[Geysers] Entrance and Backcountry Fee

[seeyellowstone at aol.com]

I'm wondering why no one is complaining about winter use in Yellowstone.  This has truly become for the elite.  It's not possible for a family of 4 to go to Old Faithful in the winter under $400 for the day.  By the way the park does not get to keep 80% of the revenue until they paid Congress the amount the park brought in back in 1996, the park has to pay that first, then they get to keep 80 million.  For example, our of the 3.5 million visitors that came in last year, let's say there were 1 million vehicles (it seemed like it some days), at $25 per car load, that would be $25 million.  The park even advertises that they get to split 2.5 million last year though this program (no where near 20 million), if Congress would keep their hands out of the pot in the first place, Yellowstone and Grand Teton would be splitting over 20 million, and all national parks would be self sustaining, likely without a fee increase.

Jim Holstein
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Webb <caros at xmission.com>
To: Geyser Observation Reports <geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>
Sent: Tue, Nov 25, 2014 5:50 pm
Subject: Re: [Geysers] Entrance and Backcountry Fee


          
    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>        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>              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
                
              
            
            
          
        
      
      
        
_______________________________________________
          Geysers mailing list
          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.			
		
	




_______________________________________________
Geysers mailing list
Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu


 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20141126/1692ed9b/attachment.html>