14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Items that do not fit the categories above.
Forum rules
  • This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
  • Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
  • Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
  • Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
Post Reply

Are you okay with paying a user fee to access Colorado 14'ers?

Yes, for all 14'ers.
24
8%
Maybe, for certain areas.
43
15%
Maybe, but only if the fees were small.
34
12%
No, fees should generally not be charged to access these areas.
191
65%
 
Total votes: 292
User avatar
nfire
Posts: 256
Joined: 8/23/2008
14ers: 33 
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by nfire »

LtWitte wrote:
Shawnee Bob wrote:You can have a discussion about fees, a POLICY issue, without going into red/blue, liberal/conservative GOP/Dem crap. People are just tempted to run back to that framework because EVERYTHING is being politicized. And it's tiring.
What good is a POLICY discussion if you can't do anything about the policy? Who makes policy?...Congress

Therefore, any policy discussion must be of a political nature or what's the point?
STFU
User avatar
coloradokevin
Posts: 1457
Joined: 6/13/2007
14ers: 15 
Trip Reports (5)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by coloradokevin »

nfire wrote:
BillMiddlebrook wrote:
LtWitte wrote:Why are people so afraid to talk politics?
We're not afraid of the subject, just sick of constantly seeing it on this mountaineering forum. It almost always turns into useless, garbage discussions.
its awful. this thread is terrible.
Please allow me to interject... this thread is a very important discussion of an issue that could potentially affect all of us, each and every time we hike. It's that simple. Having a debate about whether or not such fees are appropriate, and what we should do to address such a situation, is the entire purpose of this thread.

Turning it into a Liberal vs Conservative debate was NOT my intention, and is NOT the issue that I'd like this thread to focus on (we all know this forum is sharply divided on their voting preferences).

But, PLEASE lets keep a decent dialogue going about the fee situation itself. It is important, and it is an issue that many of us are concerned about, at least judging by the poll response in this thread.
User avatar
nfire
Posts: 256
Joined: 8/23/2008
14ers: 33 
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by nfire »

coloradokevin wrote:
Turning it into a Liberal vs Conservative debate was NOT my intention, and is NOT the issue that I'd like this thread to focus on (we all know this forum is sharply divided on their voting preferences).

But, PLEASE lets keep a decent dialogue going about the fee situation itself. It is important, and it is an issue that many of us are concerned about, at least judging by the poll response in this thread.
=D>

i'd be in favor of a $10 fee just because i bet it would keep the crowds down a good bit. would be worth the small upgrade.
SteveBonowski
Posts: 226
Joined: 2/9/2010
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by SteveBonowski »

Shawnee Bob wrote: "You can have a discussion about fees, a policy issue, without going into red/blue, liberal/conservative........

I have to laugh a bit at that; in part because it is a true statement. When the Vail Pass Task Force was having its fee increase discussion 3-4 years ago, politics NEVER came into the discussion. We all looked; snowmobilers & non-motorized recreationists alike; at what our costs were then and what services were being provided by the fee. We considered how our costs were going up; the VPTF does own and maintain a snowcat for trail grooming. While none of us were happy to see an increase, we ultimately agreed that a modest fee increase was needed so we could continue to provide our users with the same level of services.

There were no liberals or conservatives in the room; just recreationists working on a common program and goal.
User avatar
oldschoolczar
Posts: 597
Joined: 7/18/2011
14ers: 45  1  1 
13ers: 7
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by oldschoolczar »

nfire wrote:
LtWitte wrote:
Shawnee Bob wrote:You can have a discussion about fees, a POLICY issue, without going into red/blue, liberal/conservative GOP/Dem crap. People are just tempted to run back to that framework because EVERYTHING is being politicized. And it's tiring.
What good is a POLICY discussion if you can't do anything about the policy? Who makes policy?...Congress

Therefore, any policy discussion must be of a political nature or what's the point?
STFU
=D>
“what matters most is
how well you
walk through the
fire” -Charles Bukowski
User avatar
Scott P
Posts: 9438
Joined: 5/4/2005
14ers: 58  16 
13ers: 50 13
Trip Reports (16)
 
Contact:

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by Scott P »

...............
Last edited by Scott P on Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm old, slow and fat. Unfortunately, those are my good qualities.
User avatar
Jim Davies
Posts: 7638
Joined: 6/8/2006
14ers: 58  1 
13ers: 67
Trip Reports (5)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by Jim Davies »

Hungry Jack wrote:
vardo wrote:more here:

http://www.mountainnewsdesk.com/index.p ... &Itemid=67" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
LOL. "Where is Hayduke when you need him?"

