We know that Booz Allen Hamilton is earning much more than originally expected. In the agreement, the company estimated that it would earn $87 million in the first five years and a total of approximately $182 million in 10 years if the agreement was extended, which it was.
According to their invoices, Booz Allen Hamilton paid over $140 million for him over the first four years of his contract. The Forest Service did not respond to our FOIA request for more recent numbers, but one analyst, Canadian sales strategist Blair Enns, projected they could earn $620 million by the time the contract expires in September 2028.
The enhance in traffic is one of the reasons. But the model has also changed since 2016. Less than 3 million bookings have been made on the site this year; in 2023 there were about 9 million. BAH says there are currently 5,800 properties available and over 128,000 places and attractions to book. More facilities have started using the Rec.gov system, and things that were free or non-existent are now available through Rec.gov, where they are charged for. This includes things like free Christmas tree cutting permits for fourth graders (now for a $2.50 fee!) and, introduced in 2021, timed entry tickets to national parks, which are nominally free but require a $2 processing fee. Booz Allen Hamilton receives a percentage of each permit application fee, even if you do not win the permit.
This may be modern to you as it is not clearly described on the website. As former guard Betsy Walsh told me, she often talked to people who were surprised. “People want to support the parks, so they don’t mind the fees,” says Walsh, who worked at several parks before being laid off from her job at Thomas Edison National Historical Park during the DOGE layoffs in 2025. “But you’re not supporting the parks. You’re supporting a private company.”
This is not lucid. Over the past few years, several groups have taken the case to court, arguing that it is also illegal.
In 2022, Nevada tourist Thomas Kotab sued the Bureau of Land Management, arguing in his complaint that a $2 fee to visit Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area violates the FLREA, which states that public participation is required to set fees and that it must be clear how much money remains in the landscape. BLM moved to dismiss the case, but the district court ruled in favor of Kotab on the issue of public participation in his claim. However, the fees never changed.
The following year, seven plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit, Robyn Wilson et al. v. Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that the company “forces American consumers to pay Ticketmaster-like junk fees for access to national parks and other federal recreation areas.” BAH filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, accusing the plaintiff of misunderstanding the contract. “Of course,” the memorandum stated, “some federal agencies charge reservation fees to users to help cover the government’s costs of operating Recreation.gov, including USDA payments to Booz Allen. However, these fees are collected by the agencies in their ‘sole discretion.'” More than six months after filing the lawsuit, the plaintiffs filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the case. Their lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.