Zinke: Too Many People Enter Federal Lands for Free

[pianoman9701]

I don't think this is a single solution problem. Logging is possible but we're talking about National Parks, which for the most part, are supposed to be untouched, natural wilderness areas. So, you're not going to completely solve the problem by clear cutting Yellowstone. I agree with his assessment that more people should pay, that a car with a disabled person and 4 other abled people should fork up 4 admissions or at least require 4 passes. And although I agree that active duty and their families should visit free, this should not apply to the Air Force. 

As far as I know most fees are per car. Rainier is $25 per car. What would you say the per person price be? Visiting public lands will sure get expensive.

I don't know and am not even sure that's the solution. But visiting public lands is already expensive. It's just we're not paying the bill. It's clear something needs to be done to finance the maintenance backlog. Take the senior pass, for example. One person pays $80/year and then, for all intents and purposes, could bring a van of 10 seniors, none of whom have bought the pass. Is that fiscally sensible? Consider allowing a spouse but others should have to pay to play. Again, just as an example. Not sure it's a solution. But I do get where he's coming from.

[bigtex]

I don't think this is a single solution problem. Logging is possible but we're talking about National Parks, which for the most part, are supposed to be untouched, natural wilderness areas. So, you're not going to completely solve the problem by clear cutting Yellowstone. I agree with his assessment that more people should pay, that a car with a disabled person and 4 other abled people should fork up 4 admissions or at least require 4 passes. And although I agree that active duty and their families should visit free, this should not apply to the Air Force. 

As far as I know most fees are per car. Rainier is $25 per car. What would you say the per person price be? Visiting public lands will sure get expensive.

I don't know and am not even sure that's the solution. But visiting public lands is already expensive. It's just we're not paying the bill. It's clear something needs to be done to finance the maintenance backlog. Take the senior pass, for example. One person pays $80/year and then, for all intents and purposes, could bring a van of 10 seniors, none of whom have bought the pass. Is that fiscally sensible? Consider allowing a spouse but others should have to pay to play. Again, just as an example. Not sure it's a solution. But I do get where he's coming from.

The senior pass is good for life, it's not an annual pass.

And I agree with you. But we all know many people don't like fees.

[pianoman9701]

I don't think this is a single solution problem. Logging is possible but we're talking about National Parks, which for the most part, are supposed to be untouched, natural wilderness areas. So, you're not going to completely solve the problem by clear cutting Yellowstone. I agree with his assessment that more people should pay, that a car with a disabled person and 4 other abled people should fork up 4 admissions or at least require 4 passes. And although I agree that active duty and their families should visit free, this should not apply to the Air Force. 

As far as I know most fees are per car. Rainier is $25 per car. What would you say the per person price be? Visiting public lands will sure get expensive.

I don't know and am not even sure that's the solution. But visiting public lands is already expensive. It's just we're not paying the bill. It's clear something needs to be done to finance the maintenance backlog. Take the senior pass, for example. One person pays $80/year and then, for all intents and purposes, could bring a van of 10 seniors, none of whom have bought the pass. Is that fiscally sensible? Consider allowing a spouse but others should have to pay to play. Again, just as an example. Not sure it's a solution. But I do get where he's coming from.

The senior pass is good for life, it's not an annual pass.

And I agree with you. But we all know many people don't like fees.

I think movie tickets are too expensive. So I don't go. We all have a choice.

[Special T]

Obviously they arnt going to  clear cut Yellowstone or Rainer Np.
 Logging generates federal funds, and it is congresses fault they done nothing to spend wisely or look at it in a fiscally responcible matter.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[bearpaw]

I don't think this is a single solution problem. Logging is possible but we're talking about National Parks, which for the most part, are supposed to be untouched, natural wilderness areas. So, you're not going to completely solve the problem by clear cutting Yellowstone. I agree with his assessment that more people should pay, that a car with a disabled person and 4 other abled people should fork up 4 admissions or at least require 4 passes. And although I agree that active duty and their families should visit free, this should not apply to the Air Force. 

As far as I know most fees are per car. Rainier is $25 per car. What would you say the per person price be? Visiting public lands will sure get expensive.

I don't know and am not even sure that's the solution. But visiting public lands is already expensive. It's just we're not paying the bill. It's clear something needs to be done to finance the maintenance backlog. Take the senior pass, for example. One person pays $80/year and then, for all intents and purposes, could bring a van of 10 seniors, none of whom have bought the pass. Is that fiscally sensible? Consider allowing a spouse but others should have to pay to play. Again, just as an example. Not sure it's a solution. But I do get where he's coming from.

The senior pass is good for life, it's not an annual pass.

And I agree with you. But we all know many people don't like fees.

I think movie tickets are too expensive. So I don't go. We all have a choice.

Cost is an important issue too, if passes cost too much people will stop going. That is exactly what happened with parks in WA. I think the best answer is for congress to fund the parks shortfall with everyone's tax dollars and at the same time managers need to cut costs in the parks so they can balance their operating budgets.

[Special T]

We have this same issue with the state parks. Most people that use parks are not willing to pay for the services required, with the exception of those whom camp at improved facilities.

It should be obvious the trend is that the Gov isn't willing to make it a spending priority. That means it's up to the users to pay for the services. That means the way funding in the parks is done will have to be changed. No one likes rising prices especially when they have been allowed to ride for free.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[bigtex]

I don't think this is a single solution problem. Logging is possible but we're talking about National Parks, which for the most part, are supposed to be untouched, natural wilderness areas. So, you're not going to completely solve the problem by clear cutting Yellowstone. I agree with his assessment that more people should pay, that a car with a disabled person and 4 other abled people should fork up 4 admissions or at least require 4 passes. And although I agree that active duty and their families should visit free, this should not apply to the Air Force. 

As far as I know most fees are per car. Rainier is $25 per car. What would you say the per person price be? Visiting public lands will sure get expensive.

I don't know and am not even sure that's the solution. But visiting public lands is already expensive. It's just we're not paying the bill. It's clear something needs to be done to finance the maintenance backlog. Take the senior pass, for example. One person pays $80/year and then, for all intents and purposes, could bring a van of 10 seniors, none of whom have bought the pass. Is that fiscally sensible? Consider allowing a spouse but others should have to pay to play. Again, just as an example. Not sure it's a solution. But I do get where he's coming from.

The senior pass is good for life, it's not an annual pass.

And I agree with you. But we all know many people don't like fees.

I think movie tickets are too expensive. So I don't go. We all have a choice.

Cost is an important issue too, if passes cost too much people will stop going. That is exactly what happened with parks in WA. I think the best answer is for congress to fund the parks shortfall with everyone's tax dollars and at the same time managers need to cut costs in the parks so they can balance their operating budgets.

I agree. But on the federal side prices have been going up and so is visitation, so they haven't hit that peak/plateau yet.

What many people fail to realize is most of your larger and some medium size federal parks are essentially mini cities. They have their own water treatment/wastewater facilities staffed by NPS employees, the roads are maintained by the NPS, they have their own law enforcement force, some even have schools in them. And in some of the older parks it has to be this way because the state has no jurisdiction within the park. WSP/WDFW/Sheriff/WA DOT has no authority in Olympic and Rainier, so the feds are forced to operate all of those things on their own. You don't see these things with state parks.

[bearpaw]

I didn't know so many people went through parks completely free, maybe they should be paying half, maybe that would help?

[Knocker of rocks]

I didn't know so many people went through parks completely free, maybe they should be paying half, maybe that would help?

The parks largely base their fees on a per-vehicle basis.  Hence this issue.

[bigtex]

I didn't know so many people went through parks completely free, maybe they should be paying half, maybe that would help?

It's not just parks it's all federal lands. The pass that let's then into park for free let them on all the other fed lands for free too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Special T]

I didn't know so many people went through parks completely free, maybe they should be paying half, maybe that would help?

It's not just parks it's all federal lands. The pass that let's then into park for free let them on all the other fed lands for free too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Here in lays part of my issue.  I have NO problem charging fees that correlate with the cost of upkeep for services. Trail heads that are plowed and traveled, have vault toilets that need servicing, campgrounds, or national parks that cost to upkeep.

I have not seen the NP camping rates, but if they are anything like the state parks, they are well under market, and have long wait lists. Campers, just like sportsmen, seem more than willing to open thier wallet for services rendered... Day use folks, not so much.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[npaull]

I'll listen to Zinke bitch about people not paying National Park fees after he stops charging the American taxpayers $12,000 for private jets from Vegas to Montana when commercial flights cost a couple hundred bucks. I thought we were draining the swamp, no?

[bearpaw]

I'll listen to Zinke bitch about people not paying National Park fees after he stops charging the American taxpayers $12,000 for private jets from Vegas to Montana when commercial flights cost a couple hundred bucks. I thought we were draining the swamp, no?

I'd be more worried about the millions Pelosi spent than 12,000 spent by Zinke! 

https://www.activistpost.com/2017/02/nancy-pelosi-commute-california-air-force-takes-plane.html

Overall, according to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch in January 2011, Pelosi used the Air Force aircraft for a total of 43 trips, covering 90,155 miles, from January 1 through October 1, 2010. Judicial Watch, through FOIA, continues to pursue other records related to Pelosi’s use of Air Force aircraft.Previous documents obtained by Judicial Watch show the former Speaker’s military travel cost the USAF $2,100,744.59 over one two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol. For example, purchases for one Pelosi-led congressional delegation traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008 included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.

[npaull]

It's all bad, and the one won't forgive the other. But anyway back on topic...

I have no problem paying more for admission to our federal public lands, but I don't want to be closing down our federal lands or selling them to private companies while the cost for the remaining ones is going up. For FAR too long, hunters' main concern has been gun rights and anti-hunters. Those problems can be fixed with the stroke of a pen. Loss of habitat, and loss of access, is basically forever. That's where the future of hunting lives or dies.

[davk]

It's all bad, and the one won't forgive the other. But anyway back on topic...

I have no problem paying more for admission to our federal public lands, but I don't want to be closing down our federal lands or selling them to private companies while the cost for the remaining ones is going up. For FAR too long, hunters' main concern has been gun rights and anti-hunters. Those problems can be fixed with the stroke of a pen. Loss of habitat, and loss of access, is basically forever. That's where the future of hunting lives or dies.

That's because anti-hunters and gun rights are by far the biggest threats to hunters.  To say it can be fixed with a stroke of a pen is just ignorance.  It would be along the lines of me saying any developed land will eventually turn back into habitat.