U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-17-2010, 07:14 PM
 
Location: mancos
7,047 posts, read 6,190,609 times
Reputation: 4541

Advertisements

I just dont agree to have to pay the gov to go hiking or hunting on public land. the trail maintenance bull dont fly with me.what are they doing making them handicap accessible now or what? I always pick up others trash as do many other good users we dont need to pay the gov to pay anyone to do what we do for a paycheck thus justifying a stupid fee that will just get wasted
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2010, 07:37 PM
 
3,460 posts, read 4,804,375 times
Reputation: 6677
Quote:
Originally Posted by parfleche View Post
I just dont agree to have to pay the gov to go hiking or hunting on public land. the trail maintenance bull dont fly with me.what are they doing making them handicap accessible now or what? I always pick up others trash as do many other good users we dont need to pay the gov to pay anyone to do what we do for a paycheck thus justifying a stupid fee that will just get wasted
I agree with the above that the fees will most likely be wasted. After they use the fees to pay people to collect them, what will be left over for the trails? Maybe enough tidbits and scraps to put in the occasional sign, but that's about all.

When its all said and done, we'll just have a couple dozen more government employees growing fat off of the taxes they'll collect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 07:45 PM
 
2,437 posts, read 7,123,371 times
Reputation: 1507
I look at it like this:

One the one hand, I would sort of prefere to pay-per-use be means of a fee system rather than just paying for it whether I use it or not via taxes.

But on the other hand, we're already be taxed for it, right? So what's the new fee all about. is it our fault they can't manage themselves?

Back to hand one, it is what it is and if all the millions of people that hike our 14ers paid a minimal fee for using it it could really help keep them preserved and kept in good order for a long time.

But back to hand two, the fee is a lot more palatable for things like PARKING and restroom fcilities at the trailhead, and not just for walking along a trail.

Hand one says, the trail needs maintenance to, though, and that all costs time and money and has to be paid for somehow.


And hand oone, with the last word, agrees that much of that is already done by volunteers so what's all the begging for volunteers about if they're charging all the hikers to use the thing?

So at the end of it, after weighing in both of my hands, I'd say that the fee will come off as just another money-grubbing tactic from an inept bureaucracy unless is comes in the form as a day use facility fee and then it will just be another annoying but understandable fee which the honest people will pay and the dishonest ones will skip. (unless of course there is someone there to enforce it, which may not even pay for itself, depending on how heavily used the trail is)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 08:18 PM
 
20,363 posts, read 37,902,723 times
Reputation: 18169
We have people in these forums arguing they shouldn't pay any taxes at all for parks which they don't use and that hefty user fees should be levied on those who do use the parks.

We have people in these forums arguing that general tax revenues should support operation of the parks and if you don't use them that's your choice, but it's a cost all citizens should bear for the common good of us all.

Pity the poor guvmint, damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Our great parks are the crown jewels of our nation, but it seems too few people are simply grateful that the USA has these parks, rather than having let rapacious developers clear cut and bulldoze them a hundred years ago...
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 08:43 PM
 
Location: Canon City, Colorado
1,331 posts, read 4,424,724 times
Reputation: 676
Kinda like all of the taxes for the schools. Doesn't matter if you have a child or grandchild in school...........you pay. period. It's the price we pay for living in the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2010, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Summit County (Denver's Toilet)
447 posts, read 1,393,820 times
Reputation: 213
I think they need to call this a "parking fee" not a "hiking fee"........back in SC I used to have to pay for parking at major trail heads and didn't have a problem with it, actually in most cases I would toss a couple of extra dollars in there.........There is just something weird/wrong with calling it a "hiking fee", I just don't like the term
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2010, 11:26 AM
 
1,316 posts, read 1,124,052 times
Reputation: 1927
I thought the gubment wanted to keep people from getting fat....With all the new laws on food labeling and forbidding certain cooking oils in restaurants you would think that it would be a priority of Washington to get people off their arses and get fit...By charging a fee to use what is already ours, I would think that the coming fees will encourage more people to sit at home atwittering or watching golf or whatever, and laying in another layer of plaque in their arteries...Just another incongruity coming out of D.C...........by the way, I wonder what Jed and Zeb would think about a fee to walk the wilderness......Anybody know as to whom I speak?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2010, 11:35 AM
 
2,437 posts, read 7,123,371 times
Reputation: 1507
Quote:
Originally Posted by breaksraver13 View Post
I think they need to call this a "parking fee" not a "hiking fee"........back in SC I used to have to pay for parking at major trail heads and didn't have a problem with it, actually in most cases I would toss a couple of extra dollars in there.........There is just something weird/wrong with calling it a "hiking fee", I just don't like the term
That was my point exactly. A 'hiking fee' is just pugnacious by nature.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2010, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,756 posts, read 16,486,879 times
Reputation: 9292
Mike from back east wrote:
Pity the poor guvmint, damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Our great parks are the crown jewels of our nation, but it seems too few people are simply grateful that the USA has these parks, rather than having let rapacious developers clear cut and bulldoze them a hundred years ago...
<sarcasm>
The government should have sold all of the wild areas to the developers and other corporate interests. They could have put that money to better use ( could have funded an extra war or two perhaps ). Then nobody would have to pay taxes on wilderness that only a handful of weirdos care about. Certainly the developers would take MUCH better care of the wilderness than the government. Instead of useless trails for bikers, hikers, treehuggers, fitness nuts, and other similar oddball types, we could put those wild lands to good use ( more coal mines, more oil wells, more clear cut logging to obtain lumber for building trophy vacation homes for the well to do, etc ).

The government should turn over all of the National Parks to corporate sponsors who could tear down the rustic lodging and put much bigger modern hotels in their place with much bigger parking lots...smoothly paved of course. Those old buildings have outlived their usefulness. Most importantly those rocky, dusty, or muddy trails could all be paved over to make it easier for the tourists to walk into the wild areas. No sense limiting the wilds to those who are in good physical condition. There would no longer be a need to carry a pack with snacks or water, becasue they could have small McBurger outlets along the trail. The hikers could have burgers and fries washed down with a 100 ounce pepsi instead of energy bars and plain old water. It would be just like a regular weekend in the city!

For the really out of shape tourist they could charge a fee and put them on golf carts so they wouldn't have to exert themselves. They could spend an entire weekend in the wilds without having to walk except for the short distance from the parking lot to their rooms. It would be just like staying in the city. No need to let nature intrude...thanks to our corporate sponsors.

Now this would be clearly superior to the way the government is currently handling things, and we would gettin all of these EXTRAS without paying ANY taxes! FREE enterprise is always better than an intrusive government program.

</sarcasm>

Last edited by CosmicWizard; 05-18-2010 at 03:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2010, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Earth
1,442 posts, read 3,577,960 times
Reputation: 844
I think it's amusing that people whine about paying a nominal access fee to climb a mountain...and these same people have no problem spending lots of money on gear, and of course the gas money to get them there...

I got turned off on the idea of 14ers after doing a few of them and witnessing trash, feces, unleashed dogs, cell phones, and rude behavior in general. If it helps to cull some of the ignorant/selfish masses out of the tromping herds, that'd be fine by me.

I do agree with the general feeling that it's just another way of fleecing the common folk, and in turn that money just goes into a black hole, never to be seen again. That part ticks me off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top