[MtnGoat]

No, trail passes will never get expensive. No, a demo fee program is not just the nose of the camel. No, they won't raise fees continuously. Remember those arguments?...... Forest Service considers national pass plan "The U.S. Forest Service is considering taking its regional trailhead passes national with other agencies so there would be a single "pay to play" pass for all federal lands. The national pass, which would combine access to national parks, national forests, national wildlife refuges and federal rangelands, is among issues on the agenda of the annual national meeting of Forest Service recreation staff members this week in Portland. "We do want a national fee program that is seamless across all federal land agencies," Teri Cleeland, Forest Service national program manager for recreation fees, said Monday from Portland. .... Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and the organization Wild Wilderness have complained that paying to play on public lands is a form of double taxation. "We are simply substituting regressive taxation for the congressional allocations necessary for the funding to maintain all federal lands," said Scott Silver of Wild Wilderness. DeFazio said he was concerned that a combined pass would be more expensive than the $30 Forest Service pass or the $50 national-parks pass. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/134437746_trails17m.html

[Randy]

Great. I guess I fit into the larger group of folks who are *not* interested in a national combination pass. I decided last year that I wasn't going to buy the FS pass this year because I wasn't seeing the result that was supposed to come from my 30 bucks. I'll being doing the 1/4 mile warm up walk quite a bit this summer.

[Dslayer]

I was one of those guys who thought everyone was overreacting when they implemented the fees--and discovered that I was wrong. I've reached the point where I just don't it buy it and use the trailhead anyway...A. We've been lied to B. I paid for this already C. I haven't seen anything remotely resembling a discernible improvement in trail maintenance. In the past, I've chosen to donate an amount of money--I'm hardly Carnegiean-to the local NF that I frequented or if I ran into people who I thought were especially doing a good job....but this stuff has me so angry that I don't even do that anymore. If the NFS had simply said "we're out of money, please donate time and money or there won't be any trails"--I'd been there with them, but this is a scam....

[MCaver]

I'm the same. I thought everyone was making a big deal about nothing at first. I was happy to pay a little extra to use the trails with the understanding that the money would be used to keep those trails maintained and improve some locations. I've seen/heard nothing that those dollars were used for, and now they want to raise the price. Give me a break. We've been had. Again.

[MtnGoat]

Best part is, what money they do get will be used to exclude you from the M Fk. Not only will you be forbidden from driving on a road, a road which you paid for to begin with, you'll get to pay for the privilege of banning yourself, twice! Once with your trail pass $$, again with the allocation the USFS gets from your income tax. How's that feel?

[Stefan]

But Forest Service won't have any money to upgrade the Middle Fork! The Forest Service will only have enough money to put up gates!

[#19]

Pretty cool to see some of you guys admit you may have been wrong. Most people NEVER do that. I have identified myself before as not an anti-gov / anti-tax type. But this and the apparent MF mess is so typical of our BIG goverment operating on behalf of "someone" other than "we the people". I think it no surprise that the price will go up and up. But I have never and will never pay. Got ito a big agruement on the phone with the VERLOT Ranger Station about the Barlow Pass "trailhead". It ain't one! The road into Monte Cristo is not a trail - its a road! But they rip people of like its a real trailhead.

[Newt]

Somewhere there was a link posted to show where they accounted for the the money spent. Forgot where I saw it. I think the 1/4 mi warm up is a great idea...until they see all the cars, get wise and extend the distance. I park on the outskirts of the parking lots so as to not get door dinged and walk past those that been waiting for 5-10 min to get the close one. I think some folks are just afraid to walk. A 1/4 mi is a warm up just as you say. I also think that most of the trail maint. is done by volunteers and orgs. for free or a free trail pass. Oh, maybe that's where the lose of revenue stems from Walk the 1/4 mi, jump the *gate* and keep on going. NN

[MCaver]

I wouldn't be surprised if the FS decided that a pass is required to park anywhere in a National Forest, not just trailheads. It's all in the National Forest, right? Pappy: I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong. I'm just usually right.

[-lol-]

[Randy]

Yeah, that's really the part that gets me (access reduction + fee increases). Hey, maybe if they starting developing the MFK area that'll keep them from putting in another darned wooden stair along the Snow Lake trail?

[Sore Feet]

They can raise the price all they want, I'm still not buying one. Paying for National Parks is one thing, but public forest lands is another. I have to wonder if the national pass is activated, whether or not they'll be able to start going after people who don't pay (it would still probably be too expensive, but Big Bro. seems to spend ludicrous amounts of money on the stupidest things)? Gonna have to break out the trail running shoes...

[Backpacker Joe]

The founding fathers have been ROLLING in their graves for years! This stopped being a free country years ago! FDR saw to that when he threatened to add seats to the supreme court unless they gave in to his SOCAILIST ways in the 30's. It's gone down hill since then. I will NOT buy passes to use PUBLIC land! My taxes (lots of them) have paid for that dozens of times over. This is just going to end up being comrade chairman forest service chief's way of regulating activity in the backcountry by taxing people away from it! F*** those lefty bastards!

[salish]

All the posters before me have really stated their positions much more eloquently than I can. I usually stay out of the fray on topics like this because it causes me too much angst....BUT, this is an incredible crock of bull#### that is being served up to us. I usually end up going with the flow, but I'll be damned if I'm going to grab an ankles over this. Who would we write to in an effort to express our disgust with this? Our congress? The head of the USFS? Would it make a difference?

[Scrooge]

Salish, as usual, we write to each other. We at least will pay attention to people we disagree with (though I might borrow that Forest Service bull). Our bureaucrats don't have to. The Forest Service has reached that stage in its development where it does two things: defends its existence and nothing. That's right. They go up to Congress every year to defend their budget, describing in great detail all of the things they are going to "study" doing and all the organizational approaches they are going to "explore" in order to facilitate their continued maintenance of ongoing programs at a level consistent with ecological considerations and the regretable but understandable constraints of existing and foreseeable economic circumstances. Yeah. I used to do this #### for a living - not for the Forest Service but that really makes no difference. It's all the same and it all sucks. The one thing they don't want to do is get out of the way and let us do it. .... Ya know what could happen? Joe could get a few friends and put the MF Middle Fork in shape in three weekends. ..... But it won't happen, cause then who needs the Forest Service? Suggesting it earned me my bull. I'm coming to regard it as a real badge of pride.