Fine for no Trail Park Pass????

[mr.radon]

What happens with a failure to pay?

[kitten]

In Leavonworth, they will leave a $50 ticket in the window of your car. They take the license plate # to track you down if you don't pay it.

[Bronco]

mr.radon said:

What happens with a failure to pay?

 

90 days in the county slammer.

[Fejas]

Still haven't payed mine from 98'-99'-00'-01'-02'... haven't got one this year, but it not over yet... no word on them, but Oregonians might just be a little more laid back on the issue...

[cluck]

I got another camping ticket this weekend for failing to attain the proper permit to camp inside the boundary of North Cascades NP. The ranger said that the federales have a habit of turning over the names of unpaid ticket recipients to collection agencies. Having a collection agency on your tail seriously destroys your credit rating. Sounds pretty harsh to me.

[kurthicks]

you're in the clear from the Man in Oregon for at least the remainder of this year. after that, he is going to start collecting on fines...so watch out. i had something reported to a collection agency one time which i had already paid, boy did that suck to get cleared up. i've heard that up in WA they aren't quite as lenient.

[Ursa_Eagle]

what about okanogan? I didn't get a fine, but they want me to pay the $5 for parking...

[eternalX]

I got a ticket back in June and just called them to complain about the whole system. The girl I talked to was named Ann and was really friendly about the whole thing. She agreed that it's a pain if you don't realize you had to pay and then can't do it at a trailhead and said she'd cancel the ticket if i'd buy a $30 annual pass. That seems pretty reasonable to me (I should have one anyway) and so I just bought the pass online here .

 

Now I just have to fax her a copy

 

[allthumbs]

having a credit agency on your ass is not fun. suit yourselves.

[lummox]

eternalX said:

I got a ticket back in June and just called them to complain about the whole system. The girl I talked to was named Ann and was really friendly about the whole thing. She agreed that it's a pain if you don't realize you had to pay and then can't do it at a trailhead and said she'd cancel the ticket if i'd buy a $30 annual pass. That seems pretty reasonable to me (I should have one anyway) and so I just bought the pass online

Now I just have to fax her a copy

sucker. dancing for the man just aint where its at.

[eternalX]

That's the difference between me and a liberal. I think I should actually pay for what I use whereas a liberal thinks that everybody but me should pay for what I use.

 

 

[rbw1966]

eternalX said:

That's the difference between me and a liberal. I think I should actually pay for what I use whereas a liberal thinks that everybody but me should pay for what I use.

 

I have no problem paying for what I use but as long as I am also paying for what Weyerhauser, the American Beef Council, Exxon, et al, use then I will not pay extra fees. This is in fact what its all about: paying EXTRA fees for using land that has been set aside for public use. Resource industries are subsidized with our tax dollars.

 

I did not buy a permit when I went into Mt. Stuart last weekend and had a sign hanging on my mirror saying I was not recreating but rather engaging in spiritual development. No ticket. And I was parked there three days.

[MATT_B]

rbw1966 said:

I have no problem paying for what I use but as long as I am also paying for what Weyerhauser, the American Beef Council, Exxon, et al, use then I will not pay extra fees. This is in fact what its all about: paying EXTRA fees for using land that has been set aside for public use. Resource industries are subsidized with our tax dollars.

 

Maybe if we became loggers, ranchers, and mineral exploiters the FS would pay (or at least subsadize) us to be on public lands. Alass we are just citizens and now if we want to go for a walk in the woods we have to pay up?????? Kind of ironic. Maybe in a few years I'll need a permit to walk along the sidewalk in front of my house.

[eternalX]

well there's no doubt that's fucked up as well, but i guess i just don't have a problem paying for the work that the rangers do.

[erik]

what work do the rangers do? intimidate? i dont think they need additonal funding for that. lie to the public...hmm! that is a pretty low cost activity....

 

how about hide the fact that enforcment of the parking pass takes a amjority of the fees....still a low cost activity.

 

build trails...they dont do that anymore! maintain trails...mostly a volutneer activity...

 

purchase suvs, semi automatic weapons, night vison and satalite interfaced laptops..yup yup that costs a grip!

 

 

[chelle]

eternalX said:

I got a ticket back in June and just called them to complain about the whole system. The girl I talked to was named Ann and was really friendly about the whole thing. She agreed that it's a pain if you don't realize you had to pay and then can't do it at a trailhead and said she'd cancel the ticket if i'd buy a $30 annual pass. That seems pretty reasonable to me (I should have one anyway) and so I just bought the pass online here .

 

Now I just have to fax her a copy

 

 

That was nice of her. I tired that excuse with the judge out in E. WA about the stupid fish and game pass and they said "Pay up!!" to the tune of $72.

[kurthicks]

Erik,

 

fyi, i just spent nearly 6 hardass weeks clearing trails in the Sisters and it's not volunteer activity. i could only wish to be so lucky as to not do that godforsaken work. it totally sucks. before you go spouting off about this and that, get some more info.

