Printable View
Zion National Park News Release
December 15 , 2006
Zion National Park Announces Fee Increases for 2007
New Interagency Recreation Passes also Available
Zion National Park Superintendent Jock Whitworth has announced that the park is increasing its entrance fees effective January 1, 2007 . On that date, Zion National Park will also begin selling the
So my National Parks Pass to going from $50 to $80. That sucks, but if you live out west it's still a great deal!!!
I believe the National Parks Pass will be $60. And the new interagency pass will be $80..... but I could be wrong.
I don't see how paying to enjoy land that we already own is a good deal.
:cool2:
guess that means you wont be buying a pass this year either, eh shane?
I just got a pass and they told me the old parks pass is going away. That's what I was told, but can anyone confirm?Quote:
I believe the National Parks Pass will be $60. And the new interagency pass will be $80..... but I could be wrong.
Much of our hard earned tax money is going to Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. We have to pay for the parks somehow.Quote:
I don't see how paying to enjoy land that we already own is a good deal.
I'm old enough to have the $10.00 lifetime pass but I'll still buy the $80.00
because I think the N.P.s do a great job of maintaining the parks. In Zion there is a lot of the park that's not in a fee area and I i use that area all the time.
Kind of like the same reason I sent in to Circle of Friends, this is free but I think it helps to contribute.
Win
Oh geez... :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
Increase fuel prices, inflation, and increased use couldn't possibly have anything to do with the price increase.
Are the new postal rates also because of the war?
I've been paying $65 for the park pass plus the Golden Eagle sticker that gets you into all the Forest Service fee areas. If the new price is $80, then I'll gladly pay it.
I didn't say because of the war, but it is a factor. It is also a fact that if so much money wasn't going to the war than much more would be left over for other things. This is a fact, but an entirely different topic and not the theme of this thread.Quote:
because of the war?
The increase in rates began in the Clinton administration. Yah GW hasn't done anything to fix it, but he's not the one who vacationed in Jackson, WY every year until he got re-elected and then never went back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
Whoever started it doesn't matter. That wasn't my point.
I would much rather see our tax money go to things that benifit the US taxpayers (such as national parks), that's all.
How about keeping terrorists busy trying to attack our Army in Iraq so they don't have as much time and resources to come over here and kill us? That's a pretty good thing to spend money on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The terroist that attacked the US came there after the fact and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq before the invasion. :eek2:Quote:
How about keeping terrorists busy trying to attack our Army in Iraq so they don't have as much time and resources to come over here and kill us? That's a pretty good thing to spend money on.
Also, most of the curent fighting in Iraq is not the terrorist cells that are a threat to us. Less than 5% is. Most of it is between the Sunni and Shiites and most is now done by the Iraqis themselves. It really wasn't about liberating Iraq either as only 2% of Iraqi's consider the US a liberator.
I agree with the War on Terror, but do not believe the Iraq War is the same thing or even was related at the time.
Also, meanwhile the USA is sending billions of weapons to terrorist countries that are horrible human right violaters and worse than Iraq. Perhaps you already know that it was the US whom both armed and supported Saddam and the Taliban as well.
When is the last time you have either visited the Middle East as a civilian or have been involved in terrorism first hand? Do you know any over seas Iraqi's? I can tell you that the often rosy picture painted by the media or either side of dems or reps is not the case. I am a patriotic American I can also tell you that everything the US military has done is not good and sometimes we have supported the wrong side, often in hindsight.
Still this isn't an appropriate topic for the hiking board. Maybe someone should move this part to the general.
No one ever said 9/11 was connected with Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
BULLSHITQuote:
Originally Posted by scoutabout
Holy crap, chill out dude. I'm pretty sure that he meant nobody in this thread said that 9/11 was connected with Iraq. Not nobody ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
Oh, and to keep this post on-topic, I agree with what Shane said. I don't really like paying to enjoy the land, and I disagree with some NPS policies, so I avoid NPS-administered land altogether. I'll stick to the Swell and other areas that don't require fees and/or permits.
Misunderstanding on Sefan's part perhaps, but I thought the same thing. Bush administration definately did use it as the main reason to invade Iraq, but no one on this thread. :popcorn:Quote:
Holy crap, chill out dude. I'm pretty sure that he meant nobody in this thread said that 9/11 was connected with Iraq. Not nobody ever.
Wihout getting into a debate, which ones by chance since national parks is on topic? Zion or other permit system? Definately a sore point among some. Same with closing areas to all travel such has happened in Canyonlands and Zion. Some definately don't agree with that.Quote:
I disagree with some NPS policies
Particularly, the ban on geocaching and the ban against carrying loaded firearms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
I can at least understand their reasoning for banning geocaching, even if I don't agree--new foot trails will definitely be created after dozens or hundreds of visits to a cache. However, I don't see that as being any worse than carving steps into the sandstone or installing metal poles and chains for a handline.
The firearms ban keeps me away from NPS land more than the fees, though. Leaving my concealed handgun at home or unloading it and locking it up in the trunk just aren't an option for me.
but the things you listed are authorized by the national park ...perhaps placing bolts may be a better comparison. but geocaching could easily be considered littering ... couldn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Udink
if you don't mind my asking, why is that? i am seriously interested.Quote:
The firearms ban keeps me away from NPS land more than the fees, though. Leaving my concealed handgun at home or unloading it and locking it up in the trunk just aren't an option for me.
You're correct, but my point is that the NPS sometimes does things that are worse for the landscape than geocaching. And yes, it could easily be considered littering depending on how you define it, though I think intent has a lot to do with it. Hopefully people don't really look upon a placed cache as litter.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
Well, I really meant that it's not an option that I'd consider. You just never know where and when you might need to defend yourself. Instead of choosing to go unarmed, I choose not to go places where I have to disarm (unless that place also ensures that nobody else is armed as well).Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
It's most frustrating considering how much money the concessionaires make in comparison to the tiny amount of money they give back to the NPS for the contracts. The NPS should take over the operations and run them as a private entity that gives money back to the park service.Quote:
Originally Posted by Udink
Great argument! Man you're right! I can't wait until Hillary becomes President.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
I was going to Post, but Stopped. I used to frequent a board that got total ruined by Political Bullshit. This site is too good to lose. Everyone has been pretty respectful, but that can change quickly and really screw up a great thing. I'll shut up now.
okay, thanks for being open. do you think we're crazy for being unarmed? [no sarcasm on my part]Quote:
Originally Posted by Udink
My problem with Zion National Park is that I get nailed 3 times to use something I already own.
1. I pay for the park with my taxes.
2. I pay again when I buy a National Parks Pass or Entrance Fee.
3. I get to pay a third time when I am forced to buy a backcountry permit.
That just blows..... and I also say it is discriminatory against the poor and against canyoneers. The poor because $25 bucks will keep some less fortunate families out. And canyoneers because no other user group (climbers, bird watchers, yada, yada) is forced to buy a permit.
We could also get into the lottery system the park uses to distribute permits being a form of gambling..... all forms of which are banned in the state of Utah...
:popcorn:
Nope, not at all. "To each his or her own" I always say. :) Personally, I started carrying just for the novelty of it (the same reason I got into ham radio and countless other hobbies that the majority of people never try), but after carrying for a long period of time, I would feel, well, completely defenseless without it. :lol: To me, not carrying is like leaving your cell phone at home while you're away. You never know when you're going to need it in an emergency, but having it and never needing it doesn't hurt anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
Good point. It could be worse, but let's hope not. It cost me $65 in fees for my (my four year old son and I) four day backpack in the Grand Canyon on a trail not maintained by the park service.Quote:
And canyoneers because no other user group (climbers, bird watchers, yada, yada) is forced to buy a permit.
I'll gladly pay the fee. The parks dont bring in enough money from taxes or otherwise to support their maintenance and the programs they provide. No money, perhaps no more parks. If those parks werent paid for and maintained for all I would imagine it wouldnt be long til the oil drillers, and developers moved in. $80 to do my part to help protect these treasured areas seems a small price to pay - shoot, that's the cost of two dinners out.
Let's maybe look at the other side of the coin..... how much money is spent each year by the National Parks Service collecting and administering fees? I'm guessing their is no way in hell that some of these collections pay for themselves. Maybe if some of the parks were not so busy spending money on fee collections and accounting services they would have more money available?
It would be interesting to see the cost of maintaining the Zion Backcountry permit system and employing rangers to man the systems during December and January and February against revenues generated.
:popcorn:
:roflol:
I'm reading about the Parks pass fee increase. I scroll down to the bottom to see the thread turning to Iraq and 9/11.
:roflol:
[transition]I hope this new increase of the Nat'l Parks Pass fee will now INCLUDE the Fiery Furnace fee at Arches.[/transition]
NOPE.... ya still get nicked for "user fees".... you still have to pay extra to Hike Timp Cave, Visit the Fiery Furnace, canyoneer in Zion and a huge list of other things.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
:popcorn:
This money must come from somewhere ...
http://nationalpriorities.org/index....per&Itemid=182
Scott's going to love that one :lol8:Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit42
Hey, can we get that scrolling dollar amount embedded on here? :lol8:
Oh, and I'm really BUMMED that we couldn't pay for more scholarships with that money. Coming from somebody who paid EVERY DIME for college, I really, really, really don't empathize much for those who don't get their degree from lack of scholarships.
Well if you had of signed up for the Military and took your turn in the barrel your schooling would be paid for.
Join the military, travel to exotic locations, meet interesting people..... and shoot them.... :lol8:
Then go to college on Uncle Sam's dime :2thumbs:
I didn't have the balls to join the military. I thought about it, but I had put my 2 years in somewhere else. :haha:
Go Team USA!!!
Hard to imagine you with short hair Beech. Did your MP let you slip by?
Love it? I don't like it and is why I spoke up. That was my point in the first place. I would like to see more money going to things that benifit us more.Quote:
Scott's going to love that one
My final post on the matter (on this thread at least)
Anyone want to take bets on this??? :lol8:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
:popcorn:
Naw, I chopped it off. That was over 10 years ago though. In fact, this pic was taken about 3 years after I got home, but it's pretty close without the goatee. See if you can pick me out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reedus