| Author |
Topic |
PoCo, British Columbia
Canada
216 Posts |
Posted - 10/04/2004 : 11:59 PM
|
This year is the first that I really began hiking in the lower mainland (mostly in the Golden Ears area) and the first time i ran into paying for the fees. Parking now costs $5 for the day, or $50 for the season, but the price for camping has also gone up. I can understand this fee if it goes directly to the maintenance adn upkeep of the park, but over the last summer I have seen very little that has changed from previous years. I may be wrong about this but I dont beleive all fo this money is going back into the parks where it could be used. What are other peoples feelings about this, like I said I am still kind of new to this region and dont have much past experiences to compare the levels of improvment. Has there been an improvment in the parks??
----------------------------------------
Ryan Gray |
|
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
433 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 12:15 AM
|
the government cut the funding from the parks...parking fees are one way to redirect the park's revenue from the general taxpayer to the user of the park...but I highly doubt those parking fee revenues come close to the funding they used to get... I'm no expert on the subject however...just repeating what I heard from some Park Rangers.
----------------------------------------
If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough. |
Edited by - cdanes on 10/05/2004 12:16 AM |
|
|
 Coffee swillin', wine lovin', Owl fearin' Andie McDowell stunt double, who sports retro gear
Vancouver, BC
5466 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 06:14 AM
|
As a broke student, I'm sick of being nickeled and dimed for what used to be a cheap holiday or a free day outing (car camping fees are getting out of control). $5 to park here, $25 to camp there, etc. etc.....it's getting to be more and more "user pay." Our parks should be funded properly by the taxpayer, IMHO, and available for all to enjoy. Next thing you know they'll be charging entrance fees to walk or bike into Stanley Park. Thanks to all those who voted for Gordo.
However, I guess paying user fees is better than letting the parks go to pot (as long as they keep them reasonable, which I don't trust them to do....now it's $5 to park, next year they'll say they are sorry but increasing costs are forcing it up to $7.50, by 2010 it'll be $15....)
I was lucky enough to be in the Rockies during the strike, and so I got three nights free camping at Yoho, park permit fees waived, and no charge to go up the Icefields Parkway, since nobody was staffing those offices. I figure we saved $100, although I must say that if there were no parks staff anywhere ever we'd soon notice the deterioration. |
|
|
|
Coffee swillin', wine lovin', Owl fearin' Andie McDowell stunt double, who sports retro gear
Vancouver, BC
5466 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 06:17 AM
|
| Oh I guess I didn't answer your question....no, I have not seen improvements - we are simply paying for what used to be taxpayer funded. |
|
|
 Grouse Grinding, GPS carrying, lawn chair packing, bike riding North Shore tech addict who stares at Crown Mountain from his office window all day
North Vancouver
Canada
1905 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 09:07 AM
|
I haven't seen any improvements. The $5 goes towards the truck and the wages of the guy coming to empty the box. Its nickel and diming and it just pisses off tourists, I think.
Last Sunday a kind hiker coming down at Cypress Bowl offered us his day parking ticket for $2 instead of the usual $5 from the machine. So hang around the machine for a few minutes, might save a couple of bucks.
|
|
|
parksville, bc
Canada
178 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 10:34 AM
|
| i herd that nexed year you will have to pay to use the outhouse |
|
|
|
map hatin', coffee perc totin', garbage collectin', backpacking, action hero wannabe, who loves to hide out in Garibaldi park and will have his scouts sing if you keep him awake at night
2466 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 10:43 AM
|
I'm probably going to be jumped for this but....$5 isn't really that much money. When we look at the amount of cut backs to our parks, if we want them to maintain the same quality we need to help where we can.
We've lost the interpretive programs, many of the trails are no longer being maintained and the staffing levels of the parks are at an all time low. As an example, Garibaldi Park used to employ 11 fulltime Rangers, now it's 2.
How about paying for the use of the shelters at Red Heather and Elfin. Do you begrude paying for the wood that is provided at Red Heather? How about the small $10fee for the use of the cabin and all the propane provided at Elfin Lakes?
All of these things are a bonus and cost money. Money which is sadly no longer being provided by the gov't. British Columbia has the most amount of land used for park space than any province in Canada. It has the most Provincial Parks. Sadly, to divide the funding between all those seperate parks leaves very little left over.
