Purpose of Wyoming’s Fee Structure Differs from Surrounding States

The SPHS fee structure was established by the Legislature to accomplish different purposes than those in surrounding states.  The Legislature’s primary consideration in creating this fee structure has been to maintain parks to provide quality recreational experiences for residents.  The focus has not been on using state parks to promote the state’s tourism industry, or on achieving a degree of self-sufficiency for park operations as in other states.  Three important legislative policies, charging residents less than non-residents, offering annual permits, and dedicating most fee revenues for capital improvements in the system, have supported that priority. 

Wyoming’s unique fee structure has inherent benefits and limitations.  The SPHS two-tier fee structure is considerably simpler than in other states, and resident costs are minimized.  However, other states are able to accomplish additional management objectives, such as distributing visitor use or generating extra revenue, by modifying and varying fees.  Pressure is mounting on Wyoming’s park resources, and there may be ways for Wyoming to accommodate some of the other states’ use of fees to better manage park resources.

Wyoming’s Fee Structure Designed

For Residents’ Benefit

The Wyoming Legislature established the SPHS fee structure to accomplish different purposes than those in surrounding states.  Throughout the evolution of the fee program in Wyoming, the sensitivity of fee-related issues coupled with sometimes competing political points of view have contributed to the development of a fee structure that differs from those of comparator states.

Wyoming and the surrounding state park systems are diverse, including their number and types of areas, acreage,[1] visitation and revenues.  We selected Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Utah as comparators, as they are Wyoming’s six contiguous states.  Further, these states were included in a 1991 study that contributed to the establishment of the fee program. 

In Wyoming, controlling use and access appear to have been the primary legislative intent behind the initial setting of fees, rather than collecting the maximum possible revenues.  Another legislative priority has been to provide a quality recreational experience for state residents, as opposed to focusing on the parks as a tourist attraction.  Several key legislative policies, addressed in the following sections, have supported these priorities.

Wyoming Residents Pay Less For Daily Use

Wyoming and the surrounding states charge daily use fees for each day of visitation to a park or site.  Consistent with legislative intent to focus on providing recreational opportunities for residents, Wyoming is the only state among the comparators that charges non-residents more than residents for daily use.[2]  As illustrated in Figure 6, other states charge the same rates for both residents and non-residents. 

Figure 6: Daily Use Fees for Residents & Non-Residents[3]

2000

Source: LSO analysis of Wyoming and surrounding park systems’ data.
*Note: The second number is a recent change, to become effective January 2002.

Wyoming has the lowest daily use fee for residents, and is among the highest for non-residents.  Comparing daily use fees for parks, other states’ rates range from $3 to $6 for all visitors.  In Wyoming, residents pay $2; non-residents pay $5, which will be reduced to $4 in 2002.

Wyoming Permits Intended to Provide

Advantage for Residents

Annual permits allow unlimited use of state parks and sites for a flat fee.  Thus, they provide a financial advantage to frequent users, such as local residents with easier access to a location.  However, in order to comply with federal regulations, SPHS also has had to offer permits to non-residents, in effect extending the benefit to non-residents and minimizing the advantage to residents.  Further, permits are inconsistent with the user pays philosophy, since we assume that visitors purchase permits in order to obtain a discounted cost per visit.  Thus, visitors who use the parks most may pay less for their use of the resource.

Wyoming is alone among surrounding states in offering an annual resident camping permit.  Beginning in 2001, because of L&WCF regulations, it is offering a camping permit to non-residents as well. 

Figure 7: Annual Daily Use Permit for Residents & Non-Residents

2000

Source: LSO analysis of Wyoming and surrounding park systems’ data.

As illustrated in Figure 7, all comparator states offer an annual daily use permit, with Wyoming and Montana having non-resident differentials.  For residents, costs range from $14 in Nebraska to $65 in Utah.  Wyoming is in the middle at $25.  For non-residents, Wyoming, at $40, is among the most expensive for daily use permits, and only Utah charges more for all visitors.   

Wyoming Dedicates Fee Revenues

to Capital Construction

Wyoming’s fee revenues are dedicated to capital construction, whereas all of the surrounding states reported using fee revenues primarily for operating expenses.  The comparator states report levels of self-sufficiency, or the percentage of their total operating costs covered by their fee revenues.  Consistent with opinions voiced at statewide stakeholder meetings, the Wyoming Legislature has dedicated fee revenues to improving park facilities.  This maintains and enhances the resources that belong to residents, rather than covering operating costs as would be necessary if the parks were required to attain a level of self-sufficiency.

Regardless of the purposes for which fee revenues are expended in the different states, all seven of them pool the revenue.  This means each park and site does not receive funding based on the amount of fee revenues it collected.  By pooling fees, park managers can address priorities on a system-wide basis and attend to the needs of those sites that collect less fee revenue. 

