Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

Forest Service 14er Fee

Colorado 14ers access and fee issues only, please

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby Jon Frohlich » Sat May 15, 2010 11:05 am

ClimbandMine wrote:
Jon Frohlich wrote:
coloradokevin wrote:For those of you who have been hiking a while, I wonder if you remember what things were like just 5 years ago? 10 years ago? 15 years ago? It seems like every season brings more fees, higher fees, and more logistical red-tape before we can access OUR mountains.


Actually in the 9 years I've been out hiking little to nothing has changed. Culebra has changed ownership. CFI has improved a bunch of trails. Signage has improved. Prices for the train have gone up but that's private enterprise. That's about it. Can you give any real examples of what new fees have been put in place since 2000? Only real one I can think of is that now there is a fee station at Wild Basin in RMNP. I was paying at Brainard Lake back then already. I can't think of anything on the 14ers that has changed besides Culebra and that's a private ownership issue and nothing to do with this.


The Mt. Evans fee dates to about 1996?

Mt. Democrat "Fee Demo" Fee.

White River Forest "Voluntary" tracking permits -- Snowmass, Capital and the Bells/Pyramid

The Bells/Pyramid Maroon Lake shuttle / fee - I don't think its more than 15 years old. Could be wrong. The first time I went over there I didn't pay, and I started 14ers in '97.


So basically in the last 9 (maybe 10) years there's been nothing new since the Kite Lake parking fee was in place in 2001. Hardly the same as every season bringing more and higher fees. Voluntary tracking permits don't bother me one bit. The belief that fees are just popping up everywhere really doesn't fit the facts.

User avatar
Posts: 1534
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:33 pm
Location: Arvada, CO

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby coloradokevin » Sat May 15, 2010 11:37 am

ClimbandMine wrote:
Jon Frohlich wrote:
coloradokevin wrote:For those of you who have been hiking a while, I wonder if you remember what things were like just 5 years ago? 10 years ago? 15 years ago? It seems like every season brings more fees, higher fees, and more logistical red-tape before we can access OUR mountains.


Actually in the 9 years I've been out hiking little to nothing has changed. Culebra has changed ownership. CFI has improved a bunch of trails. Signage has improved. Prices for the train have gone up but that's private enterprise. That's about it. Can you give any real examples of what new fees have been put in place since 2000? Only real one I can think of is that now there is a fee station at Wild Basin in RMNP. I was paying at Brainard Lake back then already. I can't think of anything on the 14ers that has changed besides Culebra and that's a private ownership issue and nothing to do with this.


The Mt. Evans fee dates to about 1996?

Mt. Democrat "Fee Demo" Fee.

White River Forest "Voluntary" tracking permits -- Snowmass, Capital and the Bells/Pyramid

The Bells/Pyramid Maroon Lake shuttle / fee - I don't think its more than 15 years old. Could be wrong. The first time I went over there I didn't pay, and I started 14ers in '97.



^ Those are few noteworthy examples.

But, I will say that it seems like fees for campgrounds have been steadily rising (more than inflation would suggest), thanks in large part to the "help" of private companies that have been chosen to run our public facilities (btw, I understand that fees need to exist for campgrounds, but $17-20/night for little more than a tent pad and an outhouse is a bit outrageous).

I've been hiking for the better part of 25 years, and the fee system has changed dramatically in that time. The biggest changes happened just outside of the time frame you spoke of, with the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program (1997). It sure seemed like we were hit with a real cascade of fees in the years that immediately followed the implementation of that particular program. We now have the Recreation Enhancement Act, but the fees have stuck around all the same.

Back in the mid-late 90's there were still fees to camp at a lot of campgrounds, but I routinely found USFS sites that were only charging between $2-6/night, with some sites still being completely free. What do those campgrounds cost these days? Plus, more pay stations have been added in less developed areas, for activities where no ammenities have been added.

By the way, I consider Culebra to be a non-issue as far as this topic is concerned. As much as I wish it wasn't this way, that peak is on private land, and the landowner(s) can do as they choose. I'm talking specifically of fee issues that impact how I'll hike in mountains that are owned in the public domain, but found far away from other forms of development of government.

Now we can add S. Colony Lakes to that list of tax havens.

I just wonder what's next!

User avatar
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 7:56 pm
Location: colorado

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby ClimbandMine » Sat May 15, 2010 12:02 pm

Kevin brings up good points. The intent of the FLREA was to end many of the fees that had sprung up and to prevent fees at unimproved sites. The work Aaron Johnson has done has shown this is not the case in Colorado and Wyoming.

Another issue, along with rising campground fees, is the closure of campgrounds by the USFS. Sometimes it is justified by "unsafe" conditions. Others are not justified, the gate is just closed and the sites are left to rot and be reclaimed by nature. Typically they are in lightly used locations. Unprofitable? The USFS can't get a concession to take them on? You can't pin down an USFS manager and get them to explain the real reason. Ever.
I don't care that you Tele.

User avatar
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:16 am
Location: Westcliffe (sort of)

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby bonehead » Sat May 15, 2010 1:01 pm

goinforawalk

"the southern twang speaking father told me he was sorry"

Is Your Bigotry on parade here dude.???

"Moral of the story"
is where you started from.

BS 0n You!
And sorry, but your POS story smells.
The trail up BHP is always out of condition,
OMG! Sure, what else is new.
It is a mountain after all, not a hike to a lakeside picnic.
And you stated:
"FREE trail that is provided to us by the fine state of CO
and all the hard working volunteers that maintain them."
OK, you did at least get half of that right!
DS

Posts: 174
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 11:10 am
Location: Evergreen, Colorado

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby JE242 » Sat May 15, 2010 4:09 pm

crazy...
Last edited by JE242 on Mon May 17, 2010 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: Nederland, CO

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby AlpineHigh » Sat May 15, 2010 4:59 pm

g wrote:You changed my mind. Let's go whole hog and have the USFS hire cooks so they can serve hot meals to tourists up there. Also, hire masseuses too -- the bikers and hikers would absolutely love that.

As for the water, they can build a big storage tank up there. Make sure it's only pure filtered spring water though.


I find it amusing that you can't find a single thing to agree with me on - any of the positive outcomes from what the USFS has does up there (you really can't even agree getting inner-city kids into the outdoors and giving them some education regarding natural history?). You find it more important to not only disagree but to do so in a way that is clearly mocking, I was after all trying to have a civilized adult conversation with you.

And to share some history with you for free, since you would never be caught dead paying for it...there was a building at the summit that was run by the same folks who own and run Echo lake lodge. They did sell hot food, yummy donuts (which you can get at Pikes peak - same recipe I believe), and offer water...spring water if I'm not mistaken :D . Due to a mistake while refueling the LP gas tank that powered the Crest House, a fire broke out :shock: which burned the structure and left the stone foundation. To the dismay of many wealthy individuals :evil: who offered to donate the money needed to rebuild it, the Forest Service refused on the basis that the area was surrounded by a Wilderness area and improving/building a structure there didn't seem to jive.
"The mountains are calling, and I must go."
-John Muir

User avatar
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: Nederland, CO

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby AlpineHigh » Sat May 15, 2010 5:31 pm

g wrote:
I was totally serious about USFS cooks and masseuses, but only by cute USFS employees.

Well, that's the gubmint for 'ya -- refuse to rebuild a historic structure but then build all sorts of other stuff. Is the USFS in charge of Pikes Peak? Look at what a scenic and pristine environment that summit is. Also, we don't need the USFS playing inner-city counselors and tour guides -- not the role of gubmint and there are plenty of private charity programs. Finally, I do pay for this stuff -- it's called taxes. What irks most of us is then the gubmint has the temerity to charge us access fees on top of that.


I'm glad that once again you can find a way to disagree with me by calling a restaurant a historic structure when it's convenient for you. I haven't and don't care to see the top of Pikes until I need to check it off my list. I'm sure that it's trashed.

As for the USFS playing the role of guides, the schools voluntarily come and take part in the programs because I suppose they think the kids get something out of them. Plenty of private charity programs to do what? Offer interpretive programs? If the Forest Service is doing such a poor job then why haven't these so-called charity programs of yours come in to fill the niche?

