NW FOREST PASS

[sk]

as the one who was called names.. I have to call bull shit perhaps "allison" did not say it but "you" did. why fib?

[allison]

Why do I say I did not? Because I was in the Enchantments when those posts were made. Don't believe me, call the Leavenworth RD and ask them when I picked up my permit. We were a group of four on a permit for five, and I was the party leader.

[sk]

then someone must have had your password.... whatever. You have to face yourself and take responsability for who you are and who you are not. If I remember correctly you have also referd to me as an illitertrate house wife in a verry dispariging way... tell yourself what ever you have to to get threw the day.

[allison]

At least ten people have that avatar's password. Honestly, I don't know what to tell you.

[sk]

not poptart.... bingo pajama

[allison]

Yes, I remember that, she also called you a meat-fearing twit, and you called her a beeyotch. Very amusing, Grasshopper!

 

[sk]

I've got you pegged and you know it... give up woman I was following you... and reading what you were reading, interesting how you knew right where to go

[allison]

Wasn't too tough to find, and I have a pretty sharp memory. It was only a couple of weeks ago, and it was funny.

 

Were you stalking me?

 

I think we can wrap this up in email. Check your craghag account.

 

[ 08-31-2002, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: allison ]

[sk]

back atcha

[Fence_Sitter]

sharp memory my ass...you are a fucking idiot...did you ask the lesbos again before posting again? cause i'll betcha did... did the esbos call sk a bitch? yeah fess up wench... we know the truth...whether it was poptart...bulldyke or whatever...it was you deary

[allison]

No, I dont think the 'esbos' did either.

 

It could have been almost anyone.

 

Maybe you should focus on getting some nice Pee-Chees, school starts soon. Mom and Dad might give you some money of your own for this.

[jon]

Retro, I appreciate your arguement and you are absolutely right that paying for a pass is discrimitory based on a person's/family's income, this is something I've considered and heard argued before, but something I haven't not quite taken to heart until now. I believe there are even statistics in the GAO report supporting what you have stated. Even so for family with a modest income, between child care and/or schooling, mortage, car payments, etc., $25 for a pass and $20 per night for camping can be inhibiting for a family to get out often. There have been times in my life that I couldn't have been able to afford the forest pass because money was so tight, and although I'm in a situation now I could afford to buy one which I certainly don't take for granted, your explaination is just yet another reason why I refuse to buy it and why others should do the same.

 

As far as how you vote "no" to the forest pass, getting tickets or parking 1/4 mile away isn't a vote. That information isn't assemble and the people making the descions on whether to extend fee demo don't hear about that. The numbers they see is the amount of revenue that fee demo has produced. And the amount compared to before is enticing to them, and I'm sure the yearly revenue is only growing as the pass has been enforced more stictly and in more areas. So this is what congress sees. And the ARC wines and dines them and blows a bunch of sunshine up their asses, and all of the sudden fee demo sounds like a pretty good idea. People protest and write angry letters, but all these congressman see is a bunch or radical tree hugger extremists, the type they see and hear from with just about every issue that they deal with on Capital Hill. End the the occupation of the Middle East, stop Missle Defense, more money for schools, on and on and on, they hear day in and day out. These people for the most part are deaf now.

 

Then someone gets a letter about a family working hard just to get by and how the don't feel it is right that they have to pay to use their public lands. Maybe this Congressman sympethizes because there was in a time in their life where they were in a similar financial situation. My point here is the only way to vote no is to convince the people who are doing the actual voting that fee demo is wrong, and they only way to do this is to write and call them. I can write all the angry letters I want to our representatives about how fee demo is double taxation and go on and on about timber and mining yada yada, but the message behind stories like Retro's or ScottP's is so much more powerful and compelling that they must be heard.

[Fence_Sitter]

yeah i'm goin to school allison, so what? i dont wanna be a two bit whore like you...so i am getting an education...whelp...i'm outa here...hasta

[allison]

Don't forget to sign up for 'Witty Comebacks 101.'

[not_a_climber]

http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=825

 

It could happen to you If your taking the effort to post in this thread, send a post to congress and the permit vendors as well.

[MattR]

 

 

[ 09-01-2002, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: MattR ]

[priapism]

Regarding the NW Forest Pass, I have some firsthand info that may be very beneficial to those who don't buy passes or may want to fight a violation in court.

 

I've been receiving both the nice "you didn't pay your money" notices and actual violations for several years, and nothing has ever come of it. On June 6, I was parked at the Snow Creek TH in Leavenworth and received a $50 ticket for "failure to have a valid NW Forest Pass." I ignored it, but a month later I got a "Notice To Appear" in the mail, directing me to pay or show up at a hearing at the Federal Courthouse in Yakima. It also said if I planned on contesting it to call the U.S. Attorney's intern in Spokane. I called, and made the mistake of speaking with him about the violation (more on that later).

