[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [nct-l] yikes! bikes!
- Subject: Re: [nct-l] yikes! bikes!
- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:01:00
At 09:34 PM 11/17/99 -0500, you wrote:
>FYI, the AHS supports the Recreation User Fee Demonstration Project, or at
>least they said so in a spring newsletter. But I think they're feeling the
>heat. In the August/September issue of "American Hiker" they wrote:
>"American Hiking has accepted fee collection on federal lands only as a
>demonstration project. AHS has lobbied to keep demonstration fees
>reasonable, to ensure that fees are not used to replace general
>appropriations for trails, and for the equitable assessment of fees among
>all user-groups, including RV operators and motorized users."
>"What do you think? Should there be user fees to access federal land other
>than basic entrance fees at parks? Write firstname.lastname@example.org."
>Seems pretty clear to me that they're ready to ride the slippery slope.
>"No compromise" would be a much more clear message. Think I'll drop them
Yeah, that seems pretty clear. You know, here in Michigan, we pay a
reasonable fee for a state park sticker for the vehicles. At least, as much
as I use state parks, I don't see $20 per year as outrageous. But, the
parks are still underfunded to beat all getout, and the legislature can
only find more stuff to cut.
Yet, when I go to Ohio, they somehow manage to have well-maintained, neat
state parks, without an entrance fee. I really think that in Michigan the
legislature and the DNR is shooting themselves in the foot. After all, the
state parks are supposed to be a tourist attraction . . .
* From the North Country Trail List | http://www.backcountry.net *
To: Paul Haan <email@example.com>
Cc: NCT Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org>