Pretty much says it all.
Hayduke would probably slash everybody's tires at the Stevens Gulch trailhead, then dynamite the bridge at the Bakerville offramp. Probably not what most of us want.
Climbing at altitude is like hitting your head against a brick wall — it's great when you stop. -- Chris Darwin
I'm pretty tired. I think I'll go home now. -- Forrest Gump
User avatar
Hungry Jack
Posts: 914
Joined: 7/18/2008
14ers: 12 
13ers: 4
Trip Reports (1)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by Hungry Jack »

We should be able to discuss this issue (14er fees) without getting into the sweeping generalizations of how each party might approach this issue. On the list of things that dominate our two-party discourse (I am being generous in describing what occurs in the media) on national issues, public recreation fees fall far, far down the list (even in the taxation debate, recreational user fees would amount to a fraction of a percentage of an infinitesimal amount of a drop in the bucket of what our government takes and spends).

As we have seen here, one's position on paying user fees to offset the cost of caring for public lands does not all along party lines, at least in this small sample. Nor is this notion a "big idea" in the policy spectrum. The big ideas in public recreation were brought forth by Aldo Leopold, Teddy Roosevelt, et al a long time ago. At best, it is an incremental policy that is more operational than fundamental.

So let us forget trying to analyze this issue through the over hyped, over simplified lens of our two-party system, which only serves to make us all dumber by casting false dichotomies on every stupid little issue that might emerge. I would bet that for most of us, our love of the outdoors weighs far more than our allegiance to any party. Let's leave the political baggage at home for a change.
please rotate your device
User avatar
CHWitte
Posts: 281
Joined: 8/6/2008
14ers: 58 
13ers: 26
Trip Reports (13)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by CHWitte »

Scott P wrote:Very seldom would I ever make a post like this about a person and I like 99.999% of people I've talked with/met regardless of their different politcal views.

In this case though, I think it appropriate. I'd just suggest to everyone to just not responding to any of LtWitte's posts. Some people aren't worth arguing or even talking with. If the moderators feel I'm out of line, they can delete my post.
Yeah, this is the American thing to do. Shun those you disagree with. =D> Are you kidding me? :lol:
David R. Witte
CO 14er Finisher: July 2015
User avatar
12ersRule
Posts: 2264
Joined: 6/18/2007
14ers: 58 
13ers: 157
Trip Reports (4)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by 12ersRule »

Jim Davies wrote:
Hungry Jack wrote:
vardo wrote:more here:

http://www.mountainnewsdesk.com/index.p ... &Itemid=67" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
LOL. "Where is Hayduke when you need him?"

Pretty much says it all.
Hayduke would probably slash everybody's tires at the Stevens Gulch trailhead, then dynamite the bridge at the Bakerville offramp. Probably not what most of us want.
Yeah, I don't have as much free time as Hayduke.
User avatar
Derek
Posts: 1156
Joined: 5/22/2006
Trip Reports (57)
 
Contact:

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by Derek »

**edit

Since this is turning into a political pi$$ match, I'm going to remove my 2 cents.
Last edited by Derek on Mon Aug 20, 2012 1:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
CHWitte
Posts: 281
Joined: 8/6/2008
14ers: 58 
13ers: 26
Trip Reports (13)
 

Re: 14'er Climbing Fees Might Be Considered

Post by CHWitte »

Hungry Jack wrote:We should be able to discuss this issue (14er fees) without getting into the sweeping generalizations of how each party might approach this issue. On the list of things that dominate our two-party discourse (I am being generous in describing what occurs in the media) on national issues, public recreation fees fall far, far down the list (even in the taxation debate, recreational user fees would amount to a fraction of a percentage of an infinitesimal amount of a drop in the bucket of what our government takes and spends).

As we have seen here, one's position on paying user fees to offset the cost of caring for public lands does not all along party lines, at least in this small sample. Nor is this notion a "big idea" in the policy spectrum. The big ideas in public recreation were brought forth by Aldo Leopold, Teddy Roosevelt, et al a long time ago. At best, it is an incremental policy that is more operational than fundamental.

So let us forget trying to analyze this issue through the over hyped, over simplified lens of our two-party system, which only serves to make us all dumber by casting false dichotomies on every stupid little issue that might emerge. I would bet that for most of us, our love of the outdoors weighs far more than our allegiance to any party. Let's leave the political baggage at home for a change.
Jack, I wish we could live in a country where everyone got along nicely and politics was just something people had fun with. However, in the current situation we live, politics affects your life. A lot of things are going to change in this country over the next 10 years and quite frankly, we need to make the right changes or we are going to have some major problems. The money my family takes in is important and to have to pay to do what I love in Colorado, is what I see as an unnecessary evil when there are other ways to address the issue. However, as I already stated, if policy is going to be changed or kept the same, it is going to come from Congress which is elected by us, through a very harsh political process.
David R. Witte
CO 14er Finisher: July 2015
Post Reply