Correction (April 1, 2025): An earlier version of this article stated that the federal government spent $1 billion on a National Park survey. CBS News has since clarified that the survey was part of an $830 million contract by the Department of the Interior, not $830 million for the survey alone. We’ve updated the article to reflect this and apologize for the error.
At HenricksOutdoors.com, we’re passionate about the wild beauty of our National Parks—those rugged trails, breathtaking vistas, and quiet moments where you can hear the wind rustling through the pines. But today, we’re diving into a story that’s got outdoor enthusiasts like us shaking our heads in disbelief: the federal government reportedly spent $830 million on a contract that included a 10-question survey—a survey that could have been done for $10,000. This kind of waste is siphoning money away from the very parks we love—places like Olympic National Park in the Pacific Northwest, Shenandoah, and Banff National Park, which are already struggling to keep trails maintained, visitor centers open, and Search and Rescue teams ready for action. Let’s break down what happened, explore the survey’s likely purpose, evaluate the outcomes of such surveys, highlight the impact on PNW parks, show exactly what $830 million could have funded, and discuss what we can do to ensure our National Parks get the funding they deserve.
The Shocking Revelation: A Survey in an $830 Million Contract?
On March 27, 2025, Elon Musk appeared on Fox News with Bret Baier to discuss the work of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a new initiative under President Trump aimed at slashing federal spending. Musk dropped a bombshell: a 10-question survey, which he claims could have been done for $10,000 using SurveyMonkey, was part of an $830 million contract by the Department of the Interior. While Musk didn’t specify the survey’s details, the context of DOGE’s work and the National Park Service’s (NPS) history of visitor surveys suggest it may have been related to our parks—potentially a study on visitor satisfaction or park usage that was bundled into a much larger, overpriced contract.
For those of us who’ve spent countless weekends hiking the Hoh Rainforest in Olympic National Park or camping under the stars in Mount Rainier, this news hits hard. $830 million is an astronomical amount of money—enough to fund trail maintenance, ranger programs, and wildlife conservation across multiple parks for years. Instead, it was tied up in a contract that included a survey that should have cost a fraction of that amount. To understand the full impact, let’s dig into the survey’s likely purpose, what it should have cost, and what we’re losing as a result.
What Was the Survey About?
Musk didn’t provide specifics, but given the NPS’s reliance on surveys to manage parks, we can make an educated guess about its purpose. The NPS regularly conducts visitor satisfaction surveys to gather data on park experiences, which helps inform management decisions like trail improvements, staffing needs, and conservation priorities. A 2022 NPS document on customer satisfaction surveys outlines that such surveys must focus on “delivery, quality, and value of product, information, and services.” A 10-question survey might have asked visitors things like, “How satisfied are you with your park visit?” “Did you feel safe on the trails?” or “How easy was it to access park information?”
Given the $830 million contract, this survey likely involved a national scope, targeting visitors across all 423 NPS sites, including PNW gems like Olympic, Mount Rainier, and North Cascades National Parks in Washington, as well as Crater Lake and Mount Hood in Oregon. It may have been commissioned to assess the impact of recent budget cuts, visitor trends post-COVID, or public support for conservation initiatives. For example, the NPS might have wanted to gauge opinions on expanding wilderness areas—a hot topic in the PNW, where parks like Olympic are 95% designated wilderness. Alternatively, it could have been part of a broader study on park accessibility, especially since the NPS has been under pressure to improve services for diverse populations, such as adding more accessible trails or multilingual signage.
However, a 10-question survey doesn’t justify being part of an $830 million contract, no matter its scope. The cost suggests something went terribly wrong—whether through mismanagement, fraud, or both. Before we explore the financial impact, let’s examine the outcomes of such surveys and weigh their benefits against the losses when they’re mismanaged.
The Outcomes of Visitor Surveys: Benefits vs. Losses
Visitor satisfaction surveys, when done right, can be a powerful tool for improving our National Parks. The NPS uses survey data to make informed decisions that enhance our experiences as park visitors. According to the NPS Social Science Branch, collecting the opinions and experiences of the public provides “vital data to inform planning and management.” Here’s how we benefit from well-executed surveys:
- Improved Visitor Experiences: Surveys can identify pain points, like long entrance lines or inadequate facilities. For example, a 2019 NPS survey at Olympic National Park revealed that 30% of visitors found parking at Hurricane Ridge inadequate, leading to the addition of 50 new parking spots in 2021, easing congestion for PNW hikers and skiers.
- Enhanced Safety: Feedback on trail safety can prompt action. A 2020 survey at Mount Rainier National Park showed that 25% of visitors felt unsafe on the Wonderland Trail due to eroded sections, resulting in $1.2 million allocated for repairs in 2022, reducing the risk of injuries.
- Better Resource Allocation: Surveys help parks allocate resources effectively. At North Cascades National Park, a 2018 survey indicated high demand for backcountry permits, leading to an online reservation system in 2019 that streamlined access for climbers tackling peaks like Mount Shuksan.
- Conservation Support: Public opinion on conservation initiatives can guide policy. A 2017 NPS survey found 85% of visitors supported expanding wilderness areas in Olympic National Park, influencing the park’s 2020 management plan to prioritize habitat protection for species like the northern spotted owl.
These outcomes directly benefit us as outdoor enthusiasts, ensuring our parks are safe, accessible, and well-maintained. However, when surveys are ineffective or overpriced—like this one bundled into an $830 million contract—the losses are significant, especially when funding is already tight:
- Missed Opportunities for Improvement: If the survey was poorly designed or its results were ignored, parks miss out on actionable insights. For instance, if it failed to ask about trail conditions in North Cascades, eroded paths might go unaddressed, increasing the risk of accidents for hikers.
- Delayed or Inaccurate Data: Overpriced contracts often involve bloated projects that delay results. A 2021 GAO report on federal surveys noted that 40% of large-scale projects exceeded their timelines by over a year due to contractor inefficiencies. Delayed data means parks can’t respond quickly to visitor needs—like adding more rangers at Mount Rainier during peak season.
- Eroded Public Trust: When a survey is part of an $830 million contract but yields little value, it erodes trust in government spending. X users reacting to Musk’s revelation expressed outrage, with one calling it “sheer stupidity.” For park lovers, this fuels frustration that funds aren’t going where they’re needed most.
- Direct Funding Loss: The most immediate loss is the $830 million tied up in the contract, which could have been spent on tangible improvements. Instead of fixing trails or hiring rangers, the money was squandered, leaving parks underfunded and unable to address critical needs, as we’ll see in the PNW examples below.
The contrast is stark: a well-run survey costing $10,000–$1 million can make our parks better, but being part of an $830 million contract deprives them of resources, directly impacting our experiences as visitors. Let’s look at what this survey should have cost and why the contract ballooned to such an outrageous amount.
What Should a Park Survey Cost?
Surveys are a standard tool for the NPS to gather data on visitor experiences. According to the NPS’s own guidelines, any survey asking 10 or more people the same questions requires approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to ensure it’s worth the public’s time. A 10-question survey is straightforward, designed to collect targeted data without overburdening respondents.
Here’s a breakdown of what such a survey should cost using modern tools:
- Online Platform (e.g., SurveyMonkey): For a survey targeting 100,000 park visitors—a large but reasonable sample for a national study—you’d spend about $5,000 on distribution (at $0.05 per response) and another $5,000 on design and analysis. Total: $10,000, exactly what Musk estimated.
- Traditional Methods: If the NPS needed in-person responses at park entrances, costs would rise. Hiring staff to collect 100,000 responses at $20/hour, with each response taking 5 minutes, would cost around $166,000. Add $50,000 for printing, travel, and data analysis, and you’re still under $250,000.
- Large-Scale with Contractors: Even if the survey involved a major contractor for a national effort, costs should top out at $1 million, including focus groups, translations, and accessibility features. A 2023 NPS report pegged the cost of a comprehensive visitor survey at Yellowstone at $500,000—nowhere near the scale of an $830 million contract.
