Forum Index > Trail Talk > More Fees, More Reservations...Tourism
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12641 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
  Top

seeking hygge
PostThu Nov 22, 2018 9:48 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead wrote:
37 extra dollars

hbb wrote:
a $37 fee

I smell a TGR mag or two in here

For the non-mags, standard usage is 37$
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 2591 | TRs
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
  Top

Marmota olympus
PostThu Nov 22, 2018 11:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
hbb wrote:
I guess my reference to current visitation rates was confusing. Not all visits are to fee sites--the 300 million figure includes millions and millions of visits to places that are currently free to enter.

I am not sure how all these numbers are calculated, but remember that many of the fees are per auto, not per person. So if the 300 million figure is individuals, then many are coming into NPs in groups in autos.

Rumi

--------------
"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 8666 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostThu Nov 22, 2018 1:30 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Quit doing math and listen!

I should have the parks to myself.  I want to ride my bike and run my dog and see stuff without other people around--'cept a few friends or people of character.

There!  Now, go enjoy yer turkey.

--------------
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
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 33 | TRs
Location: Monroe, WA
kevperro
  Top

Member
PostSat Nov 24, 2018 11:46 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I think use taxes make a ton of sense.   

Those who use and see value in a resource should be those who pay for it.    I see no reason why I should be forced to pay for resources I don't want and I see no reason why couch potatoes who watch football need to pay for the resources for me to enjoy our wild spaces.

If you want to maintain and enjoy something.  Pay for it... don't vote to get someone else to pay for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 5891 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostSat Nov 24, 2018 9:23 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro wrote:
I don't want and I see no reason why couch potatoes who watch football need to pay for the resources for me to enjoy our wild spaces.

Where's my option for opting out of the state taxes used to pay for football and baseball stadiums for couch potatoes to watch millionaires play ball? Where may I opt out of the federal taxes used to pay for a new fleets of aircraft carriers,  fighter aircraft and tanks so excessive in number that the army simply mothballs them?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 33 | TRs
Location: Monroe, WA
kevperro
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 2:09 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
kevperro wrote:
I don't want and I see no reason why couch potatoes who watch football need to pay for the resources for me to enjoy our wild spaces.

Where's my option for opting out of the state taxes used to pay for football and baseball stadiums for couch potatoes to watch millionaires play ball? Where may I opt out of the federal taxes used to pay for a new fleets of aircraft carriers,  fighter aircraft and tanks so excessive in number that the army simply mothballs them?

You have a point up to an extent.   The football system pays for itself... otherwise, cities/states wouldn't subsidize them.    The military is necessary but to what extent is debatable.   Clearly, our spending on defense is extreme but much of that spending is investing in what other countries won't or cannot.   We have done both good things with our military (Japan, disaster relief) and bad things with it (I won't name them).

Recreational opportunities and national defense are apples and oranges though.    One clearly is a government function.   Your recreational opportunities are your own choices.    Pay for them if you want them.    I think there is a good argument for having wild spaces and ecosystems for their own merit.   That isn't the same as providing you with recreational opportunities within them.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Seventy2002
Member
Member


Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 395 | TRs

Seventy2002
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 7:50 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro wrote:
The football system pays for itself... otherwise, cities/states wouldn't subsidize them. 

That's debatable. This report by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  cites a study that was "unable to find any facilities that had a reasonable return on investment." (looking at you, Kingdome)
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 184 | TRs

Pahoehoe
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 8:53 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro wrote:
I think use taxes make a ton of sense.   

Those who use and see value in a resource should be those who pay for it.    I see no reason why I should be forced to pay for resources I don't want and I see no reason why couch potatoes who watch football need to pay for the resources for me to enjoy our wild spaces.

If you want to maintain and enjoy something.  Pay for it... don't vote to get someone else to pay for it.

Somethings should be paid for by everyone for the greater good.

Even if you do not recreate outdoors you benefit from the habitat preservation, wild space conservation, trees make good air, etc.

Nobody gets rich off national parks, national forests, etc...

Professional Sports Franchises (which are highly subsidized, btw) on the other hand...
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 33 | TRs
Location: Monroe, WA
kevperro
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 9:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
So... all these cities have been duped into paying the tab for the NFL?   

I'm not sure I believe that.   I can believe some of them come in upside down due to poor business decisions but on average, they make money for the cities that they occupy.   

I think like most accounting you can find whatever story you want in the numbers.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 33 | TRs
Location: Monroe, WA
kevperro
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 9:35 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
kevperro wrote:
I think use taxes make a ton of sense.   

Those who use and see value in a resource should be those who pay for it.    I see no reason why I should be forced to pay for resources I don't want and I see no reason why couch potatoes who watch football need to pay for the resources for me to enjoy our wild spaces.

If you want to maintain and enjoy something.  Pay for it... don't vote to get someone else to pay for it.

Somethings should be paid for by everyone for the greater good.

Even if you do not recreate outdoors you benefit from the habitat preservation, wild space conservation, trees make good air, etc.

