|
deschamps1000
Aug 16, 2006, 3:28 AM
Post #26 of 63
(8784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2004
Posts: 343
|
bump
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Aug 16, 2006, 3:40 AM
Post #27 of 63
(8784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
honestly, it's the usual bullshit.
raise fee's in the name of services that aren't needed or don't exist.
all i need is a pit toilet and some ground to sleep on.
but here's to the NPS gotta love the US DOI
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 16, 2006, 1:26 PM
Post #28 of 63
(8784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: all i need is a pit toilet and some ground to sleep on.
Yeah, a couple of $150,000 pit toilets and some $2 a gallon water that is hardly fit to drink will do me just fine. :lol:
In reply to: With all due respect to Messrs. Dawson and Monkey, and without taking a position on the J-Tree fee increase, I'm pretty sure it's lack of federal government funding (NOT past fee increases) that are necessitating this fee increase. Or maybe I'm too stupid to figure out how the NPS can keep up with increasing park visitorship (at Josh and nationwide) without raising fees or getting more money from Congress.
Park visitors pay each time they visit do they not? Has camping increased? How many new campsites have been built?
What leads to more visitors?
More services.
If a park is less accessible you will have fewer visitors. Its like the crag next to the road verses the crag 2 hours from the road. More services is like putting the park closer to the RV of a person who wouldn't normally visit.
What do more services justify?
More fees.
How do you justify more fees?
More services.
It's a vicious circle. Regardless of how few services there are more and more people will visit. Limiting the services will however greatly slow the rate at which the number of visitors increases.
In reply to: There was a good debate about NPS policies (including fee increases) in the December '05 Backpacker Mag, which unfortunately I can't find online. NPS is chronically underfunded. From '94 to '04, federal funding and entrance fees couldn't cover parks' costs, and park superintendents across the country say they get 50% to 60% less than they need.
There is also something called living within your means. I'm not at all familiar with how J-Tree is run, but if it is run anything like this Country's first National Monument there is plenty of fat to be trimmed. Unfortunately big government isn't the answer. Intelligent government is.
|
|
|
|
|
karlbaba
Aug 16, 2006, 3:14 PM
Post #29 of 63
(8784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2002
Posts: 1159
|
The extra money will not make Hidden Valley better for climbers. Sooner or later the sites will be "improved" for larger RVs, water piped on, and more Rangers and babysitters hired to supervise climbers and campers.
Worth your money?
Many of you are working a lot and have the money to burn. Some probably would welcome high fees because it would be more likely that spots would be open if folks couldn't afford them. But the disenfranchisement of our collectively owned public lands isn't worth it. The guy who works at McDonalds (or Starbucks) still need a place to take his family. Camping is the last resort for po' folks.
Throw em a bone. Resist the fees
Peace
Karl
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Aug 17, 2006, 12:10 AM
Post #30 of 63
(8784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: The extra money will not make Hidden Valley better for climbers. Sooner or later the sites will be "improved" for larger RVs, water piped on, and more Rangers and babysitters hired to supervise climbers and campers. Worth your money? Many of you are working a lot and have the money to burn. Some probably would welcome high fees because it would be more likely that spots would be open if folks couldn't afford them. But the disenfranchisement of our collectively owned public lands isn't worth it. The guy who works at McDonalds (or Starbucks) still need a place to take his family. Camping is the last resort for po' folks. Throw em a bone. Resist the fees Peace Karl
I couldn't agree more.
You should also note that when they raise fees congress cuts funding. So it's a viscous cycle.
The least expensive option is to NOT increase services. Then you don't need fees, then you don't need to maintain these services. Basically the cheapest land to manage is the least managed.
Flat place to sleep, pit toilet (I don't require a pit toilet but it's a convenience to those who come after me in a high uses area). Why anyone would need more is beyond my comprehension.
BTW, I enjoyed my climbing/camping at J-Tree just the way it was. Loved our experience and was actually suprised (disappointed) at how built up the area outside the park was.
Services suck more then fees as they ruin the experience. Fee's are the cherry on top.
|
|
|
|
|
blazesod
Aug 18, 2006, 9:10 PM
Post #31 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 27, 2002
Posts: 249
|
bump
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 18, 2006, 9:17 PM
Post #32 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: For those interested in emailing, but are rather lazy, feel free to cut and paste my email:
I may be lazy, but at least I'm not fat and lazy.
