Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
polarbear Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 3680 | TRs | Pics Location: Snow Lake hide-away |
|
Back to top |
|
|
frankm3 Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2003 Posts: 338 | TRs | Pics Location: Seattle, WA |
|
frankm3
Member
|
Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:11 pm
|
|
|
I have never had a problem with paying to enjoy the National Forests. I know I certainly get a lot more than $30 of enjoyment out of them each year. I guess I say that in the context of it costing what it does now.
The arguments about the costs coming exclusively from tax dollars- that to me kind of treats use of National Forests in the same fashion as people who buy athletic club memberships and...actually use them!
The people that go to the gym regularly get a huge subsidy from those who went twice and quit, and now sit at home eating snacky smores. That's really great for people like us who enjoy the forests regularly, but it isn't really entirely equitable either.
Frank
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sore Feet Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 6304 | TRs | Pics Location: Out There, Somewhere |
Well, considering that the forest service currently contracts out land to be logged, I think it's more than fair that taxes go towards maintaining the forest, since that wood benefits everybody.
But heck, why stop with public forest land? Why not charge to use ALL public lands; parks, city streets, public school parking lots, tolls on all the highways. With all the budget crunching going on, I'm sure the money would be welcomed by all. I mean, it's only fair, since the people who don't use them don't benefit from them.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe Blind Hiker
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics Location: Cle Elum |
Does that surprise anyone?
TB
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dante Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 2815 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Dante
Member
|
Thu Oct 16, 2003 10:23 pm
|
|
|
Sore Feet wrote: | Why not charge to use ALL public lands; parks, city streets, public school parking lots, tolls on all the highways. With all the budget crunching going on, I'm sure the money would be welcomed by all. I mean, it's only fair, since the people who don't use them don't benefit from them. |
Should there really be any public land. Bush's Public Lands Policy Advisor for the election had a neat idea--auction it all off!
"...we offer a blueprint for auctioning off all public lands over 20 to 40 years. Both environmental quality and economic efficiency would be enhanced by private rather than public ownership. Land would be auctioned not for dollars but for public land share certificates (analogous to no par value stock certificates) distributed equally to all Americans. Those certificates could be freely transferred at any time during the divestiture period and would not expire until after the final auction. Land would be partitioned into tracts or primary units, and corresponding to each tract would be a set of distinct, separable, elemental deed rights. Any individual with a documented claim to rights defined by those deeds, however, would be assigned the appropriate deed or deeds. Once divested, tract deed rights would be freely transferable." http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-363es.html
Then we could pay Disney a fee instead of the Federal Government
|
Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe Blind Hiker
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics Location: Cle Elum |
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
|
Back to top |
|
|
frankm3 Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2003 Posts: 338 | TRs | Pics Location: Seattle, WA |
|
frankm3
Member
|
Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:02 pm
|
|
|
Sore Feet wrote: | Well, considering that the forest service currently contracts out land to be logged, I think it's more than fair that taxes go towards maintaining the forest, since that wood benefits everybody.
But heck, why stop with public forest land? Why not charge to use ALL public lands; parks, city streets, public school parking lots, tolls on all the highways. With all the budget crunching going on, I'm sure the money would be welcomed by all. I mean, it's only fair, since the people who don't use them don't benefit from them. |
That's not a fair comparison. BTW, I also would have understood what you wrote equally as well without the little 'sure, whatever' guy.
Charging for recreational use (nonessential, with a very limited number of dedicated users) of forest land and charging someone to use all the public highways (essential infrastructure elements that support the day-to-day lives of millions of people) is not at all the same thing.
As someone who is single, I am paying to send a bunch of OTHER people's kids to school, and I'm not bemoaning paying for that (OK, I am)! I obviously get little use out of those dollars except that my neighbor's kids have good manners, so it's not a complete waste.
Do you disagree with what I said because you feel your tax burden is already too high, or that the USFS misappropriates their money? I would agree with you in regard to the fact that there needs to be better stewardship for the future- if such was the case, we wouldn't be talking about this, huh?
So what's wrong with pitching in and contributing a little bit? I estimate I use USFS land on average 3-4 times a month. That's like .65 a trip- a pittance. And for people like you and I who do use the forests quite a bit, all you have to do is volunteer for 8 hours and the NW Forest Pass is free anyway.
Here is a related question/ comment-
How many of the roads/ trails/ whatever....that you use in a National Forest were actually constructed and dedicated exclusively to provide access strictly for recreational use? Probably not a whole lot is my guess. In fact, I would bet (this is mostly true from my own experience)that most trails, USFS roads, and the like were in fact originally constructed for some other - likely commercial - purpose.
The USFS has been playing the game of benign neglect for years. Someone builds a road to log/ mine/ extract resources from the area, and what we typically use is the decaying remnants of the old infrastructure- and it ain't getting any newer either.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Karen Member
Joined: 22 Dec 2001 Posts: 2866 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Karen
Member
|
Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:26 pm
Challets
|
|
|
Did you mean shallots??
Karen
stay together, learn the flowers, go light - from Turtle Island, Gary Snyder
stay together, learn the flowers, go light - from Turtle Island, Gary Snyder
|
Back to top |
|
|
touron Member
Joined: 15 Sep 2003 Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics Location: Plymouth Rock |
|
touron
Member
|
Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:41 pm
|
|
|
I get really nervous when the government tries to measure how much enjoyment I get out of the wilderness. I do know that when I go on a hike, I come back, get pictures developed, show them to people at work and others who don't have to pay a thing and post stuff on the internet for the casual surfer to enjoy In reality, alot more people benefit from my little hike than me myself. Can it really be equated with the price of a movie ticket. Please pass the gorp with extra butter.
Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
|
Back to top |
|
|
touron Member
Joined: 15 Sep 2003 Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics Location: Plymouth Rock |
|
touron
Member
|
Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:39 pm
|
|
|
The word "demonstration" also contains the word demon. Particularly apt in this instance.
Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dante Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 2815 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Dante
Member
|
Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:57 pm
|
|
|
Quark wrote: | You get a lot of use out those tax dollars. I would hate to live in a county filled with uneducated people. |
I agree with you Quark, and I would hate to live in an america was even less educated or informed See e.g. Cloudy Thinking on Tax Cuts
"CONSERVATIVE and liberal political commentators alike have wondered why most Americans have enthusiastically supported two of the largest tax cuts in history even though most benefits will flow to upper-income families....
***
In the most extensive analysis yet available, Larry Bartels, a political scientist at Princeton University, gives a simple but persuasive explanation: "unenlightened self-interest."
***
Larry Bartels concludes that "most Americans support tax cuts not because they are indifferent to economic inequality, but because they largely fail to connect inequality and public policy." In this sense, Homer Simpson had it backward when he said, "Just because I don't care doesn't mean that I don't understand."
James Madison said it best: "A people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power that knowledge gives. A popular government without popular knowledge or the means of acquiring it is but a prelude to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both."
|
Back to top |
|
|
frankm3 Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2003 Posts: 338 | TRs | Pics Location: Seattle, WA |
|
frankm3
Member
|
Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:25 pm
|
|
|
Quark wrote: | You get a lot of use out those tax dollars. I would hate to live in a county filled with uneducated people. Those kids you and I are educating with our tax dollars today are the authors of laws we'll live by in the future. Perhaps the kids of today will be our benefactors when we get old, if we end up needing help.
Back to subject-matter: Even without the fee, the tax dollars are there to take care of our lands - it just isn't being appropriated correctly. Basically, what Uncle Sam did was diss the FS and tell it to come up with something on its own, if it wanted money. Enter Fee Demonstration.
Its interesting the word "demonstration" can mean 'a demonstration of a possible permanent fee,' or 'public outcry against a fee.' |
There you go...it's all in how you look at it! Your point is a good one too. Honestly, I really don't mind paying my share that much, but it was a good example to make a point. Even though I am single, I bought my house with some inkling in mind that I might be sending kids to school here some day.
So back to our original topic- I don't think that anyone ever enivisioned the intensity of recreational users that exist today. 100 years ago many of these places were simply too remote and not realistically possible for the average person to ever consider visiting. They were so far away, and transportation so slow, that the only people out 'enjoying' the national forests in the way we do today were typically really wealthy (i.e. TR and his pals).
There were a lot more other people out there eeking out a living in some remote place typically connected to mining, logging, etc, though.
This is especially true in the West, but weren't the Forests set aside as much to protect the 'resources' (very elusive - can mean many things to many people) as anything else? I think whether most of us like it or not, policy still favors resource extraction over recreation. That's been the bread and butter since inception of the USFS it seems. I don't really like it either.
The thing that does really annoy me about the mandatory fees is the criminalization of not paying and making it a jailable offense. You either pay, volunteer, don't go at all....or go to jail? WTF, we don't have better people to lock up than someone who didn't pay $3 to go hiking?
Frank
|
Back to top |
|
|
hikermike Member
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 1238 | TRs | Pics Location: Tacoma |
Some seem to have forgotten that these are PUBLIC LANDS supported by PUBLIC FUNDS for the use of the PUBLIC. Why should there be an extra charge to use them? (The "some" equal our elected officials). These should be available to all with out qualification or a "Means Test". It's beginning to have an "Elitist" aspect. But then the Bush Administration's attitude that the only true American is a rich American and all others are not deserving. When I grew up we were very poor and the only places we could have a vacation to allow my dad to get a way from a very stressful job was camping and hiking. ($2 for 2 weeks at Yellowstone in 1952). I am well off now and none of these fees are a hinderance to me but all I can think is how we're becoming a more class oriented society and not providing those less off with the same opportunities as we. (or I). My dad had 8 years of college education, including 4 yrs of graduate training, served as a Lobbist for public schools, state director of the Legislative branch of the state PTA, served as Chaplain to the state legislature for many years, testified many times to the US Congress, served as Treasurer to the National Presbyterian Church and so on. All this was unpaid, so we had little money, so this is just to show that not having money to pay the fees is not fair nor "American" as ALL are deserving to use our resources. (Someone calculated that to take a 4 day hike with a family in the Olympics could cost $155)
Sorry I'm on the soapbox again, but this attitude that hikers and users of the back country are getting some special privilege by using what IS ours burns my bacon.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe Blind Hiker
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics Location: Cle Elum |
Quote: | But then the Bush Administration's attitude that the only true American is a rich American and all others are not deserving |
I'll never understand where this attitude comes from. This "Oh republicans only care about the rich" crap.
There are MORE democrats in BOTH houses that come from old money/new money! There are more millionaires that are democrats in both houses.
IF a statement like that above CAN be said, it has to be said about BOTH parties!
You're just as insane as you think I am if you think for a SECOND that the democrats CARE in the least about anybody but themselves and their POWER!
Neither party cares anything about anything other than acquiring and keeping their POWER!
TB
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
|
Back to top |
|
|
hikermike Member
Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 1238 | TRs | Pics Location: Tacoma |
Bury your head in the sand, Bush is not a republican, he's a Neo-Conservative.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
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
|
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate NWHikers.net earns from qualifying purchases when you use our link(s).
|