 

oh yea, don't confuse the Wilderness Rangers with the Field Rangers who give you parking tickets. there is a huge difference. oh, and don't complain to the W. rangers about tickets either because we (generally) don't like, nor did the FS initiate, the fee demo policy...but you'd better talk to congress about that stuff. it was basically a ploy by some national RV organization or something that they passed up to congress. if it wasn't for that $ though, you'd see no cleared trails at all. or at least that's the way funding is going throughout the northwest. imagine schwacking on every approach...

[Paul_detrick]

Ehmmic

That was nice of her. I tired that excuse with the judge out in E. WA about the stupid fish and game pass and they said "Pay up!!" to the tune of $72.

 

 

Bummer it worked for me last year, but maybe cause I live here, got to get all the bucks we can from you 206ers.

Edited August 8, 2003 by Paul_detrick

[marylou]

yo, what wazzumountaineer said.

 

Plus if the money was there, the TM work would all be done by people getting paid. We've had this discussion before.

[mtn_mouse]

Just when we were starting to believe trail pass funds were going right back into trail work, I read an article about the USFS in northern Idaho, (or could have been western Montana-- if the surveyers had not gotten drunk at lost pass, Western Montana would be Idaho) The article said that due to the requirement Bush has given that they contract out at lease 25% of all USFS jobs,they have been diverting trail rec funds to pay for that implementation study.

[lI1|1!]

mtn_mouse said:

Just when we were starting to believe trail pass funds were going right back into trail work

 

yeah right, dream on. you got a citation or just what local rag that article was in? IMHO the hallmark of the feedemo is the public disinformation campaign that goes along with it.

[graupel]

Well, if you hadn't already read it, before they decide what to waste the money on, they already have spent half of it on the administration of collecting the fees . The Government Accounting Office Report got them to disclose that they have been disguising how much the program actually costs.

 

http://www.americanwhitewater.org/archive/article/851/

 

I don't think it is readily known how much actually makes it into trails, but a whole lot of it goes elsewhere. Notice all those new outhouses? Yet the Forest Service in the Pacific Northwest tries to tell you how all the money that is supporting the trail maintenance is coming from the fees. Even if you take their word on this (and there is no reason that you should) what they don't tell you is what percentage of the total that is. They also don't reveal how much they are making headway on the infamous "maintenance backlog" because as the GAO report highlights, they don't know what their backlog is! They never made an attempt to track it since since as part of the manner in which the "Demonstration" portion of the program was set up, Congress didn't establish that as a criteria for evaluation of the program (so explains the Forest Service, anyway).

 

Write your senators. With enough outcry, there is a chance it might be prevented from being carried forward into the 2004 budget. The senate vote will probably be coming up soon so get your faxes or phone calls in.

[Tod]

graupel said:

Well, if you hadn't already read it, before they decide what to waste the money on, they already have spent half of it on the administration of collecting the fees . The Government Accounting Office Report got them to disclose that they have been disguising how much the program actually costs.

 

http://www.americanwhitewater.org/archive/article/851/

 

I don't think it is readily known how much actually makes it into trails, but a whole lot of it goes elsewhere. Notice all those new outhouses? Yet the Forest Service in the Pacific Northwest tries to tell you how all the money that is supporting the trail maintenance is coming from the fees. Even if you take their word on this (and there is no reason that you should) what they don't tell you is what percentage of the total that is. They also don't reveal how much they are making headway on the infamous "maintenance backlog" because as the GAO report highlights, they don't know what their backlog is! They never made an attempt to track it since since as part of the manner in which the "Demonstration" portion of the program was set up, Congress didn't establish that as a criteria for evaluation of the program (so explains the Forest Service, anyway).

 

Write your senators. With enough outcry, there is a chance it might be prevented from being carried forward into the 2004 budget. The senate vote will probably be coming up soon so get your faxes or phone calls in.

 

Great info! I think this is at least the 2nd GAO report done on this (I remember one from the 2nd year of the Demo Program), and it STILL says the same thing. The cost to run the program negates the fees collected.

 

My guess is that because the program is in place, there is less money in the Federal Budget for the Forest Service, and since the cost of the program negates the fees collected, the Forest Service has less money to operate than it ever has. That doesn't even include the loss of money from subsidizing the logging industry. Very backwards as usual. Pay/subsidize the commercial "users" of the National Forests and charge the recreational users, and then lose money doing it.

 

Tod

[blue_morph]

I have noticed that this year they have changed the rules on the pass system. In addition to day passes, and the window hanger annual passes, you can now use a NPS pass if you have paid an additional $15 for a hologram sticker. The other day at the TH for Hyas lake, the volunteer person there told us to just leave the NPS pass on the dash and that was good enough.

The point now is that there is enough consistency to truly be able to claim confusion. So get the ticket and challenge it. Tell them that your NPS park pass worked at "xyz" so I assumed it would work here. Its so confusing now that the people staffed at the TH don't even understand it.

[Gary_Yngve]

Some Forest Service asshole ticketed us this weekend even though we had a legit pass hanging, face-forward, on the rear-view mirror.