Pay to Play?

Pay to Play?

Joined: April 14th, 2005, 2:42 am

May 17th, 2010, 4:36 pm #1

Quote
Like
Share

Rob W
Rob W

May 17th, 2010, 5:44 pm #2

John,
interesting article. I found this article this morning:


http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7000 ... -peak.html
Quote
Share

Joined: April 14th, 2005, 2:42 am

May 17th, 2010, 6:35 pm #3

Interesting.
For me, the idea of spending more money to "improve" a wild area seems false. The major complaints in the article seem to be 1) Lack of roads, and then at the end of the article, 2) The weather.
The monument already has a bunch of roads... but none of them connect, so everything is out-and-back. In other words, if you're not there to see the monument, you're probably not going to bother. I'm not sure how having people drive through (on their way somewhere else) is going to improve it.
And good luck on #2 there!

If you haven't been, go see it. It's a beautiful area with tons of recreational opportunities... and except for the visitor's centers, very quiet. I've been up the mountain a few times, but there's lots more there beyond just the summit. Here's a trip report:
http://www.splattski.com/2008/celebration_08/index.html
Quote
Like
Share

Rob w
Rob w

May 17th, 2010, 7:07 pm #4

How much would you be willing to pay to climb a peak? I suppose dropping $10 every weekend wouldnt hurt too much.

I guess I dont understand. I have never climbed in colorado. Do they really see this much traffic in these areas to merit a fee for upkeep??
Quote
Share

Joined: January 15th, 2008, 6:19 am

May 17th, 2010, 7:14 pm #5

I'm glad I live in Idaho!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 12:35 am

May 17th, 2010, 9:07 pm #6

How much would you be willing to pay to climb a peak? I suppose dropping $10 every weekend wouldnt hurt too much.

I guess I dont understand. I have never climbed in colorado. Do they really see this much traffic in these areas to merit a fee for upkeep??
I think these peaks get a lot of traffic because people can drive to 10,000-12,000 ft. and start climbing. A different kind of climbing than we're used to in Idaho, for sure. I personally think fourteeners are over-rated in general, but that's me.

I'm okay with a user fee (NIMBY disclaimer of course) and as a friend of mine pointed out, it all depends on proper management. What sometimes happens is that other funds are then diverted away from an area with fees. If you move too far toward a fee only approach, then no proactive work is ever done, only reactive as there is no income for something that hasn't yet been established/improved. A little like what our governor has just done to the state parks. If it's supplementary to the budget for the area, it will probably be a benefit to handle the traffic. But if maintenance is axed from the Forest Service budget because they collect fees, good luck with ever getting it back. It could be a slippery slope.
Quote
Like
Share

Dan
Dan

May 18th, 2010, 3:25 pm #7

Sure, there are a few 14ers that are just talus piles with roads and mines on them, but about 1/2 of the 14ers are challenging climbs. These all look pretty bad-ass to me!









Quote
Share

Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 12:35 am

May 18th, 2010, 3:53 pm #8

I think these peaks get a lot of traffic because people can drive to 10,000-12,000 ft. and start climbing. A different kind of climbing than we're used to in Idaho, for sure. I personally think fourteeners are over-rated in general, but that's me.

I'm okay with a user fee (NIMBY disclaimer of course) and as a friend of mine pointed out, it all depends on proper management. What sometimes happens is that other funds are then diverted away from an area with fees. If you move too far toward a fee only approach, then no proactive work is ever done, only reactive as there is no income for something that hasn't yet been established/improved. A little like what our governor has just done to the state parks. If it's supplementary to the budget for the area, it will probably be a benefit to handle the traffic. But if maintenance is axed from the Forest Service budget because they collect fees, good luck with ever getting it back. It could be a slippery slope.
Beautiful pics!
Certainly not over-rated in challenge or beauty, over-rated as in adding fourteeners to a peak list, just for the sake of being fourteeners. For me there is plenty of beauty and challenge below 14,000 ft. in the Northwest, without all the people, or going all the way to Colorado. With that said, Colorado is on our schedule this summer, and I look forward to being impressed.
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 18th, 2010, 4:01 pm #9

john "no crowds" platt seems to spend a lot of time on hood, adams, and rainier which have as many or more people on them than Colorado peaks do. not buyin it..... hypocrisy!
Quote
Share

Joined: March 22nd, 2006, 12:35 am

May 18th, 2010, 4:19 pm #10

I know we're hard to tell apart sometimes, but I'm the short, blond female that has her own opinions and mountains to climb. John is the taller, more experienced male, with his own opinions and peak list. It would be best to redirect your comment to him, as he may or may not enjoy the comradery on the Cascade volcanoes.
Quote
Like
Share


Confirmation of reply: