chucK Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 Can't you just follow the records and official budgets and see what the money is spent on? Does it need to be scandalous? Or can you just make an informative story? You could find out that x% of your trailpark pass goes to paying rangers to police the trailheads to find trailpark pass violators, that y% goes to printing and distributing the trailpark passes, that z% goes into the general (WAR) fund in D.C. and that only (?) u% actually gets spent on maintenance of the trails and parking lots. Maybe that wouldn't be scandalous, but it would probably be informative and it would be fairly easy I think (for newsy people who are used to doing FOIA type of stuff). I think I remember reading on the internet that the GAO had some pretty negative stuff to say about this. That would probably be easy for you guys to look up too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 scott silver would be a good contact, though some disagree w/ him he is very well researched and presents an educated and patient, not wacko view most of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEWSTIPS Posted March 17, 2003 Author Share Posted March 17, 2003 chucK said: Can't you just follow the records and official budgets and see what the money is spent on? Does it need to be scandalous? Or can you just make an informative story? The story we're efforting is not scandalous, but it IS investigative. It's not the type of story we can do all in one day and our investigators unit has been assigned to look into it. I'm not saying there is criminal activity going on associated with the funds, I'm just saying that we're trying to assess whether the funds have been used in the most efficient way. And because TV is a visual medium, I was wondering if anyone had photos to support arguments about how the money could be better spent. That's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 Maybe perhaps one of those lovely pie charts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 newstips there should be no money to spend...this is wilderness...it should be left alone and not improved upon... why do they need machine guns and 40k suvs to collect parking fees that have not even been enacted into law?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 I could lbe wrong, but I think almost nobody who was in on the committee meetings related to the fixed anchor ban would describe Scott Silver as either patient or "not wacko." From what I understand, people who were for and against the ban found him to be, at best, unnecessarily divisive. While he certainly couldn't be said to be objective about fee demo and I would question some of his "information," I do think he has worked hard on the issue and would be a good source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeclimb9 Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 I wouldn't characterize the MRNP spending as mismanagement. Rather, misdirection. What money is spent on trails? Here's a summary of yearly budgets: FY 2003 Annual Budget is $9,027,000 FY 2002 Annual Budget is $9,027,000 FY 2001 Annual Budget is $8,837,000 FY 2000 Annual Budget is $8,625,000 The 2000 budget doesn't mention "trails". An easier question to answer is what percentage of resources do climbers contribute, and what monies are spent on facilities that they use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 mattp said: I could lbe wrong, but I think almost nobody who was in on the committee meetings related to the fixed anchor ban would describe Scott Silver as either patient or "not wacko." From what I understand, people who were for and against the ban found him to be, at best, unnecessarily divisive. While he certainly couldn't be said to be objective about fee demo and I would question some of his "information," I do think he has worked hard on the issue and would be a good source. fair enough. he seemed fairly reasonable when interviewed w/ oregon field guide recently. I am not aware of his dealings w/ the AAC et al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 One nearby and extremely accessible trail project that I believe was funded at least in part with funds from the Fee Demo program is the trail to Big Four Ice Caves, outside Granite Falls. On that trail, there is a very large new bridge over a pretty small stream that is, like, 75 feet long and built witih 4 or 5 foot high glue lam's and would be strong enough to hold a sherman tank. The whole thing was helicoptered in there. The prior footbridge in the same location was less than a tenth as big and to replace it would probably have cost 1% as much. I think a good argument could be made that this is an example of government waste at its worst, but an equally good argument could be made that the Ice Caves trail is the most popular hiking trail in the district, and it is appropriate that they spent a large percentage of their trails budget there and made it something that serves families and probably even wheelchairs. If it was in fact built with funds from fee demo, it might be interesting to mention that the program supports this kind of project in addition to more remote and primitive backcountry trails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 NEWSTIPS said: chucK said: Can't you just follow the records and official budgets and see what the money is spent on? Does it need to be scandalous? Or can you just make an informative story? The story we're efforting is not scandalous, but it IS investigative. It's not the type of story we can do all in one day and our investigators unit has been assigned to look into it. I'm not saying there is criminal activity going on associated with the funds, I'm just saying that we're trying to assess whether the funds have been used in the most efficient way. And because TV is a visual medium, I was wondering if anyone had photos to support arguments about how the money could be better spent. That's all. Hey NEWSTIPS - Down here in Orygun, I gotta story for you on trail maintenance and citizen participation. The Forest Service, in their infinite wisdom, wanted to put in a huge paved trail up to Bagby hotsprings ... in a bunch of wetlands ... so folks could drive the trucks up to the springs. A bunch of folks got on them and and then went out there and volunteered to put in their time to rip out the improvements made by the FS. Neat huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted March 17, 2003 Share Posted March 17, 2003 Some view a pavement project on a gravel access road as an improvement and use it as an example of fee-money put to good use (if they can prove that fee-money was even used locally in the first place). However, I think I can safely say many people prefer the primitive access road and don't want the "upgrade"! Yes, I complain about the condition of the road up to Cloud Cap on Mt. Hood, but I would be furious if they paved it (though it does cost money to grade and maintain it even in its current condition). Many of us just want a gravel turnoff to remain just that, and keep the interpretive displays, steps, etc. away. There are plenty of other users who might want these things, but there is a very large amount who do not. We should not pay to walk on forest land. Keep the fees to the developed campgrounds and designated "improved" areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.