[#19]

Anyone notice how dead its been around here since all the yak about unregistered posts? Now you got Brian and Pappy dukin' it out. Ain't it great. But it would be even better with some of those folks with the clever handles? My calculator doesn't go high enough to check your numbers, but is 30 mil really 1.5 % of 2 trillion? Been out of school too long for that one. And if the Demo Fees have really raised 1.5% of the entire Fed revenues taken in then I say drop the income tax and institute fees across the board on everything. Think the gov would be floating in $ at that rate. I didn't say you were nit-picking. Said I would be if I worried about a few cabins and LO's collecting $. Of course I wrote it that way to piss you off. Sorry. But I think my point is valid. Not many people are going to care about something so seldom used like a pay for stay LO. On the other hand, every mom and pop that drives up to Alpental and strolls 20 min up the Snow Lk trail, gets nailed with a nice yellow surprise on their windshield. Brian, you are very detail oriented. Great. But when the detail, such as the fact that you are being ticketed for a parking violation, NOT for using the trail, is thrown up to you, the detail is no longer important to you. If it is really all about paying for playing, then why doesn't every person in the car have to pay? Becuase they could n't make it work, so they found a way to get you. By giving you a parking ticket. Its phony. IMO.

[Dslayer]

I'm not just angry about Trail Park Pass. There are a lot of uses of tax dollars that fire me up--I don't particularly want my tax dollar used to support guys who urinate in jars, drop a crucifix in it, take a picture and call it art. On the other hand my wife, artist and art teacher sees a need for funding to give artists the chance to 'create.' I'm willing to accept what I see as useless, another person sees at vital, although I'm willing to bet that whatever minimal portion of Americans benefit from tax dollars spent on the NFS, they still outweigh those who benefit directly from the NEA--unless you consider the millions who were 'inspired' by "Piss Christ." What bothers me about the whole Trail Park Pass deal is how it has transpired from "just signing in" to keep track of numbers for 'management purposes,' to a fee, and then to a larger fee. It feels like Environmental Science 101 to me, i.e., to decrease usage,(a/o conserve a resource) increase the cost--so why can't the fee be $100, $250, $1,000 or more? Whatever the amount, it begins to eliminate users. To eliminate by economics members of the public from using public lands is fundamentally wrong.

[Brian Curtis]

You are all, of course, correct about my trillion miscalculation. I hang my head in shame. I missed 3 zeros along the way. My apologies. The problem with the dismissing the LO and cabin rentals because not many people are going to worry about them is that it cuts both ways. We are in the situation of having a pass because there aren't enough users to make enough people sit up and take notice. We are a tiny minority of all the people in the country. You're right, I am detail oriented, but that doesn't mean I'm a concrete thinker. You are absolutely correct that having the pass on the car means that it is a per car-load fee, not an individual fee, but now we are becoming distracted and discussing how the fee was implemented instead of whether or not it should have been implemented. That's the reason I didn't pursue that angle in more detail. I see it as a compromise that is much more acceptable to me then a per person fee. That doesn't mean I like it, but I am willing to tolerate it. For an example look to the Olympic National Park. I see this as a completely onerous fee that was implemented to cover everyone in the party.

[Brian Curtis]

Dslayer, I think you are mixing up a couple different programs that have been in place over the years. If you go back far enough you'll recall the days where you had to get a permit from a ranger station for any backcountry destination. Eventually they went to a voluntary trailhead sign-in to track the same information about backcountry use. This is still done and is not related at all to the fee demo program. So far they seem intent on keeping the program affordable with the option to volunteer if you don't want to spend the money and daily passes for casual users who don't go enough to benefit from the $30 pass. Again, this isn't to say I'm in favor of the pass, I just haven't seen any indication they are attempting to control use by pricing the pass such that it keeps people away but that would certainly be completely unacceptable if they were to do so.

[MC]

For a little perspective: http://www.newsday.com/news....8.story Government Running $133B Deficit By JEANNINE AVERSA Associated Press Writer April 18, 2002, 3:11 PM EDT WASHINGTON -- The government is running a deficit of $133.6 billion for the first half of the budget year, more than five times the shortfall for the same period a year ago. The latest snapshot of the government's finances, released Thursday by the Treasury Department, was in line with the expectations of many budget analysts. They are predicting the United States will record a deficit for the entire fiscal year, which has not happened since 1997. For the first six months of fiscal 2002, which started Oct. 1, government spending totaled $1.01 trillion, a 7 percent increase over the same period last year. Total revenues this budget year so far are $878.9 billion, a 4.6 percent drop from the corresponding period a year ago. In the first half of the 2001 budget year, the government recorded a $24.8 billion deficit. The Congressional Budget Office said a drop in individual income tax payments was a big factor in the decline in government revenues. Revenues from individual income taxes have totaled $399.2 billion this budget year, a 9 percent decrease for the same period in the previous fiscal year. The CBO estimated that much of the decline reflected last year's tax cuts. Corporate income tax receipts dipped to $78.3 billion from October through March, down from $80 billion recorded during the same period in the 2001 budget year. The biggest spending categories so far this budget year were: Social Security, $239.8 billion; Health and Human Services Department programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, $225.5 billion; interest on the public debt, $164.4 billion; and military, $160.2 billion. Budget experts believe annual budget deficits are likely for the next two years. The Bush administration has blamed the return of deficits on a recession that began last March, and the costs of waging war in Afghanistan and battling terrorism at home. But Democrats said it was the 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut that Bush pushed through Congress in the spring for the budget's likely return to red ink. For all of fiscal 2001, which ended Sept. 30, the government had a budget surplus of $127 billion, about half the previous year's record total of $237 billion. It was the first time since 1992 that the government's balance sheet did not show an improvement. In March, the government posted a deficit of $64.2 billion, worse than the $50.7 billion shortfall reported for the same month last year. * _ On the Net: Treasury Department: http://www.ustreas.gov/ Copyright © 2002, The Associated Press

