Special Use Fees Increased - Denali and Rainier

[ScaredSilly]

Folks, I got word that Denali has increased the special use fees for climbing from $200 to $500 without any public input on the program. I am not sure of rules regarding such fees but in previous discussions Denali said that they would solicit public input. They went back on their word and slipped the increase through this past week.

 

Rainier is also looking at fee increase. However, they are just beginning the process.

 

Attached is a joint letter sent by the Access Fund, Alpine Club, and the AMGA.

 

http://www.sci.utah.edu/~allen/misc/J.Jarvis_fee_letter.pdf

 

Note that not only is the letter sent to the NPS but also to many congressional Senator and Representatives.

 

I would suggest that folks start talking to their Senators and Representatives - I have never been happy with the fees. Especially, on Denali for a variety of reasons. Seems they are trying to use climbers as a cash cow for services that many do not want. Rainier has been better but I still have reservations.

Edited September 8, 2010 by ScaredSilly

[Fairweather]

Thanks for the heads up. We're going up there next June, but $500 is absolutely outrageous--as is the lack of transparency in the government that supposedly works for us. This is what happens when NPS staff in a particular unit are allowed to cultivate a "country club" mentality. Sounds like maybe some transfers are in order.

[pink]

i wonder if they accept food stamps???

[Lucky Larry]

Folks, I got word that Denali has increased the special use fees for climbing from $200 to $500 without any public input on the program. I am not sure of rules regarding such fees but in previous discussions Denali said that they would solicit public input. They went back on their word and slipped the increase through this past week.

 

Rainier is also looking at fee increase. However, they are just beginning the process.

 

Attached is a joint letter sent by the Access Fund, Alpine Club, and the AMGA.

 

http://www.sci.utah.edu/~allen/misc/J.Jarvis_fee_letter.pdf

 

Note that not only is the letter sent to the NPS but also to many congressional Senator and Representatives.

 

I would suggest that folks start talking to their Senators and Representatives - I have never been happy with the fees. Especially, on Denali for a variety of reasons. Seems they are trying to use climbers as a cash cow for services that many do not want. Rainier has been better but I still have reservations.

Fees blow; they go against freedom of choice, liberty, pursuit of climbing and are discriminatory. For example: remember when it was poor people that went camping? Boycott these places, dollars speak louder than words, meetings, and bureaucracy. History is in the hands of the powerful. Freedom of choice is to go elsewhere while you still can.

[ivan]

jeebus - getting to be as goddamn expensive to climb as go to fucking disneyworld...

 

easy to cut the parks lose to fend for themselves (and have to raise rates) when all the budget is goign to kill towel-heads and service decades of deficit spending though...

[pink]

i can't see the forrest through the fees

[Fairweather]

Looks like a NPS jobs program. Just what we feared from the start:

 

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/09/12/1337950/climbers-decry-fee-hike.html

[pink]

so poor climbers have to pay for government jobs training??? this sounds familiar...

[King Beatard]

i can't see the forrest through the fees

 

I'll second that.

[tvashtarkatena]

so poor climbers have to pay for government jobs training??? this sounds familiar...

 

YOU try opening those bear boxes without any training....

[pink]

in that case, maybe having a Phd would be a good requirement for a park ranger.

[wfinley]

The NPS needs to raise fees so they can continue to pay their staff to write papers like this.

[billcoe]

HEY, like the constitution indicates, IT'S A FEE COUNTRY.

 

It's what ya get with big government. I'll send a letter or 2, but I still haven't seen any results from my whining about the parking in the national forest fees. It's rare I can't go down the way and park without paying, but it happens.

 

What are we getting for all that money they are sucking form us? Well, they've been able to hire more people to manage the fee program and signs. That's it. That's all.

 

This web site is worth a quick read. http://westernslopenofee.org/index2.php?newsdisplay=yes&newsid=23 Sign up for their newletter and get involved in other places so that when they finally come around to your fav spot, there is a history of shutting them down. Their gig is to toss all this shit out there and see how much sticks on the wall. If they can get everyone argueing as the process continues, they are able to show need and hire even more governmental workers to handle the increased load, thus furthering their bureaucratic empires. Of course, they realize that you, the taxpayers, have unlimited funds to waste on this kind of bullshit and it's job security for them. Congratulations.

