A new $100 surcharge on foreign visitors at select national parks raises a suite of questions regarding how much revenue the fees will generate, an economic consultant in Jackson Hole said Wednesday.
The Department of Interior announced the new fee Tuesday, sparking speculation about how much money it will raise and whether it might further curtail international travel to the federal preserves and the gateway communities like Jackson and Cody whose economies run on tourism.
The fee will be imposed in 2026 on each foreign visitor to Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks in Wyoming. The surcharge will also apply to Yosemite, Glacier, Rocky Mountain, Grand Canyon, Zion, Everglades, Acadia, Bryce Canyon and Sequoia & Kings Canyon national parks in other states.
Secretary of Interior Doug Burgum said the fees put American families first. Americans will continue to enjoy affordable access, he said in a statement, “while international visitors [will] contribute their fair share to maintaining and improving our parks for future generations.”
Yellowstone counted 4.7 million visitors in 2024, down from a high of 4.8 million in 2021.
What impact the surcharge will have on national parks’ revenues, which individual parks retain, is uncertain, especially in light of declining international visitation. Between 2018 and 2024, foreign visitation to Yellowstone dropped from about 30% of total visitors to 14.8%, according to the park’s statistics.
“To me the interesting question is what happened between 2018-2024 that cut international visitation. Why would international visitation fall in half?”
Jonathan Schechter
As President Donald Trump’s administration curtails visas, angers Canadians by proclaiming that country should become the 51st U.S. state, imposes tariffs and takes other actions, fewer tourists may want to visit the U.S., said Jonathan Schechter, an economic consultant and a member of the Jackson Town Council.
“We’re already seeing a big drop,” Schechter said, even before Trump took office. In 2018, Yellowstone attracted 1.2 million foreign visitors, he said, citing park figures. In 2024, that number was down to 712,089.
What’s going to happen, he mused about foreign tourists, if in 2026 “they’re not feeling welcome?”
$55 million for Yellowstone?
The fee, long touted by the Property and Environmental Research Council, a Montana-based nonprofit focused on environmental conservation, will boost Yellowstone’s revenues substantially, said Brian Yablonski, the organization’s CEO.
“A $100 international visitor surcharge could generate $55 million annually at Yellowstone National Park alone, more than quadrupling that park’s revenue to address deteriorating trails, failing wastewater systems, and crumbling bridges,” he said in a statement. He referenced a 2025 study by Stephen C. Newbold, an associate professor at the Department of Economics at the University of Wyoming.
“I calculated the relative changes in visits and revenues over a wide range of entrance fees using the averaged travel costs,” Newbold wrote, “which revealed that a surcharge would need to be increased beyond $200 per visitor before revenues would decline.”
The analysis probes visitors’ spending “elasticity,” which is their response to a price increase. Entrance fees make up a small portion of the money a foreign traveler will spend on a visit to America’s national parks, he notes.
Newbold wrote that his study has limitations because it used data from 2016 and 2018 and lacked critical information from a 2024 visitor survey. Also, the words “tariffs” and “visas” do not appear in Newbold’s 23-page paper titled “The price elasticity of the demand for visits to Yellowstone National Park.”
That suggests the research stopped short of accounting for overall international tourism trends to the U.S. Additional research could develop “more robust models of international visitor demand,” he wrote.
Today, it costs $35 per vehicle to enter Yellowstone for a week. The average vehicle carries between 2.1 and 2.8 passengers, according to Yellowstone statistics. The number varies according to entrance station and season, Yellowstone’s visitor use reporting and counting instructions state.
Shechter made some calculations using Yellowstone figures and some estimates. Those include an estimated 5% visitation growth from 2024-2026 and an average of 2.5 visitors per vehicle.
Under that scenario, if the percentage of foreign visitors to Yellowstone remains at 15%, the park would see foreign entrance fee revenues increase from $9.9 million a year to $85.2 million if the surcharges are factored in.
That’s an increase of $75.2 million.
He offered other scenarios. If international visitation in 2026 drops to 8% of all Yellowstone visitors (“all” being 5% more than the 2024 total visitation figure), the new fee would generate an additional $32.6 million.
If international visitation dropped to 1% of visitors in 2026, the park would receive $5.6 million from foreigners. That would be a drop of $4.2 million in foreign visitor entrance revenue compared to 2024.
Changing trends
Elasticity aside, the huge variable that remains is whether foreigners will be discouraged from visiting the U.S. because of the Trump administration’s foreign, immigration, visa and trade policies.
“To me the interesting question is what happened between 2018-2024 that cut international visitation,” Schechter said. “Why would international visitation fall in half?”
Was it COVID, he wondered, or a slow recovery from that pandemic? Will it be harder to get a visa to visit the U.S. in 2026? How will international visitors react to perceived American hostility toward some foreigners?
Things have changed.
