USFS considering fees for some CO 14ers
- Thread starter Dr. Dasypodidae
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
Craig
New member
There’s a couple of threads going, on 14ers.com for additional information.
vegematic
Active member
"The proposal would use $10 and $20 fees to help maintain $1 million in recently finished trail improvements and protect the 1,500-acre basin's alpine terrain."
Fine. I understand that the trails do not maintain themselves. However I'd love to see the USFS try an option where hikers could choose to join a volunteer work crew for a day in exchange for a permit. Does anyone know whether this (work to hike, not pay to hike) has been tried anywhere before?
-vegematic
Fine. I understand that the trails do not maintain themselves. However I'd love to see the USFS try an option where hikers could choose to join a volunteer work crew for a day in exchange for a permit. Does anyone know whether this (work to hike, not pay to hike) has been tried anywhere before?
-vegematic
TCD
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,080
- Reaction score
- 146
Pete_Hickey
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2003
- Messages
- 1,976
- Reaction score
- 222
Dunno, but as someone who regularly leads volunteer workers, I would NOT want it. While there are many who would benefit from something like this, it would also attract people who want to do it so they don't have to pay for something. It makes me think of the prison crews doing trailwork. An all-volunteer group gets about three times the amount of work done as a prison crew.
roadtripper
Well-known member
I don't think anything makes me more angry than new fees for just being outside. Everybody complains about how obese many Americans are, yet they might put up another huge barrier to getting exercise since so many people will say "screw it" if they have to pay for something.
As an accountant, I know that the cost to set up and maintain this program can easily be 50% or more of the revenue that is raised. Here are the costs, some of which are indirect, but nonetheless related:
~ salaries and related costs of rangers to collect, count and deposit money
~ public awareness costs, including website updates
~ bank account fees to deposit/transact money
~ administrative reports to monitor progress of program
~ vehicles/equipment to collect fees
~ contractors to install billboards/collection stations
~ cost of fee signs (you wouldn't believe how much signs cost)
~ cost of asking for public input on program
~ system to track revenue of program (if they can't use their existing system for whatever reason)
On another note, I just noticed that it now costs $15 for a non-resident vehicle to visit most of Connecticut's best state parks. Absurd.
As an accountant, I know that the cost to set up and maintain this program can easily be 50% or more of the revenue that is raised. Here are the costs, some of which are indirect, but nonetheless related:
~ salaries and related costs of rangers to collect, count and deposit money
~ public awareness costs, including website updates
~ bank account fees to deposit/transact money
~ administrative reports to monitor progress of program
~ vehicles/equipment to collect fees
~ contractors to install billboards/collection stations
~ cost of fee signs (you wouldn't believe how much signs cost)
~ cost of asking for public input on program
~ system to track revenue of program (if they can't use their existing system for whatever reason)
On another note, I just noticed that it now costs $15 for a non-resident vehicle to visit most of Connecticut's best state parks. Absurd.
Last edited:
Peakbagr
Well-known member
I wonder if this fee is for hiking by iteself? Would birding, fishing or hunting activities generate the need for a permit?
If a permit were required by anyone setting a foot in the area seems fairer than a fee for hiking.
On the face of it, having money to maintain trails, trailheads, etc seems OK, but to charge a fee to use public land for something non-invasive like hiking just doesn't feel right.
If a permit were required by anyone setting a foot in the area seems fairer than a fee for hiking.
On the face of it, having money to maintain trails, trailheads, etc seems OK, but to charge a fee to use public land for something non-invasive like hiking just doesn't feel right.
TCD
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,080
- Reaction score
- 146
The most visible user group is often singled out. Here's another example:
http://www.accessfund.org/atf/cf/{1...DF6CA8E3}/Denali NP Small Business Letter.pdf
Interesting to note that this fee was proposed at 500 in 1993. Public outrage drove it down to 150. Obviously, there's an element in the Park Service that's bound and determined to get that 500 they originally wanted.
Hopefully the 14er fee won't rise to 500...
http://www.accessfund.org/atf/cf/{1...DF6CA8E3}/Denali NP Small Business Letter.pdf
Interesting to note that this fee was proposed at 500 in 1993. Public outrage drove it down to 150. Obviously, there's an element in the Park Service that's bound and determined to get that 500 they originally wanted.
Hopefully the 14er fee won't rise to 500...
Craig
New member
I think the real issue hear is not helping maintain the new trail but to limit access to the alpine colony basin.
This alpine basin is about 5 miles in from the TH therefor most folks backpack up and camp everywhere in this alpine environment. There are basically 3 crowds. Backpackers, peakbaggers and rock climbers. Ellingwood Arete on Crestone Needle, 2550' @ 5.7 is one of the finest routes on the 14ers.
When I went through last year colony basin was littered with campsites. I didn't see any trash or waste but it was very evident that it was heavily used. I was there midweek and the crowds were very heavy.
IMO, this is a classic example of the government stepping in to try and protect an area that we (hiking/climbing community) can't or won't take care of. LNT
Wicked Nice Area
This alpine basin is about 5 miles in from the TH therefor most folks backpack up and camp everywhere in this alpine environment. There are basically 3 crowds. Backpackers, peakbaggers and rock climbers. Ellingwood Arete on Crestone Needle, 2550' @ 5.7 is one of the finest routes on the 14ers.
When I went through last year colony basin was littered with campsites. I didn't see any trash or waste but it was very evident that it was heavily used. I was there midweek and the crowds were very heavy.
IMO, this is a classic example of the government stepping in to try and protect an area that we (hiking/climbing community) can't or won't take care of. LNT
Wicked Nice Area
cbcbd
Well-known member
An acquaintance over here in WA did just that.
WTA (Washington Trails Association) offers:
1st & 2nd work parties: Earn a day or annual Northwest Forest Pass (on Forest Service projects - indicated in the Free Pass column of the schedule).
The NW Forest Pass is required in many areas out here and is $30 value.
vegematic
Active member
Any word on whether it was successful? Or did it attract too many of the "something-for-nothing" crowd that Pete Hickey mentioned?
-vegematic
cbcbd
Well-known member
I'm not sure but they still do it.
The day pass is $5.
Honestly, I don't see the harm of attracting one or two-timers into trail maintenance, these aka. "something-for-nothing"s. Would the trail crews rather just not have the numbers? You figure that if someone is looking to get a free pass they are already frequent users (the one-timer crown probably doesn't mind paying the day fee) of the parks and might keep volunteering after getting drawn in by the freebie. I don't think just being cheap is enough motivation for most to give up a whole day to help out on a trail. If they get out there they probably want to be out there, no?
Snowflea
New member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
- Messages
- 1,104
- Reaction score
- 284
Got ours -- for CA's Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres, & San Bernadino National Forests -- in the mail a couple of days ago. Two forest passes worth $30 apiece.
Hmm... IIRC we worked about 16 hours, so that comes out to less than $2/hour.
