I had to laugh out loud when I read this USA Today article on “finding good deals in national parks.” At first I thought they’d be referring to bargains on lodging inside the parks, such as at the Yellowstone lodges, cabins, and hotel. Or perhaps they were referring to inexpensive ranger-led excursions, such as the $10-per-person fee we paid last week to take an excellent 3-hour guided hike into the gorgeous Fiery Furnace section of Arches National Park, otherwise practically inaccessible to park visitors.

But no. The folks at USA Today were talking only about park entry fees. Come on!

Last week, we paid $10 (for the car and all occupants) for Arches National Park, $10 for Canyonlands National Park, $7 for Natural Bridge National Monument, and $7 for Dead Horse Point State Park (which, as its name implies is a state park, but is included for comparison). Arches and Canyonlands were WELL worth the fee. A bargain. In comparison, Natural Bridge and Dead Horse were not as good a value, the latter being for a single day’s use only, rather than a week, but, again: come ON. This is still great value for an experience you just don’t have everyday, unless you live in the canyonlands. Spectacular scenery, amazing hikes, exhibits, and park programs. Would I prefer that these national treasures be free? Of course. But a modest use fee makes sense.

There are 390 national parks, monuments, sites, recreation areas, etc., managed by the National Parks Service across the United States. Only 147 charge any fee at all. And they’re still a bargain. All of them.

…

Incidentally, during the trip, I speculated about the difference between a national monument and a national park. And the difference between land controlled by the National Park Service, the Forest Service, or the Bureau of Land Management. The whole story here, or the slightly shorter answer from Wikipedia:

A National Monument is a protected area of the United States that is similar to a national park (specifically a U.S. National Park) except that the President of the United States can quickly declare an area of the United States to be a national monument without Congressional approval. There are also fewer protections offered to wildlife and to the geographic features in a national monument compared to the protection (and funding) that a national park receives. Another difference between a national monument and national park is the amount of diversity in what is being protected; national monuments aim to preserve at least one unique resource but do not have the amount of diversity of a national park (which are supposed to protect a host of unique features). However areas within and extending beyond, national parks, monuments or even national forests can be part of wilderness areas, which have an even greater degree of protection than a national park would alone, although wilderness areas managed by the USDA Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management oftentimes allow hunting.

Local Kansas City NBC TV affiliate KSHB has an investigative report on mice (both live and dead) found inside American Airlines’ planes. (See the video by clicking on “Investigators: Mile High Mice” in the link.) The mouse problem is apparently widespread, both in terms of damage done to equipment, and in terms of rodent feces.

This is the sort of thing that’s probably more widespread across the aviation industry than I would care to know, but I do wonder why an exterminator wasn’t called.

What makes a plane an attractive place for creatures to reside in, anyway? Southwest had a problem with bees, American has mice, what’s next? (Please, please, no “Snakes on a Plane” jokes…)

Award availability has been the Achilles’ heel of frequent flyer programs for some time. But in a remarkable change of pace, Air Canada announced this week that it would open *all* available seats on its flights to its Aeroplan members for point redemption by the end of the year. Already the airline claims to leave 15% of its seats open for frequent flyer redemptions.

The catch? As the flight date approaches, the number of miles required goes up, too. (Alternatively, I could imagine the price going up even earlier for heavily booked flights, but this is not part of the plan…) This parallels American and (soon) United, which both charge a fee for short-term redemptions. Air Canada has not announced the rates it will use for the short-term redemptions, but it claims that the Classic Rewards base schedule will remain as-is.

An all-seats-are-available-for-mileage-redemption policy already exists at the major US airlines, but at elevated (usually doubled) redemption rates. This is the “standard” award. So if Air Canada is allowing unlimited redemptions at “classic” award prices, then this is a HUGE enhancement.