If it costs me $5/day for the privilege of hiking on maintained trails, the use of campsites, outhouses, shelters, bear caches etc. That is still a very cheap vacation.
----------------------------------------
"It always rains on tents. Rainstorms will travel thousands of miles, against prevailing winds for the opportunity to rain on a tent."
Dave Barry |
Edited by - Marc on 10/05/2004 10:44 AM |
|
|
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
433 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 10:57 AM
|
well said Marc. Also considering how these parks are essentially entertainment for us, the small percentage of the population that is using them...it's unfair to ask the general population to fund these parks for us...when that tax money could be used for more essential services. $5.00 a day is very cheap for a day of fun in the outdoors...and I would gladly pay more if that means more parks will be available for me...
----------------------------------------
If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough. |
|
|
prince george, bc
Canada
226 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 11:14 AM
|
| hey ryan, it's your old pal in p.g. the user fees and parking fees are nothing but a cash grab for the provincial gov't, a way to come up with a surplus. i would really hate to have to pay for parking, 5 bucks a day to park for a hike?! i guess i'm spoiled up here, there isn't one hike i've ever seen around here where you have to pay to park, or pay any user fees (provincial campgrounds excluded). i'm not just talking about parking off old forestry roads either, i'm talking provincial parks, like evanoff and sugarbowl-viking ridge. you guys are definitely getting screwed down there, there's a lot more of you, so there's a lot more money to squeeze from you. paying user fees, no matter how high, will do absolutely nothing to improve our parks, trails, shelters, until provincial funding is restored to pre-Liberal levels...(sorry to get political!) p.s. ryan, i was thinking maybe we could hit up eagle creek again if you came up, bring some crampons, maybe some snowshoes, what do you think???!! |
|
|
|
Coffee swillin', wine lovin', Owl fearin' Andie McDowell stunt double, who sports retro gear
Vancouver, BC
5466 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 8:57 PM
|
Point taken, Marc and Cdanes. I agree $5 isn't that much, but we are still being nickeled and dimed in every way possible, and we can expect more and more of it as we get closer to the Olympics. It's not just the parks, it's everything. I bet they can't keep it down to $5 for very long. Once they've made you open your wallet, they see you as a ready source of cash. Meanwhile they all keep giving themselves raises.
Martin, I've benefitted from the same generosity from strangers out at the parking lots at UBC, and I've passed on that favour to others. I feel less conflicted about ripping off UBC parking than I do in places like provincial parks (while I hate the user fees, I also hate to think of our parks not being looked after). |
|
|
 | Dru
Mountain Grammar Police
|
Sardonic sandbagging scoundrel, Cascade Climbers lobotomized spraymeister, space blanket flyer, new millennium vulgarian betaboy and friend to all squids
Climbing, a mountain
Canada
∞ Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 9:10 PM
|
The parks fee is symptomatic of a government that first and foremost sees parks as a potential source of revenue. Doing everything I can to thwart their fee collection, and encoraging others to do the same, are my own form of protest. We must be having an effect because the revenue stream they are generating is only about 1/2 of what they forecast, according to reports I have seen. Im surprised it is not less given that the machines are so easy to sabotage. I think the one at Murrin Park is broken more often than active, for instance. Not to mention the incident last year where it was ripped out of the ground at night with chains and a powerful vehicle and later thrown in protest on the lawn of the Mayor (who incidentally has no jurisdiction over provincial parks and was totally the wrong person to target).
I see the parks fee as the thin edge of the wedge, with other revenue generating things like Banff-style commercial development, ski lifts, Chief gondolas, resumption of floatplane and heli flights to Garibaldi Lake, following in the wake. |
Edited by - Dru on 10/05/2004 9:16 PM |
|
|
|
double-double seeking, snow-chasing, short-cutting, vertical feet collector
4523 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 9:40 PM
|
Earlier, Martin wrote:
>Last Sunday a kind hiker coming down at Cypress Bowl offered us his day parking ticket for $2 instead of the usual $5 from the machine. So hang around the machine for a few minutes, might save a couple of bucks.
You know, that irritates me more than the initial $5 that one has to pay for parking. The 'kind hiker' used the parking spot, got their hike in.
Kind hiker - give the parking stub away, don't charge for it!