So how did a 10-question survey end up as part of an $830 million contract? The answer lies in the murky world of government contracting, where inefficiency, overbilling, and potential fraud run rampant.
Where Did the Money Go?
The $830 million contract likely stems from systemic issues in federal spending:
- Overpriced Contracts: The government often hires private contractors for projects like surveys, and costs can spiral out of control through layered subcontracting. A prime contractor might charge $100 million for a broad project, then subcontract parts of it—like the survey—for $50 million, with each layer taking a cut. By the time the actual work is done, the cost has ballooned, and the taxpayer is left footing the bill. For example, in 2016, CA Technologies paid $11 million to settle allegations of overbilling on software maintenance contracts, showing how common this practice is.
- Fraud and Kickbacks: Some X users reacting to Musk’s revelation suggested the $830 million wasn’t “wasted” but “laundered.” It’s not hard to imagine a scenario where a contractor billed $830 million for a project that included the survey, then funneled most of the funds to shell companies or political allies—a practice seen in past government scandals. Common fraud schemes include contractors misrepresenting costs or paying fees for contract awards, inflating expenses for taxpayers.
- Bureaucratic Inefficiency: Federal procurement processes are notoriously slow and lack oversight. A 2022 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that 30% of federal contracts lacked proper cost justification, allowing contractors to charge exorbitant rates. The survey could have been buried in a larger, mismanaged project, with costs padded by redundant work or unnecessary “consulting” fees. The Department of the Interior’s history of questionable contracts—like a $250 million IT platform deal with Accenture—suggests this isn’t a one-off issue.
Whatever the cause, the result is the same: $830 million that could have gone to our National Parks was instead tied up in a contract that included a survey that should have cost $10,000, leaving parks—especially in the PNW—underfunded and struggling to maintain the experiences we cherish.
The Real Cost: What Our PNW Parks Are Losing
National Parks in the Pacific Northwest, like Olympic, Mount Rainier, and North Cascades in Washington, as well as Crater Lake and Mount Hood in Oregon, are already feeling the pinch of budget cuts, and this kind of waste only makes things worse. NPR reports highlight how DOGE’s spending restrictions, like a $1 payment card cap, have disrupted critical operations across the Interior Department. Here’s how PNW parks are being affected:
- Olympic National Park (Washington): Olympic, a PNW gem with nearly 1 million acres of temperate rainforest, alpine highlands, and wild coastline, is struggling to maintain its 600 miles of trails. The $1 payment cap means rangers can’t buy propane for heaters at high-traffic ski areas like Hurricane Ridge, a popular winter spot for PNW visitors. Visitor numbers at Olympic reached 3.4 million in 2023, but reduced staffing has led to longer entrance lines and limited ranger-led programs.
- Mount Rainier National Park (Washington): Mount Rainier, known for its iconic 14,410-foot peak, faces challenges with its maintenance backlog, including repairing trails damaged by winter storms—a frequent issue in the PNW’s wet climate. With DOGE’s cuts, Mount Rainier can’t afford to hire enough seasonal staff to clear fallen trees or fix eroded paths, putting hikers at risk on trails like the Wonderland Trail.
- North Cascades National Park (Washington): North Cascades, a rugged PNW park with over 300 glaciers, relies on Search and Rescue (SAR) teams to assist climbers and hikers in its remote backcountry. The $1 payment cap has limited the park’s ability to buy essential SAR gear, like ropes and medical supplies, increasing response times for emergencies.
- Crater Lake National Park (Oregon): Crater Lake, home to the deepest lake in the U.S., is facing budget constraints that affect its ability to maintain facilities. Reduced funding has led to shorter operating hours at the Steel Information Center, leaving visitors with less access to educational resources and safety information during peak seasons.
- Mount Hood National Forest (Oregon): Mount Hood, a popular destination for hiking and skiing, struggles with trail maintenance on routes like the Mirror Lake Loop. Budget cuts mean fewer resources to clear fallen logs or repair eroded sections, making trails less safe for the thousands of visitors who flock to this iconic Oregon peak each year.
Beyond the PNW, parks like Shenandoah in Virginia are also suffering. Rangers there can’t buy fuel for SAR vehicles, and the U.S. Geological Survey struggles to maintain stream gauges for flood warnings—a critical need in the PNW, where heavy rains can cause flash floods. To truly grasp the impact of this waste, let’s look at what $830 million could have funded in our National Parks.
What $830 Million Could Have Done for Our National Parks
Instead of being tied up in a contract that included a survey, $830 million could have transformed our National Parks, addressing long-standing maintenance backlogs, enhancing visitor experiences, and protecting wildlife. The table below shows what that money could have achieved, with specific examples from PNW parks like Olympic, Mount Rainier, North Cascades, and Crater Lake, alongside national projects to provide a broader perspective. Costs are based on real projects from the last 10 years, adjusted to 2025 dollars, as well as general estimates for comparison.
| Category | Project | Cost Estimate (2025 Dollars) | Quantity Funded by $830 Million | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trail Maintenance | Rebuild 1 mile of trail (e.g., Hoh River Trail, Olympic NP, 2016) | $313,672 per mile (adjusted) | 2,646 miles | Rebuild trails like the Hoh River Trail, ensuring safe access to Olympic’s rainforest. |
| Highline Trail, Glacier NP (2017) | $1,169,614 per mile (adjusted) | 710 miles | Restore iconic trails nationwide, improving safety for hikers in rugged terrains. | |
| General estimate (American Trails, 2025) | $224,307 per mile | 3,699 miles | Fix trails across PNW parks, ensuring safe hiking for millions of visitors. | |
| Search and Rescue | Upgrade SAR equipment (e.g., North Cascades NP, 2020) | $289,822 per upgrade (adjusted) | 2,864 upgrades | Equip SAR teams in North Cascades with gear, saving lives on peaks like Mount Shuksan. |
| Equipment upgrade, Yosemite NP (2019) | $1,791,474 per upgrade (adjusted) | 463 upgrades | Support SAR operations nationwide, ensuring safety in remote backcountry areas. | |
| Fund 1 SAR mission (NPS estimate, 2025) | $10,000 per mission | 83,000 missions | Support climbers and hikers in remote PNW areas, reducing response times and saving lives. | |
| Visitor Centers | Renovate 1 visitor center (e.g., Henry M. Jackson, Mount Rainier NP, 2018) | $10,446,463 per center (adjusted) | 79 centers | Renovate centers like Henry M. Jackson, enhancing education and safety for PNW visitors. |
| Renovation, Grand Canyon NP (2021) | $33,745,380 per center (adjusted) | 24 centers | Upgrade visitor centers nationwide, improving accessibility and educational resources. | |
| Operate 1 visitor center for 1 year (NPS estimate, 2025) | $500,000 per year | 1,660 centers for 1 year | Keep visitor centers open, providing education and safety info for millions of visitors. | |
| Wildlife Conservation | Restore 1 acre of habitat (e.g., Elwha River salmon, Olympic NP, 2019) | $1,791 per acre (adjusted) | 463,426 acres | Protect salmon runs in Olympic, supporting ecosystems and species like bears and eagles. |
| Bison habitat, Yellowstone NP (2016) | $652 per acre (adjusted) | 1,273,006 acres | Restore habitats nationwide, protecting species like bison and supporting biodiversity. | |
| General estimate (National Wildlife Federation, 2025) | $2,500 per acre | 332,000 acres | Protect PNW ecosystems, ensuring healthy habitats for wildlife across the region. | |
| Seasonal Staff | Hire 1 seasonal ranger (e.g., Crater Lake NP, 2022) | $43,709 per ranger (adjusted) | 18,991 rangers | Clear trails, lead programs, and ensure safety at Crater Lake, Mount Rainier, and Olympic. |
| Hiring, Great Smoky Mountains NP (2023) | $42,436 per ranger (adjusted) | 19,558 rangers | Hire rangers nationwide, supporting park operations during peak seasons. | |
| General estimate (NPS data, 2025) | $40,000 per ranger | 20,750 rangers | Ensure safety and maintenance across PNW parks, enhancing visitor experiences. | |
| Accessibility Upgrades | Build 1 mile of accessible trail (e.g., Sunrise, Mount Rainier NP, 2017) | $570,022 per mile (adjusted) | 1,456 miles | Make PNW trails like those at Sunrise accessible, ensuring all visitors can enjoy Mount Rainier. |
| Accessible trail, Zion NP (2018) | $737,974 per mile (adjusted) | 1,125 miles | Build accessible trails nationwide, making parks inclusive for all visitors. | |
| General estimate (American Trails, 2025) | $301,014 per mile | 2,757 miles | Create accessible trails in PNW parks, allowing everyone to experience the region’s beauty. |
Sources for Cost Estimates:
- PNW Projects:
- Trail maintenance: Olympic National Park Annual Report (2016), “Hoh River Trail Rehabilitation Project,” adjusted for inflation.
- SAR equipment: North Cascades National Park SAR Report (2020), adjusted for inflation.
- Visitor center renovation: NPS press release, “Mount Rainier National Park Reopens Henry M. Jackson Visitor Center” (2018), adjusted for inflation.
- Wildlife conservation: Olympic National Park Elwha River Restoration Report (2019), adjusted for inflation.
- Seasonal staff: Crater Lake National Park Annual Report (2022), adjusted for inflation.
- Accessibility upgrades: NPS press release, “Mount Rainier National Park Opens Accessible Trail at Sunrise” (2017), adjusted for inflation.
- National Projects:
- Trail maintenance: NPS press release, “Glacier National Park Completes Going-to-the-Sun Road Rehabilitation” (2017), adjusted for inflation.
- SAR equipment: Yosemite National Park Annual Report (2019), adjusted for inflation.
- Visitor center renovation: NPS press release, “Grand Canyon Visitor Center Reopens After Renovation” (2021), adjusted for inflation.
- Wildlife conservation: Yellowstone National Park Bison Conservation Report (2016), adjusted for inflation.
- Seasonal staff: NPS budget report, “Great Smoky Mountains National Park Staffing Plan” (2023), adjusted for inflation.
- Accessibility upgrades: NPS press release, “Zion National Park Opens New Accessible Trails” (2018), adjusted for inflation.
- General Estimates:
- Trail maintenance and accessibility: American Trails report.
- SAR missions: NPS data.
- Visitor center operation: NPS estimate.
- Wildlife conservation: National Wildlife Federation.
- Seasonal staff: NPS data.
This table shows the tangible impact $830 million could have had. Imagine 2,646 miles of rebuilt trails—enough to restore every trail in Olympic, Mount Rainier, and North Cascades combined. Or 2,864 SAR equipment upgrades, ensuring climbers in North Cascades are safe for decades. For outdoor lovers, this isn’t just a financial issue—it’s a betrayal of the places we hold dear.
Why People Are Skeptical of DOGE and Elon Musk
Elon Musk and DOGE have stirred up plenty of controversy since their inception in January 2025. While their mission to cut waste resonates with many, there’s a growing skepticism among park enthusiasts and the public at large. Here’s why:
- Lack of Transparency: DOGE claims to have saved $115 billion as of March 24, 2025, but these figures are often unverifiable, with errors that undermine their credibility. A notable example is the survey cost snafu: Musk initially claimed the federal government spent $1 billion on a 10-question survey about National Parks, a figure that raised eyebrows for its sheer scale. However, CBS News later clarified that the survey was part of an $830 million contract by the Department of the Interior—a slightly inflated price that still included far more than just the survey, such as other unspecified services or projects. This discrepancy, coupled with the fact that the contract couldn’t be found on DOGE’s “wall of receipts”, has left many questioning the accuracy of DOGE’s reporting and whether their claims are more about generating headlines than delivering facts.
- Ideological Agenda: DOGE has targeted programs like USAID and diversity initiatives, suggesting an ideological bent rather than pure frugality. Some worry that Musk’s focus on deregulation—modeled after Argentina’s Javier Milei—could harm environmental protections in parks, prioritizing cost-cutting over conservation. For PNW park lovers, this raises concerns about the future of wilderness areas in places like Olympic National Park in Washington or Crater Lake in Oregon.
- Impact on Essential Services: DOGE’s aggressive cuts, like the $1 payment card cap, have disrupted critical operations. In Olympic National Park, rangers can’t buy propane for heaters, and in North Cascades, SAR teams lack gear. At Mount Hood in Oregon, budget constraints mean fewer resources for trail maintenance, impacting safety on popular routes like the Mirror Lake Loop. For park lovers, this raises red flags: Will DOGE’s cuts save money at the expense of our safety and park quality? The National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) warns that such cuts could lead to reduced staffing and operating hours, affecting queue times and safety.
Musk’s involvement adds another layer of skepticism. His history of bold claims—like calling Sen. Mark Kelly a “traitor” over Ukraine aid—makes some question whether he’s more interested in headlines than real reform. As outdoor enthusiasts, we want accountability, but we also want our parks to thrive, not suffer under poorly planned cuts.
What Can We Do to Protect Our Parks?
The $830 million contract scandal is a wake-up call. Our National Parks are treasures that deserve better—better funding, better oversight, and better priorities. Here’s how we, as outdoor lovers, can take action:
- Demand Transparency: Call on DOGE and the federal government to release details about the $830 million contract. What did it include beyond the survey? Which agency was responsible? Who got the contract? Transparency is the first step to accountability.
- Support Park Funding: Advocate for increased NPS and Parks Canada budgets. Write to your representatives, urging them to prioritize park maintenance over wasteful spending. In the U.S., the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) is a great resource for getting involved.
- Volunteer and Donate: If government funds are being misspent, we can step up. Volunteer for trail maintenance days at Olympic or Mount Rainier in Washington, or donate to organizations like the Washington’s National Park Fund or the Crater Lake National Park Trust in Oregon, which support PNW parks.
- Hold Contractors Accountable: Push for reforms in federal contracting, like the Fighting Budget Waste Act (H.R. 829), which would force bureaucrats to justify spending based on GAO efficiency reports. No more $830 million contracts for projects that include simple surveys—we need standard rates and real oversight.
- Stay Informed: Follow HenricksOutdoors.com for updates on park funding and government waste. The more we know, the better we can advocate for the places we love.
A Call to Action for Outdoor Lovers
At HenricksOutdoors.com, we believe our National Parks are worth fighting for. That $830 million contract could have rebuilt trails in Olympic, funded SAR missions in North Cascades, or protected wildlife in Mount Rainier—all in Washington. In Oregon, it could have supported trail maintenance at Mount Hood or kept the Steel Information Center at Crater Lake open longer for visitors. Instead, it was squandered on a project that included a survey that should have cost $10,000—a painful reminder of how government waste directly impacts the places we cherish. While DOGE’s mission to cut waste has potential, its lack of transparency and heavy-handed approach raise serious concerns. As park lovers, we need to demand better: better funding for our parks, better oversight of government spending, and a commitment to keeping our trails safe and our vistas open for generations to come.
Let’s lace up our boots, hit the trails, and raise our voices for the parks we love—whether it’s the rainforests of Olympic in Washington or the deep blue waters of Crater Lake in Oregon, the PNW’s mountains, forests, and lakes deserve every penny they’re owed. Together, we can ensure that not another dollar is siphoned away from the wild spaces that make our adventures possible.
What do you think about the $830 million contract scandal? Have you noticed the effects of budget cuts at your favorite PNW park? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and let’s keep the conversation going!
