National Park Concessions

The National Park Service concessions program governs the commercial services provided to visitors within national parks — lodges, restaurants, gift shops, outfitters, river guides, and other businesses that operate on public land. Federal law requires that these services be provided by private concessioners under competitively awarded contracts, with rates approved by the NPS and franchise fees paid to the government.

Current Law (2026)

Legal Authority

• 54 U.S.C. § 101912 — Findings and policy (Congress finds that commercial services in parks should be provided by private entities under concession contracts, limited to what is necessary and appropriate, and consistent with resource preservation)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101913 — Award of concession contracts (the Secretary shall use concession contracts to authorize commercial services; contracts awarded through competitive process)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101914 — Term of concession contracts (generally 10 years or less; up to 20 years when the Secretary determines the contract requires substantial capital investment)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101915 — Protection of concessioner investment (establishes "leasehold surrender interest" — concessioners who build capital improvements on park land retain a recognized financial interest in those improvements)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101916 — Reasonableness of rates and charges (concessioners set their own rates subject to NPS approval for reasonableness; rates must be comparable to similar facilities outside the park)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101917 — Franchise fees (concessioners pay the government a franchise fee reflecting the value of the privileges granted; fees determined by the Secretary)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101918 — Transfer of contracts (no concession contract may be transferred, assigned, or pledged without the Secretary's prior written approval; transfers must be consistent with the public interest)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101919 — Concessions Management Advisory Board (advises on management of the concessions program; reviews concession contract proposals)
• 54 U.S.C. § 101921 — Multiple contracts at same location (when multiple contracts authorize similar services — outfitting, guiding, river running — at the same location, the Secretary must allocate use among concessioners)

Key Numbers

• ~$80-100M/year in franchise fees collected by the NPS from concessioners — revenue that flows back to the federal government as the "rent" for the privilege of operating in a national park; specific fees vary widely, from under 1% of gross revenues for low-margin food service to 25%+ for high-margin gift shops and lodges, depending on the Secretary's assessment of commercial opportunity value
• ~100 traditional concession contracts and ~600 commercial use authorizations (CUAs) currently active across the national park system — the two are distinct instruments: concession contracts govern major lodge, restaurant, and services operators; CUAs govern smaller outfitters, guides, and activity operators typically capped at $25,000 in gross annual revenue with flat permit fees rather than franchise fees
• Contract terms: generally 10 years; up to 20 years for concessioners making substantial capital investments — the longer term is the tradeoff for investing millions in infrastructure you don't own and can't move
• Leasehold surrender interest (LSI): when a concessioner's contract ends or is transferred, they are compensated for the current appraised value of capital improvements they made on NPS land — typically 50-100% of undepreciated replacement cost; the LSI is the key asset in any concession acquisition or transfer transaction
• Great American Outdoors Act (2020): committed $1.9B/year for 5 years to reduce NPS deferred maintenance, which stands at roughly $12B system-wide; concession facilities are among the most visible deferred maintenance targets — aging lodges, water systems, and roads that concessioners cannot be required to repair under their contracts
• Xanterra Parks & Resorts is the largest NPS concessioner by scope, operating at Yellowstone, Grand Canyon South Rim, Zion, Crater Lake, and others; Delaware North held the Yosemite contract until 2016 when it lost to Aramark in a landmark contract dispute that established important LSI valuation precedent; Forever Resorts and DNC Parks operate at numerous other parks
• Record visitation: ~325 million recreational visits in 2023, ~312 million in 2024 (per NPS visitor use statistics) — pressure on concession capacity allocation is acute, particularly for outfitters and guides competing for limited commercial use authorization slots

How It Works

National parks generate enormous visitor demand for food, lodging, guided tours, equipment rental, and other commercial services. Rather than providing these services directly — unlike GSA operations on other federal property — the NPS contracts with private concessioners to operate businesses within park boundaries. This public-private arrangement means the iconic lodges at Yellowstone, the mule rides at Grand Canyon, and the boat tours in Glacier Bay are all run by private companies under federal concession contracts managed by the National Park Service.

Concession contracts are awarded competitively. When a contract is up for renewal, the NPS solicits proposals and evaluates them based on responsiveness to NPS resource management goals, experience, and financial capability. The incumbent concessioner has a preferential right of renewal if they've performed satisfactorily — they get first shot at matching the best competing proposal. This protects concessioners who have invested in building a quality operation while maintaining competitive pressure.

Capital improvements are a central tension in the system. Concessioners often invest millions in lodge renovations, restaurant buildouts, and other improvements on land they don't own. The law addresses this through the leasehold surrender interest — a recognized financial stake in improvements the concessioner has made. When a concession contract expires or is transferred, the outgoing concessioner is compensated for the current value of their capital improvements, ensuring they're not penalized for investing in park facilities.

Rate regulation balances visitor affordability with concessioner viability. Concessioners set their own rates for food, lodging, and services, but the NPS reviews them for reasonableness. The standard: rates should be comparable to those at similar facilities outside the park. This is challenging to apply in practice — a lodge inside Yosemite Valley has no true external comparable — but it provides a framework for preventing price gouging while allowing concessioners to earn a fair return.

Franchise fees flow from concessioners to the federal government, reflecting the value of the privilege of operating within a national park. Fees are determined by the Secretary based on an assessment of the commercial opportunity's probable value. These revenues help offset NPS administrative costs.

