. Issues included, on the one hand,
parks. All concessions and commercial visitor services were
concerns about economic losses to states, localities, and job
closed (although certain concessioners negotiated with NPS
sectors dependent on park tourism when parks were
to reopen during the shutdown). Where possible, park roads
inaccessible; and, on the other hand, concerns about
were closed and access was denied. According to a 2014
damages to park resources and threats to visitor health and
NPS report, the 16-day shutdown in 2013 resulted in an
safety when parks were accessible but not fully staffed.
overall loss of 7.88 million visits to the parks and a loss of
Other topics of debate in NPS shutdowns have related to the
$414 million in NPS visitor spending in gateway
availability of funding outside of annual discretionary
communities across the country. Similar figures are not
appropriations, which could enable limited park operations
available for the 2018-2019 shutdown.
during a lapse in annual appropriations.
Funding for Limited Operations
Accessibility of NPS Units in Shutdown
Like some other agencies, NPS has had access to funding
NPS’s contingency plan dated January 2019 provided that
sources outside of annual appropriations that have allowed
“parks may still be accessible to visitors” during the
for limited operations during shutdowns. For example, NPS
shutdown, but that “staffing levels will be based on the
contingency plans (e.g., in 2013 and 2019) have provided
assumption that no visitor services will be provided.” The
for continuation of “projects obligated from funds that are
plan stated that “park roads, lookouts, trails, and open-air
not subject to lapse, such as multi-year appropriations from
memorials will generally remain accessible to visitors,”
prior fiscal years.” In addition, NPS has used mandatory
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

National Park Service: Government Shutdown Issues
appropriations to fund limited operations during shutdowns.
Recreation Fees
Two notable types of mandatory funding have been
NPS charges, collects, and retains recreation fees under
(1) donations from states and other entities to support
FLREA. On January 6, 2019, NPS announced that during
services at individual parks, and (2) in the most recent
that shutdown, the agency would use revenues from
shutdown, recreation fees collected under the Federal Lands
recreation fees for certain activities in park units. The
Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA; 16 U.S.C. §§6801-
activities included maintaining restrooms, collecting trash,
6814). The agency has used the donations and fees to cover
operating campgrounds, providing law enforcement and
operating costs that it had planned to fund through annual
emergency services, maintaining roads, and staffing
appropriations.
entrance gates to provide critical safety information. After
the announcement, multiple parks began to fund these
Donations
activities with recreation fees, enabling some staff that
NPS has authority at 54 U.S.C. §101101 to accept monetary
previously had been furloughed to return to work on these
donations for park system purposes. In NPS shutdowns at
matters. After the shutdown ended, NPS officials stated that
least since 1995, some nonfederal entities (primarily states)
the agency would “fully restore” the FLREA recreation fee
have donated money to NPS to operate selected parks or
account to pre-shutdown levels, by moving obligations
park activities, with the aim of fostering public access and
made in the shutdown from the FLREA account to NPS’s
ameliorating economic losses to communities from reduced
main discretionary account.
park tourism. For example, during the 2013 shutdown,
several states (Arizona, Colorado, New York, South
Some Members of Congress questioned the legality of
Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah) donated varying sums to
using FLREA fees for operations during the 2018-2019
reopen national park units using state funding. Following a
shutdown and restoring the account thereafter. On
model used in 1995-1996, these states developed
September 5, 2019, GAO issued a legal opinion (B-330776)
agreements with NPS to donate calculated amounts for park
stating that the Department of the Interior (DOI) violated
operating costs for a certain number of days, during which
the purpose statute (31 U.S.C. §1301(a)) and the
time the parks would be open to the public and staffed by
Antideficiency Act when it obligated FLREA fees during
NPS employees.
the shutdown for expenses normally charged to NPS
discretionary appropriations. GAO stated that DOI should
In the 2018-2019 shutdown, several states (including
report its violation of the Antideficiency Act as required by
Arizona, New York, and Utah) and the territory of Puerto
31 U.S.C. §1351 and take actions to prevent future
Rico similarly donated funds for daily operations at
violations. On September 6, 2019, DOI responded,
individual parks for specified periods. Some localities, park
disputing the GAO opinion in part on the grounds that NPS
partner groups, and other private entities also made
had used FLREA fees in the past for operating expenses
donations for specific activities or services within parks,
similar to those the fees covered in the shutdown. The
pursuant to NPS authority and guidance in the contingency
extent to and purposes for which FLREA fees could be
plan providing that, “at the superintendent’s discretion and
available in any government shutdown remain in debate.
with approval of the Regional Director or Director, parks
may enter into arrangements with local governments,
NPS had an estimated unobligated balance of $403 million
cooperating associations, and/or other third parties ... for
in recreation fees at the end of FY2022, in addition to $349
donation of specified visitor services.” As one example,
million collected during that year. According to a 2022
donations to Zion National Park in Utah reportedly came
multi-agency report, 156 of (at that time) 423 NPS units
from the State of Utah, Washington County, the city of St.
charged an entrance fee and/or “expanded amenity” fee.
George, and nonprofit groups. In addition to monetary
Under FLREA and NPS policy, generally 80%-100% of
donations, nonfederal volunteers reportedly provided in-
fees are retained for use by the collecting unit, with the
kind services, including maintenance and other types of
remaining collections available agency-wide. (The January
visitor services, at a number of parks.
2019 contingency plan provided that, during a shutdown,
the NPS Director could allocate agency-wide FLREA fees
Agreements between NPS and states for shutdown
to park units that did not collect fees or had “insufficient
donations typically have provided that NPS would refund to
balances.”) NPS has broad discretion in using fee revenues
the donor any unobligated balances that remain if the
for purposes specified in FLREA, which include
shutdown ends before all the donated monies are spent.
interpretation, visitor services, and facility maintenance,
However, any funding actually used for park operations
repair, and enhancement related to visitor access and health
could be reimbursed only through an act of Congress. For
and safety. Current NPS policy is that parks are to use 55%
example, after the 2013 shutdown, multiple bills were
of fees for deferred or preventative maintenance.
introduced to reimburse the states for their shutdown
donations. These bills were not enacted, so the states were
For Further Reading
not reimbursed. Some Members of Congress, along with the
On federal government shutdowns, see CRS Report
states themselves, contended that state reimbursement
R41759, Past Government Shutdowns: Key Resources;
should be prioritized, given that federal appropriations
CRS Report RL34680, Shutdown of the Federal
ultimately were provided (retroactively) for the shutdown
Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects; CRS Report
period. Others took the view that the states had accepted the
RS20348, Federal Funding Gaps: A Brief Overview; and
uncertainty of reimbursement when they agreed to make the
CRS Report R41723, Funding Gaps and Government
donations.
Shutdowns: CRS Experts.
Laura B. Comay, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

National Park Service: Government Shutdown Issues

IF11079
Carol Hardy Vincent, Specialist in Natural Resources
Policy


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11079 · VERSION 8 · UPDATED

---