[Fairweather]

I called the NPS station in Talkeetna and spoke to one of the rangers there (I'll withhold the name for now). I was told that they haven't received any information on a fee increase for 2011, and that they begin accepting registrations on Oct 1 for next season--the increase will definitely NOT hit the 2011 season. But here's the kicker: the proposed fee for 2012 may actually be $1000.00. Keep an ear out--and your keyboard ready. Unlike MRNP where its easy to just skip registration and climb, Denali has the access points pretty well locked up.

[ivan]

1000$/shot sure oughta keep the dirtbags out of the ruth

[j_b]

It's what ya get with big government.

 

what's really rich is that "pay to play" (user fees) has become generalized in direct response to tax cuts advocated and won by the so-called "small government" (cough, cough) crowd that has been in charge for the last 30+ years. Do try to be consistent.

[John Frieh]

1000$/shot sure oughta keep the dirtbags out of the ruth

 

Peak fees are specific to Denali and Foraker at this point. Climbing in the Ruth only requires a National Park Pass.

 

PS: Alaska fucking rules.

[Fairweather]

It's what ya get with big government.

 

what's really rich is that "pay to play" (user fees) has become generalized in direct response to tax cuts advocated and won by the so-called "small government" (cough, cough) crowd that has been in charge for the last 30+ years. Do try to be consistent.

 

While giving props to the program at Denali the fact remains that, at its core, it is an unnecessary governmental endeavor. Calling for smaller government while decrying the cost/benefit ratio of a pay-to-play scheme that isn't needed to begin with is not inconsistent at all. Do we really need an expensive government enclave at 14,000 feet?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

(user fees) has become generalized in direct response to tax cuts advocated and won by the so-called "small government" (cough, cough) crowd that has been in charge for the last 30+ years. Do try to be consistent.

 

These new fees are all occurring under a big-government spend-thrift administration, and they are complete BS.

[tvashtarkatena]

(user fees) has become generalized in direct response to tax cuts advocated and won by the so-called "small government" (cough, cough) crowd that has been in charge for the last 30+ years. Do try to be consistent.

 

These new fees are all occurring under a big-government spend-thrift administration, and they are complete BS.

 

You're needed back in the Rocket Science forum

 

 

[Nitrox]

It's what ya get with big government.

 

what's really rich is that "pay to play" (user fees) has become generalized in direct response to tax cuts advocated and won by the so-called "small government" (cough, cough) crowd that has been in charge for the last 30+ years. Do try to be consistent.

 

While giving props to the program at Denali the fact remains that, at its core, it is an unnecessary governmental endeavor. Calling for smaller government while decrying the cost/benefit ratio of a pay-to-play scheme that isn't needed to begin with is not inconsistent at all. Do we really need an expensive government enclave at 14,000 feet?

 

They really need the union up there, just think how bad the conditions are for those poor government employees at 14,000. They probably should do a three year study and then have union reps write a contract with all the necessary safeguards.

 

 

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

1000$/shot sure oughta keep the dirtbags out of the ruth

 

after a few have already slipped under the wire already

[KaskadskyjKozak]

You're needed back in the Rocket Science forum

 

 

You're not needed anywhere.

[j_b]

While giving props to the program at Denali the fact remains that, at its core, it is an unnecessary governmental endeavor.

 

???? giving info/help/infrastructure to climbers of all experience and nations on a magnet mountain like Denali is unnecessary nowadays? Do you intend also to leave the bodies on the mountain or do you expect the recovery crew to go for the booty?

 

Calling for smaller government while decrying the cost/benefit ratio of a pay-to-play scheme that isn't needed to begin with is not inconsistent at all. Do we really need an expensive government enclave at 14,000 feet?

 

what gibberish.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

While giving props to the program at Denali the fact remains that, at its core, it is an unnecessary governmental endeavor.

 

???? giving info/help/infrastructure to climbers of all experience and nations on a magnet mountain like Denali is unnecessary nowadays? Do you intend also to leave the bodies on the mountain or do you expect the recovery crew to go for the booty?

 

Calling for smaller government while decrying the cost/benefit ratio of a pay-to-play scheme that isn't needed to begin with is not inconsistent at all. Do we really need an expensive government enclave at 14,000 feet?

 

what gibberish.

 

a 150% increase in one year is what's gibberish, yet alone justifying it in the name of "info/help/infrastructure"