Lincoln Blog

December 02, 2008:

What sort of reaction, do you suppose, would there be if a major hotel chain - say Hilton or Marriott - announced plans to build resort lodges in Pennsylvania's pristine state parks?

Would there be outrage from environmentalists?

Perhaps some fist pounding by eco-bureaucrats?

Oh, but it would be justified. "We know there are many people who would spend more time using our parks if we offer them something beyond the traditional camping experience," would argue the developer.

Can you just imagine the uproar?

But, what if that quote - what if that developer - were Pennsylvania's Secretary of Conservation and Natural Resources? Those words were in fact spoken by Michael DiBerardinis, the state cabinet secretary charged with the responsibility of protecting our unblemished forests.

On the heels of a state funded bail-out of Boscovs comes word that We the Taxpayers are now going to be proud owners of "Nature Inns" at state parks, starting with Bald Eagle State Park in Centre County. If you don't like the idea of sleeping on the ground in a flimsy tent, you can now enjoy nature (or what will be left of it) from the comfort of your state-subsidized lodge.

This is wrong on many levels:

First, there is the issue of state government going into the lodging business. There is no way to justify using taxpayer dollars to build lodges that are going to compete with private hotel and motel chains. If there is a demand for overnight lodging in forested areas, then Hilton, Marriott or even some small entrepreneur would certainly build them. The fact that hasn't happened is a pretty good indication there is no profit to be made, hence annual taxpayer subsidies are on the horizon.

Which leads us to the issue of why we are spending precious taxpayer dollars building lodges in state parks when we can't fund critical infrastructure needs such as roads and bridges, social services, and sewer lines? This is just another example of how state government wastes our money on bells & whistles while the locomotive sits broken down on the tracks.

Third, the purpose of state-owned park land is to preserve it. It is not called the department of "conservation" for no reason. To have the very department charged with preserving our park land leading the construction of what are essentially commercial lodging facilities is a major failure to fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities.

What's next, perhaps a McDonalds and a strip mall for the convenience of those staying in the lodge?

All of this adds up to one major mis-step by the Rendell Administration. The General Assembly should demand Rendell and DiBerardinis put an immediate end to this untoward development on our state's park land.

Give Us Your Feedback!