Just to raise awareness of the intent of the forest service to implement fees for developed recreation sites. The proposed fee structure is not entirely transparent or clear though it appears that the new fees will be entirely separate from the a forest service pass which will also has a proposed fee increase. The latter apparently will continue to honor the interagency access pass, but I anticipate that the developed site will not. It is also not entirely clear whether developed sites are each separate fees or whether one fee will cover all the developed sites in a forest/region/state etc. I expect maybe each site separate to maximize and target fees, but seems like a administrative nightmare to me. Now also think that this is occurring across country, and how many fees you must identify and pay if you travel across forests and states etc. Ultimately, one might anticipate this is first step down pathway of having developed sites managed by private consessionaires, and we have seen how well that works at Pineview and Tony Grove up Logan Canyon and others.
https://usfs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSer...cf5bc83fd8
(07-31-2022, 06:54 PM)smokepoles Wrote: [ -> ]Just to raise awareness of the intent of the forest service to implement fees for developed recreation sites. The proposed fee structure is not entirely transparent or clear though it appears that the new fees will be entirely separate from the a forest service pass which will also has a proposed fee increase. The latter apparently will continue to honor the interagency access pass, but I anticipate that the developed site will not. It is also not entirely clear whether developed sites are each separate fees or whether one fee will cover all the developed sites in a forest/region/state etc. I expect maybe each site separate to maximize and target fees, but seems like a administrative nightmare to me. Now also think that this is occurring across country, and how many fees you must identify and pay if you travel across forests and states etc. Ultimately, one might anticipate this is first step down pathway of having developed sites managed by private consessionaires, and we have seen how well that works at Pineview and Tony Grove up Logan Canyon and others.
https://usfs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSer...cf5bc83fd8
Thanks for the information.
It's interesting that the forest service is taking over the management at Strawberry again.
"It's interesting that the forest service is taking over the management at Strawberry again."
Source please.
Guess that did not work. Try beside where it says Introduction in orange, it says Unita-Wasatch-Cache, click on that.
Lots of new fee increases at every access point.
(07-31-2022, 09:09 PM)smokepoles Wrote: [ -> ]Here is a printed list of sites and fees, perhaps preferable to the map:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOC...041915.pdf
Wow, looks like they are trying to get a lot of pay back for all the years they did not charge anything but to go from $0 for camping to $100, seems a bit exstream, hope those outragous prices don't go through.
It looks like they are only proposing taking over five locations at Strawberry.
Chicken Creek East
Chicken Creek West
The Ladders
Haws Point
Mud Creek
It sounds the concessioner will still have the remaining areas.
Go figure.
(07-31-2022, 08:34 PM)kentofnsl Wrote: [ -> ]"It's interesting that the forest service is taking over the management at Strawberry again."
Source please.
Read the link to the Forest Service site that was provided.
Mud creek has been a fee area for awhile. Those others have not been fee areas.
I spoke with a member of the forest service recreation staff regarding the fee for the developed sites. She admitted that the info available is not entirely adequate and that they are working on new press releases and info on their web site etc. She also said that a single pass (to be sold by the forest service) will cover the fee at all developed sites in the specific forest and that the America the Beautifull Interagency pass (national parks etc) will also be accepted at the sites. Guess I wll be covered since I have a lifetime senior interagency pass except for possibly some sites run by concessionaires which she admitted can vary all over the lace in how things are run.
Anyway, those were my takeaways and keep an eye out for official updates from the forest service.
(08-06-2022, 03:05 PM)smokepoles Wrote: [ -> ]Guess I wll be covered since I have a lifetime senior interagency pass except for possibly some sites run by concessionaires which she admitted can vary all over the lace in how things are run.
Yep! I have one of those life time passes and they work almost everywhere. They don't work at Mt Rushmore and they don't work when a concessionair is managing the facility.
Anything the USFS touches is a joke. Typical federal mismanagement. My two cents gained from decades of watching them mismanage the national forests from fire prevention to grazing rights. Why anyone would expect them to suddenly grow brain cells is beyond me. Bless their hearts.