[at-l] OT Cost to Enter National Parks May Go UP

[Bob C." <ellen@xxxxxxxxxx (Bob C.)]

>"...it is really not at all far fetched that there will someday (soon?) be
>hiker fees and permits to use the AT.  Much of the rest of the country already
>requires them." reports Ginny in a very informative post.

I think that what has kept the AT relatively free from fees are the multiple
points of access, which makes collection difficult.

  I suspect fees are feasible in the Whites mostly because they serve a dual
  purpose: To raise money and to protect the trail environment. Caretakers were
  originally placed at heavily used sites to keep hikers from needlessly
  damaging the vegetation and soils.

  AMC claims it loses money at the back country campsites in the Whites that
  have caretakers. I kind of doubt if that is true, but I'm quite sure that if
  there is a profit, it is pretty marginal.

  MATC also has four backcountry caretakers/ridgerunners. We haven't discussed a
  fee because we see it as mostly an educational effort. But the effort is
  expensive and takes a significant part of our annual budget. Who knows what
  the future will bring? I have no idea of the legal ramifications, if any. MATC
  neither owns nor leases the sections with caretakers. Some of the sites are
  owned by the state. Others by the National Park Service.

  Baxter State Park, which is financed entirely from the income from a trust
  fund left by Gov. Baxter who gave the park to the state, has always charged
  both camping and entrance fees, though the latter are only paid by visitors in
  out of state cars, on the theory that the good governor gave the park to be
  enjoyed "forever" by the people of the state of Maine.

  Weary