[#19]

To answer Brian's good question about where we draw the line on fees, I guess for me, my gut reaction is it comes down to access. Roads are free, sidewalks, trails in city parks - free. (obviously there are many taxes that fund these, so I know thet aren't REALLY free) But we in this part of the country don't charge someone for the "act" of riding their bike down the street. But I do take exception to Brians contention "but now we are becoming distracted and discussing how the fee was implemented instead of whether or not it should have been implemented". I didn't know there were rules on where this discussion could go? Seems to me the intial post was about the possibility of the fee going up. That sucks. And I still think its pathetic that a family thats out for a drive, parks at a trailhead, takes a short stroll up some trail and find a ticket on their windshield when they get back.

[#19]

I'll bite (of course). Maybe you could give us dumb lowly hikers another lesson climbing ropes to liven us up.

[McPilchuck]

I believe this was already posted once before on nwhikers.net, but for those who haven't seen it, here is an htm from my site I posted for a read relating to user fees not being charge in some areas anymore. My feeling has always been that the user fee (park pass thing) is too wide spread and encompasses places that don't need it, places I've seen remain the same for 30-40 years. Convince the FS of that may fall upon deaf ears however, but at least somebody sees some flaws in the system as related in the htm. My gut feeling is the fee pass is too expensive and if it is to be had, "then it should be something like $5.00 per year, seniors fee, as well as veterans who produce a DD214 showing honorable discharge." I couldn't think of a better way to thank seniors and veterans for "giving" to the country than that....people who have paid their dues. Yes, that's right, you heard here first from McPilchuck...the wild absurd poet <grin>. Now, email your congressmen/women and tell them of this proposal...when you do, tell them "drafted" or is that "dafted" McPil sent you <grin again>. http://www.alpinequest.com/feeforestpass.htm

[Brian Curtis]

I see the gas tax as a very direct user fee on driving. I literally can't drive down the street without paying that user fee. But bike riders get a free pass. They may use the highway without paying those user fees. Like the hiker who gets let off at the trailhead I guess. I wasn't attempting to set any rules on where we could take our discussion. I was just explaining why I responded the way I did. I wasn't making any attempt to direct how anyone else should respond. I agree that it would really suck if they raised prices. OTOH, the original post did discuss a universal pass that would be good on all federal lands. All things being equal (no price increase) that would be a huge net benefit over the way the program works now but if they had to raise the price the cost would very likely outweigh the benefit. I'd have to see the final proposal before deciding how I'd react.

[#19]

Sure you can. Get an electric car. Develope an alternative energy source. Coast. MC, thanks for the numbers you provided. Much like I remember reading years ago and like I said - a drop in the bucket in comparision to what is spent by our BIG government.

[Dslayer]

Brian- I don't doubt that you're right that I have specific programs mixed up, but the progression in the areas that I frequent, mostly the William O. Douglas, has gone from registering at the Trailhead, the Trail Park fee that went from 25 to 35 dollars once if I'm not mistaken, and now to apparently a higher fee. I admit that I didn't pay much attention when it started, I didn't 'chicken little' it, I suspended apprehension when the Trail Park pass was instituted, wanting to see if it would really be what it was said to be--and I paid it several years. But my basic premise isn't wrong--increasing/implementing fees and taxes as a management 'tool' to protect or preserve a resource. In the 70's and 80's when it was projected that we'd run out of oil by end the century, there was much discussion of exhorbitant gas taxes to preserve oil as well as spur alternative to fossil fuel. Of course, neither happened--we might argue about gas taxes-but it might have worked. I don't know that the tax has deterred a single person from using wilderness areas, hell, I've quit paying and I'm still using which I feel bad about in the way that I wouldn't mind contributing $ to maintain trails. I've become a conscientious objector of sorts, the amount of money isn't really an issue to me.....but when does it stop--why can't the tax be $100, $250, or more and there can't be anybody that isn't concerned about.

[Brian Curtis]

[Dslayer]

A guy who voted for John Andersen has to be all good. If the Trail Park Pass limits use-intentionally or inadvertently well then it is what it is---in my estimation evil. I tend to believe that there is an element who would like to limit use of Wilderness (other than those of us who would like to see fewer people in our favorite places) but I'm not really a conspiracy theorist--I'm just very concerned about where this is going.

[Stefan]

I will be parking and walking 1/4 mile to every trailhead in the future. Less crime too. What if you go on a trail and it isn't maintained? i.e. logs are down, toilet paper is gone. Do you have to display your park thing then?

[-lol-]