I think that asking for $2 is cheap. Giving the stub away to another person just arriving as one is leaving is plain good karma.
Opinionatedly, C Wall
----------------------------------------
|
|
|
PoCo, British Columbia
Canada
216 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 10:12 PM
|
I didnt originally know that the government slashed the funding to the provincail parks, and that to sustain the parks a fee was implamented. I see everyones points, those for and against, paying $5 to hike for the day doesnt seem like that much but overall I dont think it should be in place. The wilderness used to be something that we could enjoy for free (or thru taxes), this summer I avoided going to those parks that had parking fees whenever I could, or whenever I couldnt afford it, there are tons of parks out there not charging but overall they are not as well kept. Lang22 stated that there were no parking fees for any of the provicial parks around the Prince George area, but on those trails you could hike on a beautiful long weekend and not see anyone, it would cost more to put a ticket booth in there than it would make in 10 years. It was also mentioned that the government is only making about half of what they predicted, they are detering people from using these parks with their fees. I strongly agree with the people that said these prices arent goign to stay this way, they are goign to go up year after year, especially if park attendance is so low, the government will ahve to make that money back somehow.
----------------------------------------
Ryan Gray |
|
|
|
ass wigglin, cheese lovin, 4x4 drivin, apostrophe hatin, hiking chick who loves camping on snow
spaceship..
Canada
7209 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 11:26 PM
|
quote:
The wilderness used to be something that we could enjoy for free (or thru taxes)
----------------------------------------
Few things in life worth having come free. Im all for the parking fees, hey, if I can pay for the gas to drive there (let alone the money I spend on gear!) then I sure can pay the parking fee for a spot for my vehicle. If you dont want to pay for parking then walk or catch the bus to the trailhead!
Lets face it, it creates a job for someone who might otherwise be a drain on our system.
I agree however, in return we should see improvements to the maintenance of our parks.
|
|
|
Bowen Island, BC
Canada
614 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2004 : 11:57 PM
|
This one is loaded with issues. I think the emotional one is that we were accustomed to parking for free in the lot at the trailhead, and now we are expected to pay. To pay extra, and still be told that the park services are being reduced is disturbing.
If the road to the Diamondhead lot is ploughed when it snows, I am delighted to pay.
BTW, with my group, if there is any time on our parking receipt, we always give it away, or leave it on the machine for someone else.
There is an issue that annoys me. We now have to pay for parking in Cypress Bowl because this is a Provincial Park. Yet, when the ski season is underway the Park does not charge. I think there are a couple of points here. The first is only slightly relevant in this discussion, and that is that a ski area has no business in a Provincial Park. If it is going to be there, surely the Park can help themselves to the bonanza from the all the skiers who drive and park their vehicles up there. Is this true of Seymour too? I feel as if, when the parking fee is removed for the winter season, we taxpayers are subsidizing that commercial operation (that IMO should not be there).  |
|
|
|
Night owl posting,Subie driving, backpacking Dad who is perpetually trying to catch up to his kids on the trail.
Vancouver, BC
Canada
3055 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 01:08 AM
|
Let's be clear about the issue here. The parking/camping fees are in place in heavy use areas. Heavy use areas require far more maintenance and servicing than do wilderness areas. They require substantial road maintenance to the trail head. They also require regular maintenance of outhouses, litter removal and extensive trail maintenance. Don't kid yourselves, the trails to Garibaldi require a huge amount of labour every year to deal with blow downs, and natural and human erosion. They even provide toilet paper!
Then there are camp ground and cabin facilities: these things don't take care of themselves.
Realistically, this is not a "cash grab": what has happened is that the tax payer subsidy for our chosen form of recreation has been reduced and the users are paying a higher proportion of maintenance costs. We're still not paying anything close to the real cost.
Quite frankly, I struggle to understand why Joe or Jane tax payer should have to pay for my recreational activities out of his/her hard earned pay cheque. If I want to exploit the amenities of the heavy use areas, then I should pay my fair share.
If you don't want to pay for amenities such as "superhighway" trails, outhouses, bridges over creeks, trash removal, shelters etc. etc. there are lots of easily accessed hiking opportunities where there are no charges (To use the Garibaldi Park example: Wedgemount Lake (with shelter and outhouse), Cheakamus Lake, Helm Camp, Russet Lake etc.)