This proves that airlines — even legacy carriers — *can* come up with innovative changes to their frequent flyer programs that don’t destroy the value of points. (And I’m not talking about United’s “Choices,” even though it’s gotten some tepidly positive press…) Joe Brancatelli’s interview with Steve Grosvald, one of the founding fathers of frequent flyer programs, suggests that rethinking of programs is afoot — but not always for the best. Grosvald advocates a program based on fare paid, not miles flown. But this would destroy the appeal of the frequent flyer game for me. Read the whole thing…

I hope Air Canada’s changes are real and positive. If they are for the better, then I hope they get some positive press south of the border. Other airlines might learn a thing or two about using their programs to increase customer satisfaction, and thus loyalty.

(image)

Wi-fly
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has started auctioning the licenses for the eventual rights to inflight internet and voice-over-IP (VOIP) service. Too late to join the bidding, but watch the breathtaking action here.

Let ‘em fly!
Most brilliant invention ever: The charcoal seat pad. Great for home, office, and travel! Take it on your next flight and flatulate with impunity! (via RoadGladiator)

Birds fly high with JetBlue
If a bird is flying inside a plane traveling 550mph, how fast is that bird traveling? Ask JetBlue. Two lovebirds (the birds, not amorous couples) got loose on board a flight to San Juan last week.

Babies fly high(er) on KLM
Bassinets on the bulkhead? No surprise there, but look at the altitude of this bassinet! I can only imagine the surprise of travelers exiting that lavatory to be greeted by the cherubic grin of an unbuckled infant. (via Jaunted)

Pigs fly at Southwest
The apocalypse must be near. As part of an upgrade to its reservations system, Southwest Airlines is considering allowing advance seat assignments. I’ll begin taking bets on WILMA or Reverse Pyramid boarding once it’s official.

Front page stories about standing room seats won’t fly again
Remember the standing-room-only seat story? The New York Times offered a lengthy explanation of how they screwed up in printing it on page one when the project was in fact abandoned. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that this idea was, at least at one point, real. Abandoned, yes, but it was on the table. Okay, hopefully that’s the end of that subject…

Returning from Salt Lake City Airport yesterday, I experienced the General Electric Entry Scan ion tracking security portal for the first time. It’s been tested for a few months now, starting with San Francisco. The machines, a cross between a metal detector, the glaucoma test machine at the optometrist, and an MRI, are designed to find explosives traces on your body. Not every security line at SLC had one (there were 2 at the checkpoint for the A and B gates, but only one was operational). I guess I was just “lucky”…

For those not familiar with this system, a female voice invites you to walk into the chamber. A glass door is closed in front of you. The voice says something like “Air puffers on!” and air jets burst onto you from several sides, from the bottom up. After a pause (during which the ions in the air are analyzed), the doors open, a green light comes on, and the voice tells you to exit.

It’s a bit startling the first time. The puffers are pretty loud. You may want to close your eyes, too, if you’re unlucky enough to have a puffer at eye level. It was also a shocker for the woman in front of me, whose skirt, blouse, and long hair all flew up. No wonder most people in my line looked cranky when they left security. At least they didn’t get red-lighted and kept in holding like the poor woman behind me. I didn’t stick around to see how they manually checked her.
I’d guess it takes about 20-30 seconds per traveler, including the time moving in and out. The time inside is about 15-20 seconds. This extra portal didn’t replace the metal detector, which followed the puffer. Interestingly, most people were specifically asked to keep their shoes ON.

I’m not a huge fan of this, though it was sort of fun to try it once. It slowed the security process down significantly. Others who went through a normal line were through security nearly ten minutes faster. Maybe if they can integrate a metal detector into such a device, make the puffers less severe, and speed up the ion analysis, then this could be widely welcomed. Most importantly, I hope it actually works, and the nuisance actually increases security.

Update: See a video of the SLC puffer machine in action here.

Back from Utah… It was a hot but excellent week in Moab. While I’m happy to be back to posting, I’m not so happy to be back at work. Some nuggets from the trip soon to come, I’m sure.

Thanks to Dr. Vino for his guest posting. Visit his site and show him some love.