Forum Index > Trail Talk > More Fees Coming to a Trail Near You
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
coldrain108
Thundering Herd



Joined: 05 Aug 2010
Posts: 1858 | TRs | Pics
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
coldrain108
Thundering Herd
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 12:50 pm 
Cyclopath wrote:
treeswarper wrote:
I expect another major influx from California what with the power outages and fires. It's going to get worse here. Brace yourselves.
You should build a wall.
like the one between Colorado and new MEXICO?

Since I have no expectations of forgiveness, I don't do it in the first place. That loop hole needs to be closed to everyone.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 1:24 pm 
Cyclopath wrote:
You should build a wall.
If only walls could keep out disastrous ideas, the result of which we see in the new normal in CA.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 501 | TRs | Pics
Brian R
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 1:54 pm 
MtnGoat wrote:
Cyclopath wrote:
You should build a wall.
If only walls could keep out disastrous ideas, the result of which we see in the new normal in CA.
Exactly. I still can't fathom people who relocate here--fleeing the fruit of their own politics--only to continue voting same way they did in the place they fled. I'd be curious how many trail encounters are recent transplants. Yesterday I did a quick morning hike up Summit Lake Peak, and spoke to a new transplant from, wait for it--California.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 6900 | TRs | Pics
Kim Brown
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 2:29 pm 
So - people from California vote for more trail fees in California, they don't like it after all, and are moving here and voting for more trail fees?

"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area." Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 501 | TRs | Pics
Brian R
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 7:24 pm 
No, they're fleeing punitive taxation, fires, crime, drug vagrants, illegal aliens--any number of the very things they themselves voted to accommodate. I doubt trailhead fees on federal lands are high on their list. Nevertheless, they're here--and there are a lot of them who want to enjoy the local mountains. And they seem much more amenable to restrictions and/or fees on their freedom to travel the back-country.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Bosterson
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2019
Posts: 291 | TRs | Pics
Location: Portland
Bosterson
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 7:48 pm 

Go! Take a gun! And a dog! Without a leash! Chop down a tree! Start a fire! Piss wherever you want! Build a cairn! A HUGE ONE! BE A REBEL! YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE! (-bootpathguy)
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 6900 | TRs | Pics
Kim Brown
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 8:21 pm 
So we're blaming trail fees in Oregon on people from California fleeing devastating fires that destroyed their homes, goods, livelihoods, then making their homes in Washington, and then voting? That's quite a theory. (hey.....do you think they set the fires on purpose so they could pull this off? paranoid.gif )

"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area." Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 9:05 pm 
An example of a part of a state that has been Californicated is Northern Idaho. No joking, there was an article in a real newspaper a few years ago on how the politics have changed because of the migration. School levies fail, no new taxes, etc. enough that there was grumbling amongst the minority of people who had lived there prior to the mass migration. In the 1980s, I saw some folks in Oregon with Oregon Border Patrol hats. Perhaps they are going to put up a wall? 'Cept the southwestern part of their state is already pretty full of immigrants from CA. I am now thinking that somewhere around 50 to 70% of our Warshington population is not from here originally. Stupid, stupid Spokane actually had advertisements in CA right after their 1988 or 89 earthquake encouraging them to settle in Spokane. They wrongly claimed that Spokane had no earthquakes. The military is another culprit, and getting worse. 400 more "airmen" are arriving along with their families at Fairchild AFB. A refueling group/wing/whatever is being moved there. And no, we aren't just blaming the folks from CA. I am pointing out that the population of the PNW has increased massively and continues to do so. Meanwhile, our scenery does not. Now, try to convince me that population growth has no effects on the landscape, and the ability to be spontaneous. Maybe we should have had another smoky summer.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 501 | TRs | Pics
Brian R
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 9:31 pm 
Kim Brown wrote:
So we're blaming trail fees in Oregon on people from California fleeing devastating fires that destroyed their homes, goods, livelihoods, then making their homes in Washington, and then voting? That's quite a theory. (hey.....do you think they set the fires on purpose so they could pull this off? paranoid.gif )
Sorry Kim, can't respond to this. Since we've met, I'll respectfully ask you for a bit more civility.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
mb
Member
Member