Cut, pasted, and sent. 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
bones
Aug 18, 2006, 11:41 PM
Post #33 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 253
|
In reply to: I guess the park service needs the extra money. Mabye they're saving up for a chopper to evacuate all the climbers who hurt themselves.
Yeah, that must be it. They're going to pay for a rescue helicopter, pilots, crew, and all of it's maintenance with a camping fee increase. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
bones
Aug 18, 2006, 11:57 PM
Post #34 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 253
|
In reply to: The extra money will not make Hidden Valley better for climbers. Sooner or later the sites will be "improved" for larger RVs, water piped on, and more Rangers and babysitters hired to supervise climbers and campers. Worth your money? Many of you are working a lot and have the money to burn. Some probably would welcome high fees because it would be more likely that spots would be open if folks couldn't afford them. But the disenfranchisement of our collectively owned public lands isn't worth it. The guy who works at McDonalds (or Starbucks) still need a place to take his family. Camping is the last resort for po' folks. Throw em a bone. Resist the fees Peace Karl
^ deserves a repeat.
Don't ya just love it when you get a campsite between two massive RVs. I mean, who needs a view when you can look at the pictures of Half Dome painted on the RVs next to you. Sure beats whatever nature can provide. Generators crankin', bright porch lights in your face, and a couple of TVs blaring... ahhhh, I love the outdoors!
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 21, 2006, 1:49 PM
Post #35 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: Members of the public are invited to comment on the proposed fee increases. You may call the park at 760-367-5502 write to Superintendent Curt Sauer at 74485 National Park Drive, Twentynine Palms, CA 92277 or email jotr_publiccomments@nps.gov. The comment period will close September 1, 2006. For additional information about the proposed fee increases, you may contact Fee Supervisor Teresa Edmonson at 760-367-5549."
September first is RAPIDLY approaching. For those of you who still haven't wrote or called you still have time.
|
|
|
|
|
afreeclimber
Aug 22, 2006, 7:04 AM
Post #36 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2006
Posts: 42
|
I'm always annoyed when I hear people say that they would gladly pay more for something, without there being a good reason for it. If Josh was scheduled to be paved over for a new shopping complex, we'd all gladly pay more and there's plenty examples of climbers doing so.
But, paying more fees so the park can have more services is a step in the wrong direction. Less is more in this case.
The masses are generally thoughtless; too much tv, too much advertising. Most people think the simple act of paying more for something makes it better. If something is too cheap, there's something wrong with it.
As for the ban on power drills... There's lots of other noise pollution, for sure, but we're better than those inconsiderate a**es who think their super-loud exhaust is anything but a disgrace.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 26, 2006, 2:23 AM
Post #37 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
Anybody else? :tinfoilhat:
This thread seems awfully dead for still being an active subject.
|
|
|
|
|
jtme
Aug 26, 2006, 2:54 AM
Post #38 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2002
Posts: 84
|
September first is RAPIDLY approaching. For those of you who still haven't wrote or called you still have time.
I 'm curious to see how many folks will actually write a letter or make a phone call. I used to work in the climbing store in JT. In 2003 My Manager and I scheduled a meeting with Curt Sauer, the Park Superintendent, to talk about the first round of proposed camping fee's. Since we had the Superintendent's ear for two hours, I wrote a post here, on Supertopo, and rec.climbing asking if anyone had a question for Mr. Sauer. Sadly, I got one response. After the meeting I posted 4 or 5 paragraphs based on the interview. (check my past posts..........it's all there.) Again no responses.
I believe that most people want to bitch and complain.....but very very few will take action.
People,If you want change.........it takes action
|
|
|
|
|
ubotch
Aug 26, 2006, 3:35 AM
Post #39 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2002
Posts: 191
|
I just wrote an email and called and left a message at the listed number. It just took about 5 minutes.
I will be really disappointed if the new fees go into effect because at that price, cost really starts to be an issue on wether or not I can go camping.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 26, 2006, 1:56 PM
Post #40 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: I believe that most people want to b---- and complain.....but very very few will take action. People,If you want change.........it takes action
So true.
In the time it takes to make a post here an email can be sent. For a small fraction of what it already costs to camp there a phone call can be made.
