Submitted by TimFerris on Thu, 02/26/2009 - 08:49.
I'm not willing to pay fees for any of this.
You have to collect the fees--there's an expense--you have to coordinate, legislate, regulate, and so forth--more bureaucracy, more government jobs
None of these things is an appropriate activity for jointly-held land.
Land that produces revenue should be privately held.
Land that is held by "we the people" should not have fees attached to it.
If government is so expensive, we need to rein in costs. It's very simple. Our elected help are not doing what is in the best interests of each individual; it has succumbed to acting in the best interests of the larger group, i.e., the government, the Federal Reserve system, and so forth.
I am conflicted by this poll because I am not sure what it is asking. Is it asking, "Which of these activities do you love enough that you'd be willing to pay a fee to continue to do it?" or is it asking "Which of these activities should be taxed because they harm parks and the environment?".
So, I would vote 2 completely different ways depending on what is being asked.
Good question Jenita.....some activities at state parks are funded through permit fees...others are not. What level of impact determines the permit fee for fishing, hunting, ATV vehicles etc. and allows other activities to be "free?" I have no answers. I was just curious to know how many people use our parks and how far they might go to protect their interests. I am also intriqued by the Bureau of Land Management and our collective ignorance about this large governmental agency.
Also, I would like to respond to Tim's point...pay nothing? It costs a lot of money to "maintain" parks, especially to police parks. If not managed/protected, wild lands are targeted by poachers, vandals and subject to illegal dumping and contamination. It's not an easy discussion. I just want people to appreciate that protecting our natural heritage does merit attention, especially during troubled economic times.
Printer-friendly version
Just a thought
As Governor Strickland raises license fees to cover state expenses...and President Obama looks to reduce the federal deficit...Consider this breakdown
http://www.ohiodnr.com/tabid/5153/Default.aspx
Please feel free to comment on your recreational needs...of course, I missed a lot of other activities..like camping, stargazing :)
"none"
I'm not willing to pay fees for any of this.
You have to collect the fees--there's an expense--you have to coordinate, legislate, regulate, and so forth--more bureaucracy, more government jobs
None of these things is an appropriate activity for jointly-held land.
Land that produces revenue should be privately held.
Land that is held by "we the people" should not have fees attached to it.
If government is so expensive, we need to rein in costs. It's very simple. Our elected help are not doing what is in the best interests of each individual; it has succumbed to acting in the best interests of the larger group, i.e., the government, the Federal Reserve system, and so forth.
--TimFerris
Conflicted
I am conflicted by this poll because I am not sure what it is asking. Is it asking, "Which of these activities do you love enough that you'd be willing to pay a fee to continue to do it?" or is it asking "Which of these activities should be taxed because they harm parks and the environment?".
So, I would vote 2 completely different ways depending on what is being asked.
Good question
Good question Jenita.....some activities at state parks are funded through permit fees...others are not. What level of impact determines the permit fee for fishing, hunting, ATV vehicles etc. and allows other activities to be "free?" I have no answers. I was just curious to know how many people use our parks and how far they might go to protect their interests. I am also intriqued by the Bureau of Land Management and our collective ignorance about this large governmental agency.
Also, I would like to respond to Tim's point...pay nothing? It costs a lot of money to "maintain" parks, especially to police parks. If not managed/protected, wild lands are targeted by poachers, vandals and subject to illegal dumping and contamination. It's not an easy discussion. I just want people to appreciate that protecting our natural heritage does merit attention, especially during troubled economic times.