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 507 | TRs | Pics
mb
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 9:58 pm 
Brian R wrote:
Kim Brown wrote:
So we're blaming trail fees in Oregon on people from California fleeing devastating fires that destroyed their homes, goods, livelihoods, then making their homes in Washington, and then voting? That's quite a theory. (hey.....do you think they set the fires on purpose so they could pull this off? paranoid.gif )
Sorry Kim, can't respond to this. Since we've met, I'll respectfully ask you for a bit more civility.
I can't speak for Kim. But if 'californication' had anything to do with the topic at hand (a congressional act related to all national forests, many of which are in Washington and visited by members of this board, and proposed by a WA congressman), then your comments would be worthy of a direct response. But as you are totally derailing this thread, they are not. Please either take them to a relevant thread, or describe how this has anything to do with the topic at hand, especially the several unresolved topical questions.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 7694 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
Faster than light
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 10:02 pm 
treeswarper wrote:
An example of a part of a state that has been Californicated is Northern Idaho. No joking, there was an article in a real newspaper a few years ago on how the politics have changed because of the migration. School levies fail, no new taxes, etc. enough that there was grumbling amongst the minority of people who had lived there prior to the mass migration. In the 1980s, I saw some folks in Oregon with Oregon Border Patrol hats. Perhaps they are going to put up a wall? 'Cept the southwestern part of their state is already pretty full of immigrants from CA. I am now thinking that somewhere around 50 to 70% of our Warshington population is not from here originally. Stupid, stupid Spokane actually had advertisements in CA right after their 1988 or 89 earthquake encouraging them to settle in Spokane. They wrongly claimed that Spokane had no earthquakes. The military is another culprit, and getting worse. 400 more "airmen" are arriving along with their families at Fairchild AFB. A refueling group/wing/whatever is being moved there. And no, we aren't just blaming the folks from CA. I am pointing out that the population of the PNW has increased massively and continues to do so. Meanwhile, our scenery does not. Now, try to convince me that population growth has no effects on the landscape, and the ability to be spontaneous. Maybe we should have had another smoky summer.
I don't understand why people start frothing at the mouth whenever California comes up. But I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the trail fees being proposed. I hope everybody took the time to write their representatives and to comment on the proposal.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 501 | TRs | Pics
Brian R
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 10:20 pm 
mb wrote:
Brian R wrote:
Kim Brown wrote:
So we're blaming trail fees in Oregon on people from California fleeing devastating fires that destroyed their homes, goods, livelihoods, then making their homes in Washington, and then voting? That's quite a theory. (hey.....do you think they set the fires on purpose so they could pull this off? paranoid.gif )
Sorry Kim, can't respond to this. Since we've met, I'll respectfully ask you for a bit more civility.
I can't speak for Kim. But if 'californication' had anything to do with the topic at hand (a congressional act related to all national forests, many of which are in Washington and visited by members of this board, and proposed by a WA congressman), then your comments would be worthy of a direct response. But as you are totally derailing this thread, they are not. Please either take them to a relevant thread, or describe how this has anything to do with the topic at hand, especially the several unresolved topical questions.
You should read back through the thread if you want to see where the California corollary began. Still, if you think Californication isn't related to surging trail usage here--along with associated proposals to limit access--then feel free to propose speech limits on this topic.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Bosterson
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2019
Posts: 291 | TRs | Pics
Location: Portland
Bosterson
Member
PostTue Oct 29, 2019 10:30 pm 
mb wrote:
But if 'californication' had anything to do with the topic at hand (a congressional act related to all national forests, many of which are in Washington and visited by members of this board, and proposed by a WA congressman), then your comments would be worthy of a direct response. But as you are totally derailing this thread, they are not.
Cyclopath wrote:
I don't understand why people start frothing at the mouth whenever California comes up. But I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the trail fees being proposed. I hope everybody took the time to write their representatives and to comment on the proposal.
up.gif If everyone wants to spin this off into a pointless pseudo political nitpick spat, then so be it (after all, this is the internet), but have any of you tried directing this energy towards contacting your Congresspersons? This thread was about a proposed amendment to FLREA that potentially (and confusingly) redefines how the FS is allowed to create special use permit fee areas. I have emailed my Congressman and 2 Senators (one of whom is Wyden, a co-sponsor on the bill) and am awaiting a response to my questions and concerns. Have any of the Washingtonians here contacted the other (Washington) co-sponsor about this? If so, what was the response?

Go! Take a gun! And a dog! Without a leash! Chop down a tree! Start a fire! Piss wherever you want! Build a cairn! A HUGE ONE! BE A REBEL! YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE! (-bootpathguy)
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
cunningkeith
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 14 | TRs | Pics
Location: Portland
cunningkeith
Member
PostWed Oct 30, 2019 6:39 am 
mb wrote:
Did cunningkeith read the text of the bill?
Yes. Here is the language about charging "individuals" for hiking in "special areas"
Quote:
“(h) Special Recreation Permit And Fee.— “(1) SPECIAL RECREATION PERMIT.—The Secretary may issue a special recreation permit for specialized individual or group uses of Federal recreational lands and waters, including— “(A) outfitting, guiding, or other recreation services; “(B) recreation or competitive events, which may include incidental sales; “(C) for the use of— “(i) a special area; or “(ii) an area in which use is allocated; “(D) motorized recreational vehicle use; and “(E) a group activity or event.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
cunningkeith
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 14 | TRs | Pics
Location: Portland
cunningkeith
Member
PostWed Oct 30, 2019 7:04 am 
If anyone can explain how the language for charging "individuals" snuck in this legislation, I would love to know. Here's one theory (and it's just a theory): Lobbyists who stand to gain from the legislation put this language in the bill. Think that's far-fetched? Look at the facts: The website recreation.gov could make millions from charging people for hiking permits across the country. So let's follow the money. recreation.gov is not run by the government despite the ".gov" domain name. The website is operated by Booz Allen Hamilton, a huge government contractor. The parent company of Booz Allen is the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm. Sen. Ron Wyden has been a lead sponsor of this legislation. According to opensecrets.org, the Carlyle Group paid Sen. Wyden $51,800 over the last five years. So it appears that the Carlyle Group contributed to Sen. Wyden and now he supports legislation that will benefit his donor.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Trail Talk > More Fees Coming to a Trail Near You
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum