WMNF Parking Fee Increase Proposal Jan 30,2017 Comment Deadline

[sierra]

Anyone who has walked the East Side truck "road to nowhere" will probably agree that they went way overboard for a dead end road whose entire purpose appears to be to provide truck access to pump out the pit toilet at a campground.

I've been meaning to do that, never been on it. I've been curious about that new tentsite. Do happen to know if it gets a lot of use? For me, it seems to be in a weird place, given that the bridge is now gone. I know the old site was always busy and I loved that place.

 

[peakbagger]

The claim was that this campsite replaced the Franconia Falls campsite and that folks would walk across the river to go to the falls. It quite a large campground with somewhat dispersed sites. If someone is looking for an easy hike in it cant be beat. I expect someone with a garden cart could easily haul a keg up there (or at least a few coolers). The first part of the road is state of art, far nicer that many of the FS roads you normally drive, it then gets a bit more primitive but the bridges they put in place are quite impressive.

 

[chomp]

Don't forget this:

(f) Standard amenity recreation fee
Except as limited by subsection (d), the Secretary may charge a standard amenity recreation fee for Federal recreational lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, or the Forest Service, but only at the following:
(1) A National Conservation Area.
(2) A National Volcanic Monument.
(3) A destination visitor or interpretive center that provides a broad range of interpretive services, programs, and media.
(4) An area—
(A) that provides significant opportunities for outdoor recreation;
(B) that has substantial Federal investments;
(C) where fees can be efficiently collected; and
(D) that contains all of the following amenities:
(i) Designated developed parking.
(ii) A permanent toilet facility.
(iii) A permanent trash receptacle.
(iv) Interpretive sign, exhibit, or kiosk.
(v) Picnic tables.
(vi) Security services.

 

[peakbagger]

One of the "tricks" used by WMNF is to post a sign at a lot with no amenities, like 19 mile brook, that is part of another parking area (Great Gulf) and that the amenities are available down the road. This is also done along the Kanc at Downes Brook trail parking. There is fee tube but the amenities are down the road at Champney Falls. I think the 19 mile brook fee tube is scheduled to be removed as part of this fee increase.

 

[TJsName]

One of the "tricks" used by WMNF is to post a sign at a lot with no amenities, like 19 mile brook, that is part of another parking area (Great Gulf) and that the amenities are available down the road. This is also done along the Kanc at Downes Brook trail parking. There is fee tube but the amenities are down the road at Champney Falls. I think the 19 mile brook fee tube is scheduled to be removed as part of this fee increase.

If there was a bear-resistant trashcan and toilets at every popular trailhead, I would happily pay a fee increase. I just worry that we pay more and get less, with our fees subsidizing fire suppression efforts out was. Buy fire insurance or don't live in a high-risk fire zone. Ditto for floodplains.

 

[Remix]

So, with regard to the 60% parking pass increase: Anything in the WMNF on the verge of being closed?

Why do we have to fall off the cliff before we recognize a problem?

It's called maintaining infrastructure and, while many are loathe to do it, it's inevitable (and costly).

I for one am happy to pony up a few addl bucks before the bridge collapses, the trail gets covered with blow downs or lean too turns to dust.

BTW - Who funded and financed the rebuild the Dry River trail after the flood damage?

cb

It's not clear there is a problem, but of course people can disagree.

 

[Remix]

Don't forget this:

(f) Standard amenity recreation fee
Except as limited by subsection (d), the Secretary may charge a standard amenity recreation fee for Federal recreational lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, or the Forest Service, but only at the following:
(1) A National Conservation Area.
(2) A National Volcanic Monument.
(3) A destination visitor or interpretive center that provides a broad range of interpretive services, programs, and media.
(4) An area—
(A) that provides significant opportunities for outdoor recreation;
(B) that has substantial Federal investments;
(C) where fees can be efficiently collected; and
(D) that contains all of the following amenities:
(i) Designated developed parking.
(ii) A permanent toilet facility.
(iii) A permanent trash receptacle.
(iv) Interpretive sign, exhibit, or kiosk.
(v) Picnic tables.
(vi) Security services.

The following is an excerpt from the fee increase web page that I cited:

In 2004, Congress passed the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act which allows the Forest Service to retain funds collected at certain recreation sites and use these funds locally to operate and maintain and improve these sites. Before the Forest Service received the authority to retain funds locally, all fees collected by the Forest Service went to the national treasury. Fees are used to maintain day-use sites including trash pickup, septic pumping, painting, and cleaning, and to address the backlog of deferred maintenance, conduct patrols and maintain highly used trails, shelters, and campsites, and to assist visitors with information and education services such as Leave No Trace and hikeSafe.


What specifically is the 60% increase funding?