 

To make a long story short, I showed up at the hearing, entered a plea of not guilty, and had a trail date set for Aug. 23. At the trial, I spoke at length about the NW Forest Pass, citing that it is, at present, an extension of the Fee Demonstration Program and paying is discretionary, not mandatory; that it is a fee charged for recreation, and I was not witnessed recreating; that it is only (unfairly) charged to motorists and not those who access the trailheads by other means; that it discriminates against people of low income; and so on. Basically I hit all the arguements that are out there, emphasizing that the goal behind the program is increased privatization of our public lands. The issuing officer was there, and I had a chance to cross-examine him. He stated he did not witness me driving/parking the vehicle or participating in any recreational activity, but only that he observed my vehicle parked there. The Government produced pictures of my vehicle and pictures of the sign saying passed were required, presumably because I had a large sign in my windshield saying "Northwest Forest Pass, Don't Buy It!" After we all said our peace, the Judge (who was quite cool, by the way) basically said although he sympathized with my position, my arguements were much better suited to the political arena than the courtroom. He felt that the Government had met the burden of proof to show my vehicle was there and did not have a pass. However, the question was raised as to why the violation was even mailed to me in the first place, as there are two names on the registration. Under questioning, the officer said he "just sends it to the guy, I guess". The ticket itself just has the vehicle information - a registration check is done by computer, and then the violation gets a name attached to it.

 

So the Judge is taking this case under advisement, waiting for the intern-Attorney to provide him with case law showing how the violator is picked from a registration with two people, and I should hear back in a week or so. I wanted to win based on principle, not a technicality, but we'll see.

 

So what did I learn? Don't put a protest sticker in your windshield, as I'm sure that is why they decided to prosecute me. Don't buy a pass, and if you get an actual violation, ignore it. When the notice comes in the mail and you call the intern, DON'T SAY ANYTHING. In my passion for this issue, I pretty much told the guy I didn't have a pass, why I thought it was wrong, and that I was looking forward to going to court. He obviously thought he had a winning case on his hands, and that's why it didn't get dismissed by the U.S. Attorney's office. Remember, this is an intern who wants to win cases and move up through the system. He's not going to take on a weak case. When you call, don't tell them anything, just decline comment. I would be surprised if they followed through and didn't just drop it. If you do go to trial, the burden of proof is on the Government to show you didn't have a pass. If you don't hand them their case (like I did), they don't have too much to go on. The more of these we can take to trial, the better for our cause. And restating what several people have said earlier, get involved! Call your congressmen, educate other trail users. If we don't beat this now, it will be much harder down the road. If you're going to fight one, feel free to PM me; I learned more about beating these than I have time to discuss here. Hope that helps.

[allthumbs]

I don't have the time to drive all over the state going to trials. I'll just park 1/4 mile away, thanks.

[Retrosaurus]

It is also a rare side effect from taking Trazodone.

[Dru]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Retrosaurus:

It is also a rare side effect from taking Trazodone.

---

been there trazodone that?

 

(traskodone?)

 

I thought it just meant "priapism" is a hardman

[allthumbs]

dru, your play on words makes no cents

[Retrosaurus]

Mrs. R here,

 

Well, I've been protesting fee demo, and I've stirred someone up. Last Saturday, I gave information to a forest service friend. She of course can't protest because she signed a thing that says she can't talk against the forest service without losing her job. She took the information to show to her boss. I also sent information to our local paper. The gal at the paper called me today and said she was doing an issue on 'Fee Demo'.

 

So, on the front page is fee demo and all the money it's making [not taking]. Only 20% is going back to administrative costs. We're building new toliets, trails, etc.... They've quoted me on a few things. Nothing about ARC (American Recreational Coalition), nothing about losing our public lands. If I wanted Developed Public lands I'd go to Disneyworld, they charge too.

They quote me, "With more money comes more roads and facilities, and more reasons to charge fees." But the next sentence says, "She has no argument with the way the money is being spent"--a little conflict here? What I didn't say in this article written was that the Forest Service budget is cut by the $amount$ that is brought in by fee demo. So where is the extra money from fees at?

 

What about the issue of commercialization of our public lands. Here's the prime example: The ending of this article says "To comment on how the fees are being spent or to suggest future projects call a local ranger district or fee program coordinators Vladimir Steblina, (509) 662-4319, and Jim Archambeault, (509) 826-3573. They don't want to know what you think about fees. They want to get your opinion on how to spend them your way, to endear the fee program to the public. This is development,commercializing our public lands? This is the forest services sole agenda: money and development. To someone who hasn't researched fee demo, they would look at this and say "Oh, look the forest service looks like it's doing okay." Nowhere is there any mention of making a profit by selling off our basic right as American citizens to access our public lands.

 

Well, I'm writing to the paper again. Do they ever reject opinions? I'll be somewhere in the middle of the paper, listing the facts. Get the information out to others, write congress, sign petitions, etc....

 

Here is one you can sign right now http://www.PetitionOnline.com/feedemo/

 

Thanks,

Betty Merriman

[iain]

Kudos to you for taking the time for all of us to help fight this thing. I'm not sure I would be able to endure trial dates, etc. but we'll see when my day eventually comes.

 

BTW your nickname is disgusting.

[allthumbs]

No shit...how's the dating scene? hahaha

[Off_White]

For those of you wondering:

 

pri·a·pism -- Persistent, usually painful erection of the penis, especially as a consequence of disease and not related to sexual arousal.

 

[ 09-03-2002, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Off White ]