Re: National Parks pass fee increase

From the Fresno Bee:
By Marek Warszawski / The Fresno Bee12/20/06 03:58:28


Starting next month, central San Joaquin Valley residents will be digging deeper into their wallets to visit national parks and forests.

Federal officials this month unveiled a new interagency pass program that will give holders access to not only Yosemite and Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks but also fee areas on most public lands, including national forests.

The pass is called the "America the Beautiful — National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass" and goes on sale Jan. 1. It will cost $80 and can be used for one year from the date of purchase.

The America the Beautiful Pass will become the only annual pass accepted at national parks and other federal land agencies, replacing both the National Parks Pass ($50) and Golden Eagle Pass ($65). Existing passes will remain valid until expired, lost or stolen.

The new pass will cover most, but not all, user fees charged by the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureaus of Land Management and Reclamation.

Link to the article is http://www.fresnobee.com/371/story/19788.html

Who decided this?

I assume a group decision, after thought, the Nat Parks pass and the Golden Eagle are history in favor of a cover-all-bases $80 fee which also expands to national forest fees. I assume this new card will cover the entrance fee to the Minarets/Reds Meadow/Devils Postpile area west of Mammoth east of Yosemite (actually used to be part of the fledgling Yosemite jurisdiction). Not sure of all the implications of this change.

I do know of one implication. I buy the Nat Parks pass, I figure two visits to Yosemite and one to Kings Canyon and I'm good for the 50 bucks ($20, $20, $10) and I most certainly visit those areas more than that. Now with eighty bucks, well geez eighty bucks!

Supposedly this covers BLM areas as well, though I've never paid to visit BLM land.

Anyway, here are several websites I googled, all different points of view:
Montana:
http://www.newwest.net/index.php/topic/article/national_park_fee_media_coverage_sparks_concern_among_agency_reps/C41/L41/

Good story.

Here's another:
Before I give the link might I say this seems slipped under radar to general folks...
http://www.sunvalleyonline.com/news/article.asp?ID_Article=2764

From Lompoc, CA:
http://www.lompocrecord.com/articles/2006/12/11/news/centralcoast/news06.txt

From Casper, WY:
http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2006/12/09/news/wyoming/300b12c2ed75d7628725723e00794e43.txt

I feel left out of this process now that I know about it. Nice effort to keep us OUT of the lands WE OWN.

Vince

You might also want to read the excellent Mt. Whitney portal store web reactions to this here:

http://www.whitneyportalstore.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005394;p=0&r=npwm

I found out about this when I purchased a parks pass for my sister for Christmas. I bought the 2006 pass in Dec 2006, then realized what I really wanted to do was purchase a 2007 pass. When I called, they told me I could return the old one if I wanted, but the 2007 pass would be 80 smackers for the combined pass. I said, no thanks, I'll keep the $50 pass. A parks pass has been a great Christmas gift for us in the past.. Now, $80 is a little cost prohibitive for us (and maybe for others buying one for us!). I know it's all about supporting the parks and lands, so maybe I shouldn't complain. I can't help but think Dubya should be allocating a bit more of the taxpayers money for the parks.

ahem, letterknit..."Dubya" did. Well, at least the proposal is on the table, who knows what the lawmakers will do with this part of it. Here's the article:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-02-04-budget-parks_x.htm

Thanks for the info!