There has been some concern expressed about a bill proposed by Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation (IDPR) that would allow the agency to contract with corporations and nonprofit agencies. Some fear this will lead to over-commercialization in state parks and even the naming of state parks after corporations.

First, there is nothing in state code that currently prohibits IDPR from entering into agreements with corporations and nonprofits. Taking the conservative approach, the agency decided to seek statutory authority to ensure transparency.

But why do they want to do this in the first place?

During the economic downturn a few years ago, the agency lost 81 percent of its General Fund revenue and 25 positions. Some of that money has been restored, but the agency is operating on far less General Fund money than it did a decade ago.

IDPR has been creative and dedicated in finding ways to address the shortfall. Staff members have sought efficiencies in every agency process to reduce costs. Volunteers have stepped up to give tens of thousands of hours of their time to keep state parks operating. The agency has increased fees for camping and other services. It has become entrepreneurial, creating and implementing detailed marketing plans for every state park. The State Parks Passport created by the agency is a big success. Thousands of Idahoans pay $10 annually so they can visit and support their state parks year round.

But they're still not where they need to be. Interpretation in the parks is a shadow of what it once was. Maintenance needs are outpacing the agency's ability to address them. Most important, adding capacity to the system right now to address the needs of a growing population is out of the question.

Passage of the bill would allow the agency to work with companies and nonprofits in promoting events in the parks. It would help IDPR provide more interpretation by seeking sponsorship of interpretive programs. It would let parks seek corporate sponsorship of new programs and facilities.

If the bill passes, you are likely to start seeing recognition of corporate support in the form of small logos in the corner of an interpretive sign or brochure. You may see a new state parks smart phone app that is free to you, but that contains advertising links. You may see donated service vehicles with corporate wraps, similar to those you see now for Idaho Public Television and the Idaho Shakespeare Festival.

Would you see Taco Bell State Park or something like it?

The Idaho Park and Recreation Board, appointed by the Governor, has the authority right now to name state parks. This bill doesn't change that. The current board and director are sensitive to the concerns of Idahoans and would be highly unlikely to offend park users with such a move.

But what about future boards, directors and legislatures? When funding again becomes tough, might they be tempted by the offer of millions in exchange for the right to name a state park for a corporation?

There is that danger. We believe SB 1098 offers the opportunity to preclude such a move. We support the language of the bill, but believe it would give state park supporters more confidence in its intent if a line prohibiting the state parks to be named after corporations were added.

The Friends of Idaho State Parks is an organization dedicated to keeping parks open and increasing outdoor recreation opportunities in state parks across the state. We support this bill but would like to see the legitimate concern regarding naming rights for state parks addressed in the statute.

Rick Just is president of Friends of Idaho State Parks.