[Geysers] Entrance and Backcountry Fee

[Karen Webb]

Can I just point out that, in the case of FPP, the parking lot used to 
extend to the north and have the decent, airier, 
I-have-not-just-been-dropped-into-an-oubliette sort of latrine. If an 
environmental impact statement was the cause of either the shrinkage of 
the parking lot or the placement of these blots on the name of humanity, 
I was not aware of it (although that can be said of other things).
Karen Webb

On 11/24/2014 1:35 AM, michellechristine08 at gmail.com wrote:
> There is not an exact plan yet for where the extra revenue will go, 
> but they hope to use a portion of it for gill netting in Yellowstone 
> Lake as well as setting some aside for a rehabilitation fund.
>
> Also, just a note on the parking areas at FPP and Midway. The reason 
> that those parking
> lots are not expanded has nothing to do with funding. Therefore, you 
> should not expect that to be in the plans for extra revenue. Expanding 
> parking areas in protected areas like our national parks is pretty 
> complicated, involving environmental impact statements and other plans 
> that take years to complete. In Yellowstone, you also have to take 
> into account the thermal areas that lie close to those parking lots. 
> If those parking area were being built today, they would never be 
> where they are. They are already too close to thermal areas, so 
> expanding them is out of the question. It stinks, but it is true.
>
> As far as the entrance fee increase goes, the fact is that our 
> national parks need more money. Thankfully, Yellowstone was not 
> impacted too much by the sequester a couple years back (because it is 
> such a popular and large park) but visitor centers all over the nation 
> were closed and important jobs cut. Unless parks get more money, 
> actions like that will become much more common. As was stated earlier, 
> short of changes in federal government funding, there really aren't a 
> lot of other ways to get that extra money. They have to do what they 
> have to do.
>
> For those that are interested, there are days that the national parks 
> allow free entrance. For those that truly cannot afford the entrance 
> fee, I am sure they can plan their trips to coincide with those days, 
> especially if they live within short driving distance. The NPS 
> advertises those days on their website.
>
> Michelle Eide
>
> On Nov 23, 2014, at 6:38 PM, David Prast <davidjprast at gmail.com 
> <mailto:davidjprast at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Having reviewed the minutes if the meeting that were provided, I 
>> noticed there was no mention of the the specific use of the 
>> additional revenue. It would seem there is no interest in a shuttle 
>> system (thank goodness) and the no interest in expanded parking at 
>> Fountain Paint Pots even though the number of automobile parking 
>> spaces was reduced during the last parking lot project. So....what is 
>> the "plan" for the additional revenue? Is there a specific designated 
>> project for the additional revenue?
>>
>> Just wondering,
>>
>> David Prast
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:05 PM, <mmjustus at mmjustus.com 
>> <mailto:mmjustus at mmjustus.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     I disagree wholeheartedly with this, especially for people who
>>     live within a reasonably short drive (say within a tank of gas)
>>     and make trips to the park on a shoestring.  Or who have to save
>>     pennies to make trips to the national parks.  Every dollar
>>     counts.  This is how I visit national parks, and I will tell you
>>     that yes, doubling the entrance fee would make a huge difference
>>     to people like me.  And there are a lot more of us than those
>>     making this argument seem to think there are.
>>     Meg Justus
>>
>>     I agree with Ben.  The cost is a real bargain---Disneyland and
>>     Disney World charge $100 per day.  It seems to me highly unlikely
>>     that the small rise in entrance fee would prevent any but the
>>     most casual potential visitor from coming, considering the cost
>>     of travel and other expenses.
>>
>>     Ralph Taylor
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Geysers mailing list
>>     Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu <mailto:Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>
>>     
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geysers mailing list
>> Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu <mailto:Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>
>> 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geysers mailing list
> Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu
> 



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20141125/0ba14ba4/attachment-0001.html>