Capitalism had me really feeling free... free from that desire to be free...
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:41 am
- Location: PNW
- Ski style: Telemark
- Favorite Skis: Roosignol Soul 7 skis on powder
- Favorite boots: Crispi
- Occupation: Professionally unemployed (aka retired)
- Website: https://www.clark.wa.gov/sheriff/jail-roster
Thank you for your comment. You should be troubled by this. Charging a fee for the right to access the backcountry is wrong. This is happening too much.Andy M wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:29 pm... I read through the details, and, frankly, I find this very troubling. Perhaps I am overly sensitive since this is initially occurring in Colorado, but all of us should be concerned where this might lead. Although this instance is on private land, in a worst-case scenario, this could potentially lead to fee-oriented backcountry areas in national forest.
Recently, near Bend, Oregon the FS will start charging a $4 to $11 (plus a recreation.gov fee of up to $6 processing fee) a day to access a several wilderness areas nearby. No new services will be provided sans one... a ranger to enforce fees. And here's the best part, you have to reserve your access in advance. So, if there's a snow dump, you should have planned for that in advance. Also, since you may have planned in advance, and made a reservation, if the avalanche conditions are high, how many people may put themselves at risk for this reservation based system.
I have seen this trend develop rapidly for charging special fees for accessing the backcountry. This thread is particularly disturbing. Thanks for posting.
I assume you are talking about Hurricane Ridge. If so, Hurricane Ridge is nothing like what is being proposed in the original post. At Hurricane Ridge, you do have to pay the national park entrance fee, but you do not pay anything additional to recreate, whether it be on skis or snowshoes or on foot.Cannatonic wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:48 pmwe already have MANY lodges and facilities dedicated to BC skiing all over the United States. The nicest one I've seen is a day lodge in Olympic National Park in Washington. Can't remember the exact name of it but you drive way up into the montains to get there...beautiful building and facility surrounded by disneyland of BC skiing. I believe it was a socialist facility i.e. free for all citizens of the realm
The precedent that this "backcountry area for fee" may set is that you may now have to pay to ski at your favorite national forest area, where previously there was no fee, because someone like Bluebird got a permit to "administer" the area. Yes, there are already controversial fees for public lands, e.g., Vail Pass in Colorado (mostly due to backcountry ski vs. snowmobile issues), but this could lead to fees in other areas, because an entity like Bluebird gets a permit for a forest service area that currently has no fees.