Nobody gets rich off national parks, national forests, etc...

Professional Sports Franchises (which are highly subsidized, btw) on the other hand...

Yes.... I agree.   We should subsidize wild space and habitats.    That doesn't mean we need to subsidize your ability to play in it.   

Why is there a resistance to paying for what we use?    I seems to me that we should all be willing to pay for the services and system we enjoy so much.    The trails, infrastructure, management of these resources would be much better managed if there was money rolling into those programs.    we should be willing to pay for it, not asking someone else to pay for them.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Joseph
Joseph



Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Posts: 39 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Joseph
  Top

Joseph
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 9:47 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
Where's my option for opting out of the state taxes used to pay for football and baseball stadiums for couch potatoes to watch millionaires play ball? Where may I opt out of the federal taxes used to pay for a new fleets of aircraft carriers,  fighter aircraft and tanks so excessive in number that the army simply mothballs them?

I think its called elections.  You get to vote for leaders who are in support of spending $$ on defense more wisely / efficiently.  Maybe you're an expect in defense spending, how many aircraft carriers we need, tanks, etc.  If so, maybe you should run for office.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 184 | TRs

Pahoehoe
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 9:48 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro wrote:
So... all these cities have been duped into paying the tab for the NFL?   

I'm not sure I believe that.   I can believe some of them come in upside down due to poor business decisions but on average, they make money for the cities that they occupy.   

I think like most accounting you can find whatever story you want in the numbers.

Um. No.

http://harvardpolitics.com/united-states/how-sports-teams-exploit-city-budgets-to-fund-stadiums/


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_subsidy
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 33 | TRs
Location: Monroe, WA
kevperro
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 10:08 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Interesting..... let me dig into this.

Thank you for a credible source!
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 5107 | TRs

Kim Brown
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 1:00 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
kevperro wrote:
Why is there a resistance to paying for what we use?    I seems to me that we should all be willing to pay for the services and system we enjoy so much.    The trails, infrastructure, management of these resources would be much better managed if there was money rolling into those programs.    we should be willing to pay for it, not asking someone else to pay for them

Because these are public lands, whether or not you use them. And because pay-as-you go is too expensive.

How would your idea work? It is often brought up, so I'm curious as to what the plan might be. Part of the NPS budget includes many sources like the Land & Water Conservation fund, to name one of many, that are, in part, taxpayer supported.

So starting with an income of Zero on the NPS books, what is the plan to budget, obtain, and spend dollars?

If I'm first in line of the approx 350 million visitors to a National Park next fiscal year, how do they know how much to charge me, not knowing how many visitors they will get that year, how much in grants they receive from partner organizations, the potential damage by natural events, chopped federal budgets and other incidentals?

I might boat to an island and then hike. But I'm not sure I'll do both of those things, or either. Maybe I'll just end up camping and picnicing, and leaving the boat strapped to my car.  Or cut my vacation short if I decide to just go home early. Am I on the hook for 3 days of maybe boating, hiking, picnicking if I only spend one day after all, picnicking? Is there a Customer Service where I can get money back? Because I don't want to pay for something I didn't do. Or do I pay on my way out? Do school children have to pay out-of-pocket for an educational outing, including the bus driver, teacher salary, Park staff, gasoline, taxes, other incidentals?

I am happy to pay for fire departments, police, and roads that i do not use. If I had to pay the entire cost of putting out a fire in my home, it would wipe me out, and who would pay for the $57 that I did have to offer. I'm happy to pay for public parks and sidewalks I don't use. I don't go to a public school, I don't require the services of DHS, but I'm happy to pay taxes that support them.

You're not the first to suggest it, and so there may be some good information out there. Can you offer a link?

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 5107 | TRs

Kim Brown
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 25, 2018 1:05 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Pahoehoe wrote:
You should read this again and think about if this is the type of person you are proud to be.

Do you think you have more right to take pictures in National Parks than others?  Their cameras should be smashed because they want to take a picture of the same thing as you?

You are the problem.  Your attitude is the problem.  You are not better than anyone else nor do you have more rights to access.

Interesting, I was thinking along the same lines. I wondered if he had a sign floating above his head saying 'wide angle photo in progress' so he could 'know' the darned other people didn't understand wide angle.

There are more than hints of anti social, damn near anti human strains/streaks running through so many of the population/access/enviro questions of the day, and it's disturbing.


To quote you, There are more than hints of anti social, damn near anti human strains/streaks running through so many of the population/access/enviro questions of the day, and it's disturbing. Sorta like this:

Pahoehoe wrote:
True.  If nobody had more than 2 children population would go down because not everyone would have 2 or any, and some always die before reproducing.

I always wonder what people who have large families today are thinking.  Especially right now when sh## is likely to hit fan during said childrens lifespan.

Plenty of adpotion and fostering opportunities for those wanting a lot of children.

Enjoy your conversation, you two!  hmmm.gif

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Trail Talk > More Fees, More Reservations...Tourism
  Happy Birthday Flash Gordon, raz2sea!
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
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy