Utah state parks pass increase

[RonPaulFan]

Wow RonPaulFan.  Where do you expect the funds to come from to pay for the needed expenses to run the state parks?  I own my boat, but that doesn't mean I don't have to pay to own and to use it.

Listen to the audio file that is linked. They say: "It takes money to make money." That's going FAR BEYOND running the state parks! That is running us as a cash cow. The state parks are run now. They want to do more -- a lot more -- listen to the audio file and hear it for yourself.

A lady once exclaimed to me regarding, "needed" tax increases, that government waters the trees in the forest.  Really, that is the example she gave me!  She loves trees.  I said there is no sprinkler system and no watering of trees in the forest except for rain which has been occurring thousands of years before our government existed.  She seemed surprised that the government doesn't do everything.  I asked her how there were trees before we even discovered the continent?  She looked bewildered as if she had never thought of that.

Did you read the context of my opposition to more services and more fees to pay for it?  The links are to conversations we had right here in Big Fish Tackle and remain just a click away for your reading. Sand Hollow cost so much for a spot in the sand that it is almost as much as a motel in the city with lots of amenities.

It's also not just about the cost.  The cost will deter the recreational use of our lands for a lot of people even if it isn't you.  That brings in to the Utah economy a lot of money that is much more than the government collects.  The sporting goods stores, outdoor clothing, boats, fishing gear, motels, tourism ... (long list).  It kills the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Raise fees and that reduces revenue.  It's the classic politics of the day.

We can't tax ourselves into prosperity.  I know a lot of people believe that.  It's the same issue on a much broader scale.  You might get a better sense of my perspective by reading my comment on to a news article at this link: (open comments and find the one with my name) (another reason to read my comment there is it would be humorous IF it weren't so very true)
https://www.ksl.com/article/46764317/bid...ice-others

The other (current news) article is about crowding people into a small open campground and the thousands of acres of our land are closed to us.  Ironically, this crowding is due to the dangers of the spread of the virus, but spreading out in the outdoors would be a much better idea.  Just how much do you want the government to manage YOU at our State Parks?  That's the main expense -- managing what doesn't need to be managed and for the purpose of more fees.  Without increasing management and creating government-run business competition with free enterprise (yep, that's in the audio file and worth listening to it), I guarantee the water in the reservoirs will still be wet and enjoyable.

Without their fancy campgrounds, I would have much better places that I could camp and would camp where I fish.  They find ways to prevent that enjoyment, so they can force us to pay their overpriced camping fees in crowded campgrounds.  To me, that doesn't even fit the definition of camping nor is it the desired outdoor recreational camping and fishing experience.

Read some of the links to conversations right here in Big Fish Tackle to get the context.  You can also reply to old posts. 

Ronald   

---

Yes, the parks are ours. Which implies that we are responsible for maintenance and upkeep. In lieu of requiring a certain number of work hours spent doing that, your alternative is to chip in to pay somebody else to do it. What part of that do people not understand?

Great, Rocky!  Accepting your premise that higher fees and more "maintenance and upkeep" is good, where do you draw the line?

If you listen to the audio file, you will hear that they are intending to do a lot more than maintenance and upkeep.  They already do that, they are going into business with a "takes money to make money" concept to compete with business.

Perhaps you didn't get that part.

Perhaps you did and you like it.  But, where do you draw the line?  They are proposing double the fees.  If that's so good wouldn't ten times the fees be better?  Just think how much they can do with $1500 a year for the annual pass.

Also, consider the unintended consequences of it collapsing revenue from taxing the now billions of dollars of profits of the Utah recreational economy which will drop off substantially when fewer people use our parks due to greater fees.  It's not as simplistic as more fees mean more money.