Even if you never plan to visit J-Tree please write or call. If they raise the fees there it is only a matter of time before they start raising fees at your favorite Park.
From a conservation stand point how does increasing services and visitors help preserve the Park? Joshua Tree is a protected area, not another plot of land ripe for development or to be paved over for parking and paved trails.
|
|
|
|
|
valygrl
Aug 26, 2006, 2:33 PM
Post #41 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2002
Posts: 247
|
Here's the email address, I just wrote my comment to them.
jotr_publiccomments@nps.gov
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 26, 2006, 2:41 PM
Post #42 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
Granite_Grrl just wrote too. :lol: :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
pyrrhonota
Aug 26, 2006, 4:39 PM
Post #43 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2006
Posts: 33
|
Another email sent
whos next...
|
|
|
|
|
beesty511
Aug 26, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #44 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 336
|
In reply to: You should also note that when they raise fees congress cuts funding. So it's a viscous cycle. |
|
|
|
|
beesty511
Aug 26, 2006, 6:39 PM
Post #45 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 336
|
In reply to: You should also note that when they raise fees congress cuts funding. So it's a viscous cycle.
In reply to: The guy who works at McDonalds (or Starbucks) still need a place to take his family. Camping is the last resort for po' folks. |
|
|
|
|
ubotch
Aug 26, 2006, 8:07 PM
Post #46 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2002
Posts: 191
|
I believe that tax payers should subsidize parks because it is important to preserve certain places. I think this earth would be a sadder place if there were neighborhoods everywhere. I want a place for my children and their children to be able to go so they can experience nature that is as untouched by humans as possible.
I am happy to help support a park in Alaska that I may never visit, simply because I believe that preserving that space is important for the good of people (sounds cheesy but I believe it). I think it is a greater good issue rather than a pay for what you use issue.
|
|
|
|
|
mbez
Aug 28, 2006, 12:00 AM
Post #47 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Posts: 66
|
Unfortunately, fees are a one-way proposition: they only go up, rarely down. I suspect the real reason behind such a quick increase in the fees is governmental cutbacks. As has been pointed out before, if you hate the fee increase, tell the park now and vote accordingly in November.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 28, 2006, 2:05 AM
Post #48 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: In reply to: You should also note that when they raise fees congress cuts funding. So it's a viscous cycle. why should taxpayers be required to subsidize the park users at joshua tree? why shouldn't the user's be required to pay 100% of the cost of running the park? maybe fees should be quadrupled. In reply to: The guy who works at McDonalds (or Starbucks) still need a place to take his family. Camping is the last resort for po' folks. low income families could be given free passes.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Isn't that a LITTLE contrary?
Lets quadruple the fees so we can give away free passes to those who can't afford them! :righton:
The National Park Service was started to protect special places. These places are part of our National Treasure which should be supported by ALL of the people of the USA whether they appreciate it or not.
Commercialization of our Parks is not the answer. Unfortunately that seems to be the road the Park Service is heading down. Yea Grand Canyon!(insert puking emoticon here)
Four days left.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 29, 2006, 1:12 AM
Post #49 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
THREE DAYS LEFT for your to voice your opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
fredbob
Aug 29, 2006, 2:32 AM
Post #50 of 63
(8783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 7, 2003
Posts: 455
|
A couple of people have hit the nail on the head.
This is not about commercializing the Park. It is about the fact that Congress fails (year after year) to adequately fund all of our Parks. Joshua Tree is severely underfunded (as are many Parks) and maintenance and hiring of staff has to be constantly deferred.
If some of you took the time to educate yourselves about the finances of the Park, you may still not like proposed fee increases, but maybe you would understand why they are being proposed. Personally, I don't like the idea of fees being charged at all. However, Congress believes that user fees -- as opposed to direct funding -- is the way to fight "big" government.
BTW, the new roads, signs etc, did not come from the regular budget, but special appropriations and matching funds specific for those projects. And power drill bans did not originate because of the noise issue. And, ... etc.
I find I rarely log on to this site for the very reason this thread has run astray with misinformed BS.
Feel free to voice an opinion against increases, but do so for legitimate reasons (eg: limits access for people/climbers on limited budgets, etc.) And if you do oppose the increase, don't just whine about it, but make your Congressional Representative know how you feel about funding for our National Parks.
Carry on.
Randy Vogel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