How It Affects You

Many concession facilities operate within structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places, requiring concessioners to maintain historic character while meeting modern visitor service standards.

State Variations

Implementing Regulations

• 36 CFR Part 51 — Concession contracts (prospectus requirements, proposal evaluation, preferred offeror rights, contract terms, franchise fees, leasehold surrender interest)

• 36 CFR Part 52 — Visitor Experience Improvements Authority (VEIA) Contracts (27 sections — a distinct contracting mechanism from Part 51, created under 54 U.S.C. §§ 101930–101944 to allow NPS to rapidly modernize and expand visitor services at specific sites without going through the full concession contract process):

  • § 52.1 — Scope and § 52.2 — Purpose: Part 52 authorizes commercial services contracts and professional services contracts to expand, modernize, or improve visitor services; unlike concession contracts (Part 51), VEIA contracts are funded by NPS — the operator receives payment from NPS rather than charging visitors directly and keeping revenue; this reversal makes VEIA contracts suitable for services that would not be commercially viable under the traditional franchise-fee concession model
  • § 52.4 — Types of commercial services contracts: NPS may issue fixed-term or base-with-options contracts for commercial services; contracts may be for any visitor facility or service — lodging, food service, transportation, recreational equipment rental, interpretive programming — where the Director determines VEIA funding is appropriate
  • § 52.10–52.16 — Competitive solicitation: NPS must publish notice of contract opportunities; potential respondents are evaluated against selection factors stated in the request for proposals; the Director may reject all responses and reissue the solicitation if no response is satisfactory
  • § 52.25 — Contract term: VEIA contracts are generally awarded for a set term, with base terms and optional extensions rather than the 10-year standard concession contract duration; specific terms are set in each solicitation
  • § 52.27 — No leasehold surrender interest: unlike traditional concession contracts (Part 51), VEIA operators do not acquire leasehold surrender interest in capital improvements — a significant structural difference that limits long-term capital investment risk for NPS but also reduces the incentive for operators to invest in durable improvements
  • § 52.28 — Rate approval: NPS may require advance approval of rates for services provided to visitors, giving the agency more direct control over pricing than the "reasonableness" standard in Part 51 concession contracts
  • § 52.40 — Relationship to concessions: Part 52 contracts do not modify or affect any existing Part 51 concession contract; the two systems operate in parallel
  • § 52.41 — VEIA expiration: the VEIA authority expired December 16, 2025, unless extended by Congress; contracts awarded before expiration remain in effect for their full term

  The VEIA was created as a time-limited tool to address a specific problem: NPS had high-profile visitor service gaps at priority sites but could not attract concession investment under Part 51 because the sites were too small, too seasonal, or too remote to generate a commercially viable franchise fee. By funding the operator directly, VEIA allowed NPS to provide services at sites that market economics would not otherwise support. Contracts awarded before the December 2025 expiration remain in effect; whether Congress extends or replaces the VEIA authority is an open question in the 119th Congress.

Pending Legislation

No standalone national park concession reform bills pending in the 119th Congress.

Recent Developments

The Delaware North v. NPS leasehold surrender interest dispute — resolved in 2019 for approximately $12.5 million — reshaped how the NPS structures concession contracts. Delaware North had held the Yosemite Valley concession contract for decades and invested heavily in developing the Ahwahnee Hotel, Curry Village, and other iconic facilities. When it lost the contract to Aramark/DNC in 2016, it retained trademark rights to those iconic names as intellectual property assets distinct from the LSI. The Ahwahnee temporarily became "The Majestic Yosemite Hotel," Curry Village became "Half Dome Village," and other venues were renamed — creating visitor confusion and political backlash. Congress intervened to restore the original names, and the eventual settlement required NPS to explicitly value and pay for intangible assets alongside the physical LSI. NPS has since revised contract templates to more explicitly define what the government owns vs. what the concessioner can retain, making future transitions cleaner.

The Great American Outdoors Act (2020) — which committed $1.9 billion per year over five years for deferred maintenance — has begun reaching concession-adjacent infrastructure in high-priority parks. Much of the deferred maintenance in the system predates the current concession operators and falls outside their contractual responsibility: aging water and sewer systems under Yellowstone lodges, deteriorating roads in Glacier that limit visitor and supplier access, electrical infrastructure at Grand Canyon that NPS owns but concessioners depend on. GAOA spending is helping NPS address the infrastructure foundation that concession operations sit on, potentially enabling more robust concession contract requirements in future procurements — concessioners are more willing to invest in visible guest-facing improvements when they're not also expected to underwrite basic infrastructure.

Record visitation from 2020 through 2024 has strained concession capacity at the most popular parks and forced NPS to confront allocation policy at sites with more demand than any concession operator can satisfy. For commercial use authorization holders — outfitters, guides, river operators — NPS has increased use of mandatory reservations, day-use limits, and time-windowed access allocations that directly cap the number of commercial clients any single CUA holder can serve. Some operators have seen their effective revenue ceiling drop as a result. The 119th Congress has received pressure from the outdoor recreation industry to expand commercial use authorizations, particularly for adventure sports outfitters, as part of a broader policy argument that commercial operators drive economic value in gateway communities while improving visitor experience. NPS has generally resisted large-scale CUA expansion, citing resource protection obligations and the capacity limits of the park infrastructure itself.