NEClimbs.com forum

General => Climbing NOT (Bitch & moan, Politics) => Topic started by: ralbert20 on August 05, 2016, 09:17:07 AM

Title: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: ralbert20 on August 05, 2016, 09:17:07 AM
Not sure if you have all seen this:

http://www.wmur.com/escape-outside/white-mountain-national-forest-proposes-fee-increase/41053688
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 05, 2016, 10:29:39 AM
I have NEVER paid the fee and NEVER will. The money does not stay in NH for use here, it just goes into the coffers of the USFS. I already give the government way to much of my money and many federal judges consider the fee an unconstitutional tax and refuse to enforce the fine for non-payment! You ever wonder why they give warnings in NH that say they have your plate number and if you don't pay you will get a $100 ticket for non-payment but they never give out an actual ticket?

I have used many of those warnings as a fire starter!
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 05, 2016, 11:43:56 AM
Thank you DaveR.

Pay to park on OUR (the peoples) land.

FUCK THAT
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: NEAlpineStart on August 06, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
I don't think it's just for parking

"Ninety five percent of the revenue collected at recreation fee sites remains on the forest to operate, maintain and improve the facilities and recreation programs.

Fees are used to maintain day-use sites including trash pickup, septic pumping, painting, and cleaning and to address the backlog of deferred maintenance.

The money is also used to conduct patrols and maintain trails, shelters and campsites, and to assist visitors with information and education services such as Leave No Trace and hikeSafe."

So... I'm not trying to take a side here but is the feeling our tax dollars should be better earmarked to address these needs instead? I could be on board with that.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nick Grant on August 07, 2016, 09:25:11 PM
Is this White Mountain National Forest thread going to turn into a Trump rally or a survivalist/militia manifesto?
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: pappy on August 08, 2016, 09:31:29 AM
I have NEVER paid the fee and NEVER will. The money does not stay in NH for use here, it just goes into the coffers of the USFS. I already give the government way to much of my money and many federal judges consider the fee an unconstitutional tax and refuse to enforce the fine for non-payment! You ever wonder why they give warnings in NH that say they have your plate number and if you don't pay you will get a $100 ticket for non-payment but they never give out an actual ticket?

I have used many of those warnings as a fire starter!
I agree wholeheartedly, but would point out that a number of years ago ('01?) I did receive a $25 ticket at the Whitesides parking lot, and when I ignored it they were aggressive about pursuing the matter. Maybe I just didn't know to fight it.

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on August 08, 2016, 02:15:46 PM
According to the reports 80-95% of the fees stay local, developing the infrastructure we all enjoy and use. Where do you think all the new maintenance cost at Rumney alone come from?

www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd513434.pdf

But then, some people wants to live in Trumpland and some do not.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: z.st.jules on August 08, 2016, 05:02:43 PM
How about an alternative where you can volunteer a few days a year and that opts you out of having to pay the fees...
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on August 08, 2016, 05:06:56 PM
How about an alternative where you can volunteer a few days a year and that opts you out of having to pay the fees...

I like that idea. Everyone volunteering should get a year pass.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DGoguen on August 08, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
I have NEVER paid the fee and NEVER will. ...in NH that say they have your plate number and if you don't pay you will get a $100 ticket for non-payment but they never give out an actual ticket?

I agree my taxes should be enough but a couple of years ago I got a very real ticket for $100 at Sugarloaf and a very real summons.
I sent them a very real check.:D
I guess I wasn't up to going to court and looking like " My Cousin Vinny"



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 08, 2016, 10:34:00 PM
NEVER park where there is signage. Just move up the road from the pay lot and get your wheels off the pavement. Then tell 'em to pound salt.

The land we are talking about belongs to us. NOT some goddamn gov't agency.

Did you ever think that the parking fee creates a job? Cause that's what it does. Government parking attendants.

Something is painfully wrong with this. 
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 08, 2016, 10:34:37 PM
These things from the time I was born many years ago until very recently were paid for in our taxes. Now they take OUR tax money and spend it on bullshit or give it away and then tell me I have to pay more to use the land that belongs to ME. Let's take all the US dollars that were just changed to foreign currencies and secretly shipped to Iran and use it HERE!

As far as Rumney goes, most of what you enjoy came from private citizens and NOT the government. That includes most of the original parking lot and the trails.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 08, 2016, 10:36:45 PM
NEVER park where there is signage. Just move up the road from the pay lot and get your wheels off the pavement. Then tell 'em to pound salt.

The land we are talking about belongs to us. NOT some goddamn gov't agency.

Did you ever think that the parking fee creates a job? Cause that's what it does. Government parking attendants.

Something is painfully wrong with this.

A+++
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 08, 2016, 10:37:47 PM
I have NEVER paid the fee and NEVER will. ...in NH that say they have your plate number and if you don't pay you will get a $100 ticket for non-payment but they never give out an actual ticket?

I agree my taxes should be enough but a couple of years ago I got a very real ticket for $100 at Sugarloaf and a very real summons.
I sent them a very real check.:D
I guess I wasn't up to going to court and looking like " My Cousin Vinny"



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I now know my first ticket holder!
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: eyebolter on August 09, 2016, 06:26:01 AM
I don't like the fees, but they surely have legitimized climbing at a place like Rumney. There is too much money being made for them to prohibit climbing now.

And I agree the land is ours in principal.  Just like I own my own house, lol, as long as I give the town eleven bucks and change every day of the year.  Stop paying your property taxes and you will find out who owns "your" house.....
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nick Grant on August 09, 2016, 09:34:55 PM
 "Let's take all the US dollars that were just changed to foreign currencies and secretly shipped to Iran and use it HERE!"

HUH?   "LL crazy talk."
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 09, 2016, 10:00:53 PM
I don't like the fees, but they surely have legitimized climbing at a place like Rumney. There is too much money being made for them to prohibit climbing now.

And I agree the land is ours in principal.  Just like I own my own house, lol, as long as I give the town eleven bucks and change every day of the year.  Stop paying your property taxes and you will find out who owns "your" house.....
100% true.

As egregious the concept of "property tax" is, you must admit that a "parking tax" (cause that's what it is peeps), is OVER THE TOP.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 09, 2016, 10:26:27 PM
I don't think it's just for parking

"Ninety five percent of the revenue collected at recreation fee sites remains on the forest to operate, maintain and improve the facilities and recreation programs.

Fees are used to maintain day-use sites including trash pickup, septic pumping, painting, and cleaning and to address the backlog of deferred maintenance.

The money is also used to conduct patrols and maintain trails, shelters and campsites, and to assist visitors with information and education services such as Leave No Trace and hikeSafe."

So... I'm not trying to take a side here but is the feeling our tax dollars should be better earmarked to address these needs instead? I could be on board with that.

One would think that the common land- like the WMNF, would be maintained by common monies. Long before any common tax revenues are siphoned away to god knows what (actually I've got a damn good idea where it goes but that's another thread). It's the same with infrastructure in general (bridges, roads, etc.) Should be first and foremost IMO. I have spent the last 30 years walking all over the White Mtns and pick up and carry out whatever litter I come across. That's my contribution to this area and I'm glad to do it (although I will shove it up the ass of the MF'r I see littering). There is NO WAY some freedom encroaching gov't agency, because it is poorly funded from its own bumbling beauracracy, has ANY RIGHT to chisel yet another $20, $30, $40 TAX to park my vehicle on MY land. Again, FUCK THAT.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on August 09, 2016, 11:58:24 PM
Just curious, what other taxes do you feel like not paying and simply skipping? Sales tax, property tax, income tax, gas tax? At the gas station you pay only $1 per gallon and drive away? At the restaurant you pay the price on the menu and run away? or you just skip the ones you can get away with?

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 10, 2016, 07:24:19 AM
"Let's take all the US dollars that were just changed to foreign currencies and secretly shipped to Iran and use it HERE!"

HUH?   "LL crazy talk."
LL CRAZY

Nick, Making that statement just tells me you are out to lunch and have little idea whats going on in your own country! I guess you don't get radio or TV where you live seeing that has been a major story over the last week! Pay attention to what your government is doing my son. That money shipped to Iran would pay for alot of stuff. Below is a link to two of hundreds of articles.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-cash-iran-hostages-232100146.html?ref=gs

http://nypost.com/2016/08/05/hostage-we-waited-for-2nd-plane-to-land-in-iran-before-leaving/

The money was converted to other currencies because it is illegal to ship US currency to Iran.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 10, 2016, 07:35:19 AM
One would think that the common land- like the WMNF, would be maintained by common monies. Long before any common tax revenues are siphoned away to god knows what (actually I've got a damn good idea where it goes but that's another thread). It's the same with infrastructure in general (bridges, roads, etc.) Should be first and foremost IMO. I have spent the last 30 years walking all over the White Mtns and pick up and carry out whatever litter I come across. That's my contribution to this area and I'm glad to do it (although I will shove it up the ass of the MF'r I see littering). There is NO WAY some freedom encroaching gov't agency, because it is poorly funded from its own bumbling beauracracy, has ANY RIGHT to chisel yet another $20, $30, $40 TAX to park my vehicle on MY land. Again, FUCK THAT.
A++
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: grubbers on August 10, 2016, 10:29:25 AM
Am I the only one who thinks that $20-30 a year isn't that big of a deal? I'm not crazy about paying taxes, but I do it anyway. Go live in Somalia if you want to live tax-free.

I'm just thankful that the government isn't selling off the public lands (like some states want to do) to private entities who could either shut off access or potentially charge vastly more to recreate on their property.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nick Grant on August 10, 2016, 10:47:48 AM
Believe it or not, not everything that Donald Trump says is true. 

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/08/03/business/ap-us-campaign-2016-iran-fact-check.html?_r=0
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 10, 2016, 11:30:01 AM
Believe it or not, not everything that Donald Trump says is true. 

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/08/03/business/ap-us-campaign-2016-iran-fact-check.html?_r=0

This has nothing to do with Trump, he is an idiot.

FACT: 400 million was changed from US currency to other currencies and then transferred to Iran. Obama admitted to the transfer, the only question is why it was done!


Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 10, 2016, 11:31:32 AM
Just curious, what other taxes do you feel like not paying and simply skipping? Sales tax, property tax, income tax, gas tax? At the gas station you pay only $1 per gallon and drive away? At the restaurant you pay the price on the menu and run away? or you just skip the ones you can get away with?
What other taxes do I skip because I don't feel like paying? That's implying that I'm dishonest. I've got too much integrity to tell you what I really think of your leading questions.
Ahhh... the benefits of living in NH: Sales tax? Nope. Income Tax? Nope. 
Perhaps there's a reason that judges are not enforcing this parking tax. Did you think it might be because it's illegal? Educate yourself.
You prefer being an uninformed sheeple, that's unfortunate, but hey, it's OK with me. Just don't dare imply that I'm dishonest.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 11, 2016, 03:21:54 PM
Am I the only one who thinks that $20-30 a year isn't that big of a deal? I'm not crazy about paying taxes, but I do it anyway. Go live in Somalia if you want to live tax-free.

I'm just thankful that the government isn't selling off the public lands (like some states want to do) to private entities who could either shut off access or potentially charge vastly more to recreate on their property.

Your "thankful" that the gov't isn't selling off OUR- that's yours and mine, land? Again, your thankful? Gonna just follow along huh? (baah baah) Seems a rather pussified stance on the matter IMO. Why don't you write a letter to a congress critter and actually DO SOMETHING about it.

And sure, $20 /yr is no big deal right? Of course not. Just add it to the multitude of taxes, fees, registrations, etc.etc.etc. (ad nauseum). Do you know there was/is proposed legislation in Maryland to charge (tax) homeowners for the amount of rain water that lands on their property? Where does it end? Just so these scum bag politicians can keep on rolling along.

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nemesis on August 11, 2016, 09:18:55 PM
Just curious, what other taxes do you feel like not paying and simply skipping? Sales tax, property tax, income tax, gas tax? At the gas station you pay only $1 per gallon and drive away? At the restaurant you pay the price on the menu and run away? or you just skip the ones you can get away with?

Everyone cheats the tax man.   
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 12, 2016, 08:15:51 AM
Just curious, what other taxes do you feel like not paying and simply skipping? Sales tax, property tax, income tax, gas tax? At the gas station you pay only $1 per gallon and drive away? At the restaurant you pay the price on the menu and run away? or you just skip the ones you can get away with?

Everyone cheats the tax man.

Everyone? Don't think so. More accurately, know so.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nick Grant on August 12, 2016, 08:22:39 AM
"In this world, nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes."

—Ben Franklin, 1789
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 12, 2016, 09:16:22 AM
"In this world, nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes."

—Ben Franklin, 1789

Very true. Now please explain how an illegal tax fits into that statement.

And here I thought climbers embraced freedom. Guess I was wrong.

Some of you seem to have forgotten basic civics and that pesky little document called the Constitution.

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: frik on August 12, 2016, 10:00:32 AM
I really really hate the fee, and go out of my way to try to not ever pay it. But I'm not sure why you think it's illegal. Anyone can walk into any designated fee area without having to pay.... so we can still enter "our" land without paying. We're only required to pay, if we are parking a car....so if the FS re-named it to "parking fee" would that make it "legal"?

I'm not a lawyer, but my dad used to watch Perry Mason... so I'm as qualified as anyone else to ask this: Has there been a recent* case; in which someone refused to pay the ticket (for not paying the fee), they went to court, and the  judge dismissed the case?  I'm really curious to know, because the free legal advice you are dispensing can become pretty expensive if the answer is crickets.

 * I'm pretty sure, when the fee was initially implemented, the wording on the pass implied that paying the fee was voluntary -and a case was dismissed because of that. However that was a while ago and the wording has long since been changed.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 12, 2016, 10:58:30 AM
What I'm telling you is that by NOT parking in any signed area, you can LEGALLY park along any road in the WMNF (as long as there is no sign prohibiting the spot you want to park in). As long as your wheels are off the pavement.

That said, doesn't it seem highly suspect that your $20 "fee" is being used to hire gov't parking attendants? And why is any roadside "legal" to park in, but certain parking lots are not?
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: pappy on August 12, 2016, 12:06:30 PM
Only Congress can implement a tax, and they can tax any damn thing they want as long as it is applied equally within the targeted group. I doubt they passed this specifically as a tax. However, I'm sure they have authorized various units in the Executive to implement reasonable user fees. (BTW, the increasing tendency of Congress to delegate lawmaking powers specifically given to it in the Constitution to the Executive is contributing greatly to the erosion of our freedoms and the unconstitutional actions of the current administration, not that I would expect many or any of you to give a sh*t--most don't.) But that's where this gets squishy. A user fee should be targeted to maintain the specific facility being used, i.e. the parking area. Therefore, it should be limited to an amount that would raise enough revenue to maintain the parking area, and no more. It should not be available to do all this other wonderful maintenance work  they tout, because as Ken points out  as a fee it is not applied equitably--if I park outside the parking lot then I get to use the facilities, trails, shelters, etc. without paying for it.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: frik on August 12, 2016, 12:16:49 PM
Sorry, i thought you had implied that the fee was illegal... even if it was called a "parking tax". Also that it wasn't being enforced -at least not by the courts.

Most - not all, fee lots have an outhouse of some sort, which is probably how the FS tries to justify it.  For the fee areas that don't have any facilities, my guess is the FS figures they are popular enough that it's worth their time to check - think the Greely pond/Osceola trail head off the Kank....

A better question to ask is; How come they don't have this fee out west?
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 12, 2016, 12:30:53 PM
A better question to ask is; How come they don't have this fee out west?

I have recently seen this out west also.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: frik on August 12, 2016, 12:31:58 PM
So here is a serious question: Does the Department of the Interior need congress, if they want to raise the campsite fees in Yosemite?

Another actual serious question: Are all those hundreds of cars that are parked along rt 3 at the Lafayette trail head in Franconia notch every weekend obliged to have a pass? The fee lots are full, the overflow ends up parking on the side of the road.... What's their legal situation?
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 12, 2016, 01:40:54 PM
So here is a serious question: Does the Department of the Interior need congress, if they want to raise the campsite fees in Yosemite?

Another actual serious question: Are all those hundreds of cars that are parked along rt 3 at the Lafayette trail head in Franconia notch every weekend obliged to have a pass? The fee lots are full, the overflow ends up parking on the side of the road.... What's their legal situation?

Not sure about the first question.

I asked that question of a ranger once and was told they were also responsible for the "USE FEE" he never called it a parking fee and made it quite clear it was a fee for the use of the forest that "all visitors to the forest with a vehicle must pay."
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: slink on August 12, 2016, 01:50:27 PM
Do you pay at the Lafayette trail head?  I thought that was a NH state park? You really shouldn't have to pay a federal fee for state lands. Just saying.  I get a free pass every year so I have no real beef in this fight. I also got one of those official tickets and payed the fine it says that you can have a war rent placed for non payment. Official enough for me.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: pappy on August 12, 2016, 03:11:54 PM
So here is a serious question: Does the Department of the Interior need congress, if they want to raise the campsite fees in Yosemite?

Another actual serious question: Are all those hundreds of cars that are parked along rt 3 at the Lafayette trail head in Franconia notch every weekend obliged to have a pass? The fee lots are full, the overflow ends up parking on the side of the road.... What's their legal situation?

As to the Yosemite question, the campsite fee is a user fee. If they can show an increase is needed to maintain the campground they can do it, although I think Congress built in comment periods, etc. Not that they pay much attention to that sort of thing anymore.

Don't see how they can collect the fee from someone parked by the highway. They may have just parked the car there and aren't even in the forest. Furthermore, if you are collecting money just from those who came to the forest by vehicle rather than collecting from everyone who uses the resource then it is a tax, not a user fee. If you are doing so in order to raise general revenue for your budget rather than targeted at the specific resource being used then it is a tax, not a user fee. It should be obvious why it would be a horrible and thoroughly un-Constitutional idea for a government agency to be able to just conjure up a new 'fee' any time they wanted to raise money for their budget, just a little bit less horrible than a government employee being able to seize the cash you're carrying simply because they think you have more than you 'should' have for legal purposes, and then using the proceeds to make their budget. Oh wait, they do that.

'I'm proud to be an American,
Where at least I think I'm free....' cough, cough
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: frik on August 12, 2016, 04:58:38 PM
Good catch slink - i should have known that. Dave regardless of what the ranger called it or said about it, obviously not all visitors to the forest with a car have to pay. The Scookumchuck lot, among others is still free, although maybe it won't be by the end of the week.
Quote
all visitors to the forest with a vehicle must pay.

 but it's not for parking.... fking Orwell!

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on August 12, 2016, 05:12:19 PM
If you read the document originally linked there are two paragraphs of interest to the discussion:

"Ninety five percent of the revenue collected at recreation fee sites remains on the Forest to operate, maintain and improve the facilities and recreation programs.  Fees are used to maintain day-use sites including trash pickup, septic pumping, painting, and cleaning, and to address the backlog of deferred maintenance, conduct patrols and maintain highly used trails, shelters, and campsites, and to assist visitors with information and education services such as Leave No Trace and hikeSafe."

and

"In 2004, Congress passed the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act which allows the Forest Service to retain funds collected at certain recreation sites and use these funds locally to operate and maintain and improve these sites. Before the Forest Service received the authority to retain funds locally, all fees collected by the Forest Service went to the national treasury."

Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on August 12, 2016, 09:02:51 PM
So here is a serious question: Does the Department of the Interior need congress, if they want to raise the campsite fees in Yosemite?

Another actual serious question: Are all those hundreds of cars that are parked along rt 3 at the Lafayette trail head in Franconia notch every weekend obliged to have a pass? The fee lots are full, the overflow ends up parking on the side of the road.... What's their legal situation?

As to the Yosemite question, the campsite fee is a user fee. If they can show an increase is needed to maintain the campground they can do it, although I think Congress built in comment periods, etc. Not that they pay much attention to that sort of thing anymore.

Don't see how they can collect the fee from someone parked by the highway. They may have just parked the car there and aren't even in the forest. Furthermore, if you are collecting money just from those who came to the forest by vehicle rather than collecting from everyone who uses the resource then it is a tax, not a user fee. If you are doing so in order to raise general revenue for your budget rather than targeted at the specific resource being used then it is a tax, not a user fee. It should be obvious why it would be a horrible and thoroughly un-Constitutional idea for a government agency to be able to just conjure up a new 'fee' any time they wanted to raise money for their budget, just a little bit less horrible than a government employee being able to seize the cash you're carrying simply because they think you have more than you 'should' have for legal purposes, and then using the proceeds to make their budget. Oh wait, they do that.

'I'm proud to be an American,
Where at least I think I'm free....' cough, cough

Pappy,
If you go to the WMNF web site it is called a "recreation fee" and does not have one fucking thing to do with parking. It is pay to play on land that belongs to me. The way it is worded anyone who uses an area that a recreation fee has been approved for must pay the fee. They just go after drivers because they have a way to get you if you don't pay. "Most White Mountain National Forest lands are open and free of charge for your use and enjoyment.  Certain developed sites require payment of a recreation fee authorized via the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act."

I just renewed my drivers license so all those warning I have got at Rumney don't mean shit! We have your plate number and if you don't pay by the end of the day...blah, blah, blah. I suspect they are not real strict with enforcement because way back when this fee first started a judge in the US District court in Concord declared it unconstitutional and vowed that he would throw out any tickets that he had the chance to. I don't even know if he is still on the bench. There must be a lawyer on this board that would know how to find his decision.

FEE, BULLSHIT!! A tax by any other name is still a tax and I will not pay a tax that has not been voted on by my elected representatives.

Oh and by the way Pappy, forget the Constitution! It's old and outdated like you and me. :P

http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/whitemountain/passes-permits/recreation
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: kenreville on August 12, 2016, 10:25:30 PM
"A tax by any other name is still a tax and I will not pay a tax that has not been voted on by my elected representatives."

Yhup.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Admin Al on August 18, 2016, 12:17:36 PM
As far as Rumney goes, most of what you enjoy came from private citizens and NOT the government. That includes most of the original parking lot and the trails.

really??? looks like most of the newer stuff came via the FS.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: ed_esmond on August 19, 2016, 10:09:32 PM
As far as Rumney goes, most of what you enjoy came from private citizens and NOT the government. That includes most of the original parking lot and the trails.

really??? looks like most of the newer stuff came via the FS.

I think some of the "newer" stuff from the USFS is actually very nice. I really like the long staircase up to the main cliff area, but think much of the newer stuff they've done sucks....

They started and never finished (even though they had a lot of free climber labor) a series of steps going up to the New Wave area.  It sat, unfinished for over a year before Chris Smith spent an afternoon fixing it. 

Their latest work by the small parking lot is embarrassing. These guys are obviously professional, so the workmanship is fine, but the results are pointless.  Apparently, there was a pile of pressure treated timbers (left over from their aborted attempt to build the New Wave steps.). These were used to make a series of steps close to the parking lot where none were actually needed.  What's the point in doing high quality, craftman-like work, fixing something that didn't need fixing?  There are a lot of other areas that actually could use their professional skills and expertise.

I know that Dave Quinn has been busy doing some other trail work further up the mountain as has Chris Smith and Mark Sprague (I'm sure others have been involved, but don't recall the exact details.)

Personally, I've stopped contributing to this sort of work as I just don't the time and energy as I previously had to spare.  I'm hoping there is a "new generation" of Rumney "locals"  who will take up the burden and carry it into the future.  It's time to give Smitty, Dave, et al a deserved rest....

Also, I do find it a bit ironic to hear people who I've never seen actually do any trail work complain or take credit for what has been accomplished in the past.

ed "Yes, I pay the 'fee,' and think of it as a bribe to keep them from bothering me..." e



Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Nick Grant on August 19, 2016, 10:46:47 PM
Ed, thanks for explaining why those steps to the New Wave were in limbo for so long.  Mystery solved.  And thank you, Chris, for completing the project.  (As a side note, Ed, do you really think that "The Little People" at Hinterlands is only a 10a?
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: pappy on August 22, 2016, 07:02:08 PM
Just as a side note, because I'm bored and want to stir up trouble, I climbed the ice at Rumney a good bit BITD ('83-'85), and it never occurred to us to climb the crappy looking rock. (As a side note, we also climbed ice at Farley, and that rock did look nice and we even did a good bit of stuff never recorded, because it never occurred to us that anyone would give a crap).
On reflection, I'm now happy that Rumney is a destination, especially after dealing with all the mindless gym trained idiots in the 'Daks. What the hell is going on, the crowds are nuts (not where I am, just looking at the miles of parked cars. Even Barkeater was a zoo this weekend). It's good to have a place (like Rumney) to concentrate these people, and then tax the shit out of them.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: tradmanclimbz on August 23, 2016, 06:52:30 AM
If your looking at under dog or Armed and dangerous and you do not see a great rout perhaps you don't really have the eye for it ;)
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: eyebolter on August 23, 2016, 07:45:34 PM
Agreed, the Waimea cliff has some of the crappiest rock ever, lol.  Nothing like that quality stone on the Whitney Gilman.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: glen on August 24, 2016, 11:59:49 AM

FACT: 400 million was changed from US currency to other currencies and then transferred to Iran. Obama admitted to the transfer, the only question is why it was done!

It was done because we owed them the money. Iran paid 400M for fighter jets.  The money was held in trust, and the arms deal was signed, but then the revolution happened.  The planes were never delivered and the U.S. has been sitting on the money ever since.  The U.S. owed Iran the 400M plus interest.  Iran had sought a much larger restitution in international court. 

Iran didn't demand ransom for release of hostages. They've been fighting in international court to get their money back for decades. The U.S. did use the money it owed as leverage settling negotiations with Iran.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: steve weitzler on September 07, 2016, 11:28:09 AM
I just pay the user fee and go climb and hike. I am just happy to be healthy enough to enjoy the place.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: Admin Al on September 07, 2016, 03:06:18 PM
Agreed, the Waimea cliff has some of the crappiest rock ever, lol.  Nothing like that quality stone on the Whitney Gilman.

LOL...
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: eyebolter on September 07, 2016, 06:20:45 PM
Agreed, the Waimea cliff has some of the crappiest rock ever, lol.  Nothing like that quality stone on the Whitney Gilman.

LOL...

I remember you posted that you had never been there Al, you should at least hike up and look at it, then maybe do Junco and Lonesome Dove on the Jimmy Cliff above.  Waimea has the best rock in New Hampshire IMHO......
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: CLemay on September 08, 2016, 05:39:01 PM
Dave, where have you seen this out west? Curious...

A better question to ask is; How come they don't have this fee out west?

I have recently seen this out west also.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on September 08, 2016, 06:15:57 PM
Dave, where have you seen this out west? Curious...

All the places around Sedona for example. Very similar to the white mountains one.  It has been like that for some time:

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/coconino/recreation/?cid=stelprdb5416207
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: DaveR on September 09, 2016, 05:50:41 AM
Dave, where have you seen this out west? Curious...

All the places around Sedona for example. Very similar to the white mountains one.  It has been like that for some time:

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/coconino/recreation/?cid=stelprdb5416207

I have also seen this in the Sierras and assumed it was a national thing but based on your comment Chris it seems to be a local thing. When I think about it, I did not pay those fees in Colorado.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: frik on September 09, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
Been to the sierras, Colo, Wyoming in the last 10 years or so and never saw a fee area. Not saying they don't exist, i haven't seen one or heard of one until the link to the Cococino. I just think congress shafted the North east because -well why not; fuk libruls. That and the folks out west wouldn't have put up with it.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on September 09, 2016, 10:31:53 AM
It's actually quite common out west. Here is for example another one that works like the white mountains (for Oregon/Washington):

http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/r6/passes-permits/recreation

And also, most national parks do charge it too. No difference there. I personally like getting the annual national pass which is valid at all national parks and forest services like white mountains and all the places out west that has the same system.
Title: Re: $3-$5 for Forest passes
Post by: rbirk on September 09, 2016, 01:12:19 PM
Southern Californa is especially of interest to this thread. They also have a similar fee to the white mountains (and call it Adventure Pass):

http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/r5/passes-permits/recreation

But of interest is this recent court settlement:

http://www.keyt.com/news/adventure-pass-compromise-reached/40465932