Eight years ago, Schechter said, there were planeloads of visitors from Shanghai landing in Salt Lake City, loading buses and touring Grand Teton and Yellowstone national parks. It is much rarer to see a coach full of foreigners wending its way through Jackson, Grand Teton and Yellowstone roads today.
The affordable American national park vacation may be becoming less affordable too, Schechter said.
“Most of the consumer spending going on right now in the U.S. is coming from the ultra-wealthy,” he said. “People who are in the middle, lower [income strata] are not spending. Those are the bulk of the people visiting Yellowstone and Grand Teton.”
Lodging revenue “has been saving the bacon of the local taxable economy,” Schechter said. In Jackson, hotels have “raised their rates, and there hasn’t been pushback yet.”
If that trend continues “that just adds even more cost to the price of a vacation,” he said. “How’s that going to affect us?
I was fortunate to visit the Galápagos Islands a few weeks ago. The 97% of the land on the islands are an Ecuadorian National Park. The entry fee is $200 for non citizens. Anywhere you go you must be with a tour guide that is an employee of the National Park and there is a charge for any tour you take. So there’s that. It is well worth the fees. Every guide I talked to loves their job and the people who live on the islands are very protective of the wildlife there. Yellowstone is an international tourist destination just like the Galapagos. I am a frequent visitor to the Park and I actually don’t mind all the visitors. They are there for the same reason I am. To visit nature and appreciate the natural world.
Reading the comments it appears people completely base their opinions on political bias. Anyone that ever spent time in many western National Parks 20-30+ years ago knows what they are supposed to be isnt what they are now.
I dont care who is President is or who raises the rates. The Parks have been TOO CROWDED for for years. They are a literal zoo.
Next step is to either ban or surcharge Tour busses out of the Parks.
So Shechter says less people are visiting because Trump is imposing tariffs and talking bad about Canada, but in another paragraph states the there has been an increase in visitation by 2.5% in 2024-2026. What? Its nice to thrown blame when you throw personal opinions in with statistics. But reading closer it doesn’t match up does it? And, how many international tourists come from Canada on these dates? Not mentioned. I would venture to guess that number is low compared to other countries.
You may have missed the statistics cited by Jackson town council member Jonathan Schechter showing that the number of foreign visitors has already dropped by a large amount in recent years:
““We’re already seeing a big drop,” Schechter said, even before Trump took office. In 2018, Yellowstone attracted 1.2 million foreign visitors, he said, citing park figures. In 2024, that number was down to 712,089.”
This recent decrease in the number of foreign visitors by 500,000 per year is the backdrop to Schechter’s speculation that the new higher fee, combined with various other US govt actions and policies that have been in the news and may make foreign visitors feel “less welcome”, will cut that number still more.
Yes, Schechter said something about an estimated 2024 to 2026 change in TOTAL (not foreign) visitation rate. However that estimate was merely incidental to Schechter’s main point: he needed some estimate of the 2026 visitation rate to estimate future numbers of foreign visitors and revenue collected from the new foreign visitor fee in a few scenarios. Also your citation of what Schechter said on this point is inaccurate.
Your citation: “there has been an increase in visitation by 2.5% in 2024-2026. What?” Schechter’s actual calculation: “… Yellowstone figures and some estimates. Those include an estimated 5% visitation growth from 2024-2026 and an average of 2.5 visitors per vehicle.” (He didn’t say there “has been an increase” in 2024-2026 because 2026 hasn’t happened yet.)
My opinion on the underlying issue, as a multiple-time visitor to both Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, is similar to yours, however: the $100 foreign visitor fee is justified and not excessive (it’s a small fraction of the total cost of foreign travel, and US unlike foreign visitors support the National Park Service through tax payments). While it’s worth asking why the foreign visitor numbers plummeted from 2018-2024, the parks aren’t going away, and foreign visitors may come back in later years due to factors we can’t anticipate. I also strongly support the suggestion by other posters to impose a surcharge on all large tour buses to increase the stability of park revenues and discourage overcrowding at peak times.
I see bumper stickers around town that say “Wyoming is CLOSED.” This sounds like a first step to making this true. Not exactly the message the Wyoming Tourism Board is trying to send.
The article feels biased / thinly researched with the only new “input” being from Jonathan Schechter. The numbers have continued to go up in total visitors to GTNP (3.6mm in 2024 second only to record 3.8mm in 2021) which Schechter’s comments / data usednin the article doesn’t ever address. Based on this last summer’s experience, I suspect that GTNP number will be even higher for 2025. The sheer weight of visitors is already putting pressure on our Parks. Given the impact of “busloads” of foreign tourists which I have personally witnessed on the Parks, I don’t have an issue with the surcharge. I have traveled outside the US and visited many national parks / monuments in other countries where surcharges for foreigners are the norm. That makes sense since a foreigner doesn’t pay national income and related taxes supporting those resources. Though I am definitely NOT a fan of this current administration, the constant “sky is falling” theme found increasingly in WYOFILE articles is undermining my confidence in the journalistic integrity of the product. And only using a subset of Schechter”s “sky is falling” stats doesn’t help.
Single sourced – thinly researched – biased reporting you say ? WyoFile doesn’t do that.
You might want to read the article again … the part citing the Montana nonprofit special interest group PERC Property and Environmental Research Council , which in turn cites U of Wyoming economics academics. Just sayin’
The fee increases can be used to build more squat toilets.
Why the charge? Is there a greater cost involved in hosting foreign visitors than others? Does the park need the money more than local businesses need customers? Will any increased revenue be offset by decreased sales tax, lodging tax, and Federal income tax revenue? Seems like unwise and self-destructive discrimination to me.
I am skeptical re this latest episode by Dt and administration. Where will that extra money go? I doubt that Yellowstone will see much, if any of it.
Please be vigilant. This extra fee for foreigners seems to smack of discrimination to me, personally. We shall see. ..
This is a great idea to try out especially since its foreigner visitors who come in bus loads plugging up the parks access for local taxpayers. Tour companies are benefiting at the cost of local American tourist.
I’d like to know more about how, exactly, this new rule would be administered and enforced. Will all entrants to the Parks have to show their passports or green cards to get the regular entrance fee? Or just the driver of a vehicle? Considering the typical backups and wait times at the entrance gates during summer months, won’t this add an unworkable amount of time (and confusion) to the entrance process? Considering that only 14.8% of GTNP/YNP visitors are foreigners (a figure that is likely to decline), it would seem that the net yield from this rule might not be as significant as projected. And if I have a (Senior) lifetime pass, do 5 foreign passengers in my car get to enter on my pass, as is currently the case, or are all of their passports and green cards to be checked, too? And will online pass purchasers have to upload an image of their passport or green card? These are only a few of the many questions that are bound to arise, for which I can envision no simple, workable answer.
I too would like to know why the steep drop in international visitors from 2018 to 2024. That’s a 6 year window, I would think that numbers for each season should be available, might better explain the fall off. If you want to dance, you need to pay the fiddler……having said that…..how are the entrance kiosks going to determine who is international and who is not? Personally, $35 bucks for a vehicle for a week is ridiculous. National Parks/Monuments/Forests, etc… are treasures, perhaps it’s time to treat them as such.
There’s nothing unusual about charging a higher fee to Nonresidents. Sportspeople have done this for years to fund state wildlife agencies. A Wyoming resident elk license is $57, a non resident license is $692. This is a good thing for sportspeople and a good thing for our wildlife.
When I traveled to South Africa to visit Kruger National Park I paid more as an international visitor to enjoy that park. Increased fees for international visitors should be a non partisan win for conserving our National Parks.
Will Barrasso, Lummis and Hageman stand with the WYO tourist industry or tremble in their booties afraid of retribution from their lord and master DJT? My guess is the latter. The three of them only care about themselves.
I beg forgiveness every day from the world for what this régime has wrought. And now this absolute caca. I suspect what foreigners deign to travel to the U.S. will pass on paying more to experience the parks. It’s all so heartbreaking.
This charge is LONG overdue and should be higher. This charge is a drop in the bucket compared to what foreign visitors are shelling out to do the western loop so many do.
Next step should be massive fees for charter bus companies that flood every point of interest all summer long.
Make Our Parks Less Crowded Again!
This proposed fee increase on international travellers is insane. Pure greed and ” America First” xenophobia totally out of place and purpose. It has the smell of Trumpism to it.
Living in the tourist resort of Cody , I will say I vastly prefer the enlightened international travellers over the generic American tourons who arrive in town wearing polyester pants with a $50 bill in their pocket and don’t change either. Putting a hefty admission fee on the foreign visitors to the Parks seems punitive, with negative ripples outwards. How do you even enforce it or collect it ? Never mind the compounding issue of getting a travel visa from the Trump bureuacracy to come to America in the first place.
I’m glad Schechter brought up lodging . Accomodation rates in the Yellowstone-Teton region are already scandalous. It’s why bed tax revenues go up even when the number of guests goes down — the lodging tax is a flat percentage of the room rate. Currently, room rates in my Cody motels and especially the VRBO’s and Air BnB’s boggle the mind. Avarice at work with collateral damage to the affordable housing situation .
Not giving the government a pass here, but add to the story the $400- $800 per night rooms at Lake Hotel in Yellowstone . That’s the private sector – concessionaire Xanterra Resorts – at work. A sidebar would be on the huge fees Xanterra charges to rent a dock slip for the summer at Bridge Bay Marina that have driven off most of the longtime locals there. Xanterra has 20 year concessionaire contract all throughout Yellowstone and pretty much does as it pleases. And we let them.
Both the public and private sectors of the Wyoming tourism biz are seriously challenging the overall economy and yearround liveability here. This Department of Interior fee scheme should be challenged as unworkable and counterproductive.
It’s done all over the world. We are one of the last to do it.