Me: I'm happy to use the luxury facilities like the Elfin Lake cabin and $10 a night is absurdly cheap for what you get. Check out what it will cost you to use similar facilities provided by non-profit organizations such as BCMC and the ACC.
----------------------------------------
"Aging ... it beats the alternative" |
Edited by - ChuckLW on 10/06/2004 01:10 AM |
|
|
PoCo, British Columbia
Canada
216 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 01:43 AM
|
Good point howesound, why are the parking fees lifted for the winter ski hills, I didnt even realize that this was the case. It seems to me that the hill is used far more often requiring much more maintnance then compared to the summer time. Perhaps some of the revenue from the ski hill via lift passes goes back into it???
----------------------------------------
Ryan Gray |
|
|
Vancouver, B.C.
461 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 07:54 AM
|
I think that in the winter Cypress and Seymour are both responsible for the roads, maintenance cost comes out of their revenue. Remember, this Government is very business friendly, Cypress and Seymour felt that is was unfair for skiers to have to pay for lift tickets and parking so the Ministry lifted the fees for the winter.
An interesting note, the total revenue from user fees for Parks for 2003 was only $700 000. Of that $700 000, $105 000 went to contractors who collected the fees. These stats are from the Ministry. So in the grand scheme of things, not a lot of revenue is being collected from park users. |
|
|
| DW2
Senior Member
|
West Coast, B.C.
1396 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 3:16 PM
|
While up at Seymour last year we were told that the machines kept freezing up causing many problems, so it was easier to just let the fees go over the winter.
As for the parking fees in general. We were also told that they go in to one giant pot, and the fees collected from Golden Ears, for instance, do not necessarily go to that park at all. The money goes to where THEY feel it is needed. |
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
228 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 7:36 PM
|
I'm no longer a fan of 'Parks', provincial or national. They have become overmanaged and magnates. In theory the idea of a park is good but the practical aspect is failing. I prefer unmanged natural reserves where there is a restriction on the building of roads, development, forestry, ...public land without park status. No formal parking lots, interpretive centers, trails campgrounds and the like. The 'parks' seem more a function of a tourist industry than preservation.
|
|
|
Vancouver
1820 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2004 : 7:56 PM
|
My understanding, perhaps outdated, is that the provincial government covers most of the cost of maintaining the Cypress Bowl Road. This includes $50,000 each winter for snowremoval.
While the question of whether parking fees are double taxation is an important point, it is not the most critical aspect of the fees. The most important point is this:
If you choose to go for a recreational drive in the area covered by the fee, you may drive all day, and for days on end, without paying fees. However, if you should have the good sense to park your car to admire the scenery, or benefit your health by leaving the car shut off for a few hours or days so you can participate in health-enhancing non-motorized recreation, then you're going to be charged. This, at a time when the government, elected by half our fellow citizens, bellyaches about pollution and mounting health care costs. Compared to that, all other aspects of the fees are side issues.
But I have a few of them also. First, as soon as you start paying a fee, no matter how small, you have a legal right to proper service. This means the road to the Rubble Creek parking lot should be plowed in winter, instead of the unacceptable adhoc winter parking near the bottom of the road. Once a party such as the government puts something on a direct fee-paying basis, they don't have the legal right to arbitrarily withdraw both the fee and service. Because, as the holder of an annual pass, I've already paid. Anyone who purchased an annual pass has a right to demand a refund if the areas they paid for are not fully available. And if you bought a pass mostly for use on the north shore mountains during the winter, then you should demand a refund, as I did.
The road to the original Singing Pass trailhead should be repaired, included in the fee area, and taken back from Intrawest.
It is a glaring inconsistency that the fees are not charged at the north shore mountains during the winter. Undoubtedly this is because the private downhill skiing operations pointed out that their leases said nothing about their customers being charged for parking. However, this awkward and easily foreseeable situation resulted in the exemption from fee paying of the people who would provide the most revenue, and who arguably are the most reasonable group to charge.
Lastly, the people who instituted this system made a number of serious errors that were gradually corrected. But they have yet to display on the ticket machines how to figure out how much you pay to camp if you already have an annual parking pass. The whole thing is so stupid and stupidly executed that it's beyond being laughable.
----------------------------------------
Time spent in the mountains is not deducted. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Provincial park Fees
