By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Canadian travelers continue to avoid the U.S. in 2026, with return trips down 24.3% in January compared to the previous year. This trend has expanded, as the U.K. and Australia are now joining Canada in boycotting U.S. national parks. This significant decline is largely attributed to a new $100 surcharge for international visitors to 11 popular parks, increased annual pass fees, and stricter U.S. entry requirements, including biometric scanning and potential social media history checks. These factors, coupled with safety concerns raised by advocacy groups, are impacting the U.S. travel sector, despite upcoming events like the FIFA World Cup.
Read the original article here
It appears that the United States’ national parks are experiencing a notable decline in international visitors, with a growing number of travelers from Canada, the U.K., and Australia opting to forgo trips to these iconic natural landscapes. This trend, if it continues, could have significant economic repercussions and signals a broader sentiment among international tourists.
Bookings for U.S. national park tours have seen a dramatic drop, with one prominent Australian travel agency, Intrepid Travel, reporting a 42% decrease. This significant downturn is not isolated; Canadian bookings for such tours have plummeted by an astonishing 93% compared to previous years. The United Kingdom and Australia are also contributing to this trend, with substantial declines in visitor numbers to U.S. national parks being observed.
This shifting travel pattern is not just an abstract statistic; it’s leading to concrete changes in the travel industry. Some U.K. travel agencies, like Cazenove+Loyd, are now actively canceling tailor-made itineraries that were specifically designed around visits to U.S. national parks, indicating a direct impact on tour planning and operations.
The economic consequences of this decline are already being felt. Reports suggest that last year alone, the Canadian boycott of U.S. tourism, which extends beyond national parks, cost the American economy an estimated $4.5 billion. This economic impact is affecting all sectors of the tourism industry, not just the national parks themselves.
For many international travelers, the decision to avoid the U.S. isn’t solely about national parks. Some individuals explicitly state that their decision to not travel to America is a broader boycott encompassing all aspects of the country, not just its natural wonders. This suggests a more generalized sentiment of disaffection.
The cancellation of U.S. flight routes by airlines like Air Transat and WestJet further underscores the diminishing demand for travel to the United States. This decision, attributed to a lack of demand, reflects a tangible shift in traveler behavior.
For some potential visitors, the choice to explore destinations other than the U.S. has become an easy one. The allure of American sights, once a significant draw, is now being overshadowed by other considerations.
Concerns about personal safety are frequently cited as a primary reason for avoiding travel to the U.S. Many individuals express that they simply would not feel safe visiting the country due to what they perceive as current circumstances and the prevailing leadership. There’s a hope that this sentiment might change in the future, allowing for a return to travel.
This sentiment of unease is not confined to a few individuals. Families are also reconsidering their travel plans, with parents canceling trips due to fears of violence and a perceived lack of justification for such incidents, painting a grim picture for potential tourists.
Some observers question whether this trend constitutes a deliberate boycott or simply a lack of desire to visit a country perceived as “crazy.” This framing suggests that the reasons for the decline might be multifaceted and deeply rooted in perceptions of the nation’s current state.
Even within the United States, there is support for this shift. Some American citizens acknowledge the positive impact of fewer tourists on their own national parks, allowing for a more serene experience. This indicates that the desire for less crowded parks is shared by some domestic visitors.
The current situation is seen by some as a stark contrast to previous years, with individuals who have experienced popular parks like Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon expressing relief that they had the opportunity to visit before the current administration.
It’s important to note that for many, the decision to refrain from traveling to the U.S. is not limited to national parks. The boycott extends to U.S. products and services as a whole, indicating a more comprehensive stance against the country.
The idea that international travelers are boycotting U.S. national parks solely due to the cost is a misconception for many. The decline in visits is driven by factors that transcend financial considerations, with political and social concerns playing a significant role.
The perception that the U.S. is unique in possessing national parks is challenged by many, who point out that numerous other countries offer their own spectacular park systems, providing ample alternative destinations for nature enthusiasts.
The shift in tourism is leading some Americans to explore their own country’s parks, with some choosing to visit Canadian national parks instead, drawn by the prospect of beautiful nature and purportedly friendlier people.
While some might label this as a mere boycott, others distinguish between a deliberate political action and a simple disinclination to travel. This nuance highlights the complex motivations behind the declining visitor numbers.
The idea of avoiding U.S. holidays for a few years is being considered by some, particularly those who identify with both British and Australian nationalities, suggesting a potential sustained period of reduced tourism.
There’s a concern that fewer international visitors could inadvertently aid in the potential privatization of national parks. The argument is that reduced tourism and income could be used as justification for selling off parkland for commercial exploitation.
This potential exploitation is seen by some as a deliberate outcome, designed to facilitate activities like coal mining and timber harvesting, which they view with disapproval.
Conversely, some individuals welcome the idea of fewer crowds in national parks. The overcrowding in popular locations like Zion National Park has detracted from the experience, leading to a hope that reduced visitor numbers will improve the quality of these natural spaces.
The current situation is also framed as an act of self-preservation, with fears that U.S. immigration and customs enforcement agencies are becoming overly aggressive, making foreigners hesitant to visit and risk negative interactions.
The upcoming World Cup in the U.S. is also being predicted as a potential disaster, with the implication that the current political climate might negatively impact its success.
Even for those living near major national parks like Yellowstone and Glacier, the decline in foreign tourism is noticeable. While not peak season, a significant number of international visitors are still present, though reservations may still be necessary for entry.
The travel industry is reportedly facing a significant number of cancellations, with the current situation being described as more severe than during the COVID-19 lockdowns. This highlights the profound impact of the current sentiment on the tourism sector.
The decision to avoid the U.S. is not limited to specific attractions; for many, it’s a rejection of the country as a whole, due to deeply held concerns about its current state and perceived dangers.
This is not viewed as a boycott by some, but rather a simple lack of desire to visit a country perceived as unsafe and undesirable.
The idea that national parks are becoming overcrowded and losing their sanctity is a sentiment echoed by some, who believe that reduced tourism could be beneficial for the preservation of these natural areas.
The notion of a global boycott of U.S. tourism is gaining traction, with concerns about safety in America being a recurring theme.
The impact of this trend is significant, with international travelers actively seeking alternatives, suggesting that the U.S. is losing out on potential tourism revenue and cultural exchange.
The perception of the U.S. as a “crazy place” filled with “insanity, fascism, and stupidity” is a stark indictment from some, making it seem inhospitable for tourism.
Alternatives like Canada are being actively promoted, highlighting their natural beauty and perceived welcoming nature as a contrast to the U.S.
For American park enthusiasts, the current situation presents a unique opportunity to experience less crowded national parks, making it a potentially ideal time for domestic travel to these locations.
Despite the declining numbers, there’s a suggestion that many U.S. national parks will likely remain crowded, diminishing the hope for a truly quiet and serene experience for visitors.
Ultimately, the decision by Canada, the U.K., and Australia to reduce or suspend visits to U.S. national parks, and by extension, the U.S. as a whole, is a complex phenomenon driven by a confluence of political, social, and safety concerns, leading to significant implications for the American tourism industry and its international perception.