Other Unique Features of

Wyoming’s Fee Structure

Fees Are Set in Statute

Wyoming’s Legislature sets policy for the state park system, including determination of fees.  The surrounding state park systems receive overall policy direction from a parks board or commission, which also has fee-setting authority.  Only in Nebraska does the Legislature set the daily use fee, but Nebraska’s parks board approves camping fees.  Agency staff make initial fee change recommendations in Idaho and Utah, with final approval coming from the board and the legislature routinely accepting the fee structure changes. 

Wyoming statutes make no fee exception for non-vehicular traffic; thus Wyoming is also unique in charging the same amount for both motorized and non-motorized admittance.  For visitors who enter on foot or by bicycle, Idaho, Nebraska, and South Dakota do not charge a daily use fee, and the remaining surrounding states, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah, charge a reduced fee.  

Wyoming Offers Only Primitive Camping

Wyoming and Montana parks differ from the other comparator states in offering open camping in addition to designated campsites, while charging the same fee for both experiences.  Open camping means that users can camp anywhere within the park boundaries, excluding areas posted as off-limits.  Most of the eleven parks or sites in Wyoming offering camping have both types of camping. 

In Wyoming and Montana, designated campsites are all primitive; at a minimum they have access to potable water and primitive (vault) restrooms but do not provide access to utilities.  Wyoming’s designated sites include a parking space, fire ring, and picnic table.  The other comparator states offer improved designated campsites that include access to electricity, running water, and modern toilets, either through hook-ups or central facilities.  These states vary camping fees according to the amenities offered or the popularity of the sites or of the parks in which they are located. 

In Wyoming, campground owners have adamantly maintained that SPHS should not offer camping opportunities comparable to those available in the private sector.  Private concessionaires operating in some water-based parks offer improved campsites, and most SPHS parks and sites that offer camping are within 30 miles of private campgrounds with improved campsites.  In the surrounding states, park fees are at least somewhat determined by comparing with private sector rates. 

Cost For Resident Camping is Low

Considering the total cost for a day of camping, Figure 8 shows that Wyoming is again at the low end for residents at $6.  Only Nebraska charges less, $5.50, for its primitive campsites.  Non-resident campers in Wyoming pay significantly more, $14, for primitive campsites than do out-of-state visitors to most of the surrounding state park systems.  Charges for primitive campsites for all visitors range from $5.50 in Nebraska to $12 in Montana.

Figure 8: Daily Camping Costs for Residents & Non-Residents

2000

Source: LSO analysis of Wyoming and surrounding park systems’ data.

Wyoming’s Fee Revenues Low

Considering Visitation

Considering total fee revenues in conjunction with visitation, as shown in Figure 9, two states can have similar visitation but significantly different revenues.[5]  For example, Wyoming and Idaho had about the same visitation in 2000, but Idaho collected almost $3 million more in fee revenues.  Even though Wyoming had over a million more visitors, it collected $300,000 less in revenues than Montana.

Figure 9: Visitation & Revenues in Wyoming & Surrounding States

2000

Source: LSO analysis of Wyoming and surrounding park systems’ reported 2000 data.

Variations in fee revenues collected may be due to factors outside of the control of the state park system, such as the population of the state and the types of parks and sites each system provides.  However, we believe the different legislative priorities and unique fee structure in Wyoming discussed above, may account for some of the disparities.

Benefits and Limitations Of Wyoming’s

Unique Fee Structure

Wyoming’s fee structure supports the legislative priority of providing quality recreational experiences for residents, by minimizing costs to residents and by investing most of the fee revenues into improving the parks and sites.  Further, the state’s two-tier fee structure for parks and historic sites is significantly simpler than the surrounding states’ fee structures, since all locations within a tier are valued the same. 

However, Wyoming’s fee structure limits its ability to accomplish park management objectives compared to surrounding states, as will be discussed in Chapter 4.  For example, the flat camping fee established in statute does not allow the flexibility that other states have in setting their fees, which they use for management purposes.  Other states vary fees to reflect different camping experiences, enabling them to distribute use between and within parks and to generate extra revenue by charging higher fees for more developed campsites.  SPHS cannot vary fees since the rates are set in statute. 

Recommendation:  The Legislature should consider other states’ usage of fee structures for enhanced park management.

As visitation at Wyoming’s state parks increases, more pressure will be placed on SPHS resources and greater flexibility will be needed to effectively manage diverse circumstances.  Although some management options are unavailable by virtue of legislative intent and the choices made in structuring Wyoming’s park fees, there may still be opportunities to incorporate techniques used in other states.  For example, variable fees could be considered based on the amount of visitation a specific location gets, or quality of campsite, as is done in surrounding states. As Wyoming’s park system continues to evolve, the Legislature may want to consider modifications to the fee structure to enable SPHS to fulfill expanded management requirements and to ensure the quality of residents’ recreational opportunities.