If your taxes are not enough to cover the money needed by the forest service to operate properly, take up your issue with the other government agencies that get more tax dollars (dept. of defense, fda, or what-have-you) better yet, take up your fight with the lobbyists that are screwing over our land management agencies and forcing the FS to look to drastic measures such as charging you to use your land (which I agree is not fair). I still haven't heard any decent/realistic suggestions from you for a better system then volunteers for areas that see as much use as Mt.Evans. Do you honestly think there are enough people willing to volunteer to staff and make possible a site that sees over 200k visitors a year? And if you are going to say spend less money in other areas of the district so that you have enough for Mt.Evens, I'd love to hear your tone when we stop things like hazard tree mitigation and and your car (or you god-forbid) gets smashed by some beetle kill.
"The mountains are calling, and I must go."
-John Muir

User avatar
Posts: 1534
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:33 pm
Location: Arvada, CO

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby coloradokevin » Sat May 15, 2010 5:50 pm

JE242 wrote:I hope they close the road and all of you lazy fools have to use the Chicago Lakes trail. Or better yet, from the Guanella Pass. Please make sure you use the Georgetown side for your access. :wink: You are mountaineers right?


Sounds fine by me. More wilderness never really offended me. The problem, of course, is that the empire building has already been done on that mountain, and LONG before my time. As such, in my lifetime it won't ever appear natural again. I'm not really opposed to using existing roads, I'm just opposed to paying to an agency that neither owns or maintains that particular road.

But, the USFS can keep the Mt. Goliath building and the little gardens around it... that has little to do with wilderness, and I never asked for that development. A road and a trailhead is all I'll require, thanks :)
Last edited by coloradokevin on Sat May 15, 2010 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:40 pm
Location: Northern NH

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby perryw » Sat May 15, 2010 5:57 pm

The USFS implemented a FEE Program to park at the trailheads in the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire about 10 years ago. It's thirty bucks a year now per vehicle. I think they now raise enough money each year to partially pay for the implementation of the program. :wink:
Did you know that the word gullible is NOT in the dictionary?

User avatar
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 7:56 pm
Location: colorado

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby ClimbandMine » Sat May 15, 2010 9:20 pm

Alpine high:

The truth is USFS appropriations have grown over the last decade. If our lands can't be managed within the allotted budget, maybe jobs should be cut and infrastructure reduced and returned to a more natural state so that less "management" is needed.

Source: http://www.westernslopenofee.org/pdfuploads/FS_Approps_1999_to_2009.pdf


G, shut up. You are not being constructive.
I don't care that you Tele.

User avatar
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 6:17 pm
Location: Lakewood

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby JeffR » Sat May 15, 2010 9:36 pm

JE242 wrote:I hope they close the road and all of you lazy fools have to use the Chicago Lakes trail. Or better yet, from the Guanella Pass. Please make sure you use the Georgetown side for your access. :wink: You are mountaineers right?

A lot of us lazy fools already summit it from Chicago Lakes or Guanella Pass. If you decided to explore this site instead of using it solely to butt your nose into a single subject, you just might realize that most of us who hike regularly actually attempt to avoid roads and well-travelled areas.

Any other arguments you want to advance for us to blow holes in?
To recognize the beauty in sadness, without playing host to the pain...
- Under the Sun, "Reflections"

User avatar
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: Nederland, CO

Re: Forrest Service 14er Fee

Postby AlpineHigh » Sat May 15, 2010 9:44 pm

ClimbandMine wrote:Alpine high:

The truth is USFS appropriations have grown over the last decade. If our lands can't be managed within the allotted budget, maybe jobs should be cut and infrastructure reduced and returned to a more natural state so that less "management" is needed.


I guess the only option - to keep things legal - would be to reduce staff. I personally worry what the consequences of less staff will look like in terms of the impact on the environment though


ClimbandMine wrote:
G, shut up. You are not being constructive.


Thank you.
"The mountains are calling, and I must go."
-John Muir

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests