Utah state parks pass increase

[Rainy]

didn't want to sit and read everyone's novel i just want to know did the price really go up to$150

[WET1]

My thinking on our public lands is it is already ours and ours to use.  Combine that with the understanding that the power to tax is the power to destroy.  Essentially the "fees" are taxing us for what we already own as if government owns what is public land and is "selling us" the use of what is already ours by means of abuse of power.  Listen to the audio file where they tell us how good a deal it is for $150 to use the parks.  Sure, our parks are an amazing wonder of our Creator's creation, but government didn't create them.  The parks are already ours!  We own them.  A theme is pervasive throughout: "The operating structure has changed from a typical government service to a business-like model ..." (first sentence of their "Agency Explanation" as quoted from the full text above).  It is NOT business!  A business would own something and charge us to use it or charge us to buy it.  State Parks are already ours.  Their "business model" is raising taxes to pay for more services and more government (businesses expand) as if they are selling us something.  But, we aren't going there because of their services.  Instead, we are tolerating fees to use what is already ours and we go to our parks to get away and not to have even more government in our lives.  Once they have a high price "service" they prohibit alternatives to force paying for their monopoly by forcing concentration of camping into a small area and closing the rest.  I commented similarly in this article (click comments to open and see two from me using my name, Ronald Levine): https://www.ksl.com/article/46764153/cam...is-it-safe
Further, they intend to compete with free enterprise saying "it takes money to make money (audio file linked in my above post)," but that money comes from us.  Listening to the audio file, they are sounding like salespeople selling us a product.  Regarding business, our State Parks and our recreation using them is huge boon business and our Utah economy, but consider the power to tax is the power to destroy.  Sure, government might technically "make money" competing with private business with us paying them to do that with increased fees, but the real cost is multiplied by the harm to this sector of Utah economy by creating a disincentive to use our State Parks by creating a drain on the very thing that supports a robust recreational economy.  That would reduce our very much larger private economy with less use of our public lands all so government can "profit" to support it's growth and intrusion into what is already ours with use as a monopoly as if they own public lands.  If these government bureaucrats want to "make money" in business, they should quit their jobs working for us as public servants and invest their own money into their own private businesses.

Related posts with our discussions on cost:

(In these I comment on the high cost of camping at Sand Hollow and the monopolistic and punitive ways they use to force us to use their high-cost crowded camping when primitive camping away from things and without fees of nearly the price of motel in a city is more desirable.  It interferes with the real camping experience I and many others want.)

https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/showthre...+hollow%22

https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/showthre...+hollow%22

https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/showthre...+hollow%22

https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/showthre...ght=hollow

Couldn't agree with you more Ronald! I expect soon that the State will follow the Federal government in selling out our public lands as they have done with many public use areas like Strawberry for one example. Farming out the management of the camp grounds to private companies with a guaranteed profit margin for something that the tax payer made all the investment in. They come in like Recreation Utah (which is really a Califormia outfit) and jack up all the prices but refuse to invest any money in maintaining the facility. 
  The bureaucrats think they own our public lands now and they are nothing but an inconvenience for them or a way for them to pad their resume for a move to the private sector after showing how successful they were at turning our public lands into a for profit entity.  

---

RPF,

Public land refers to the public domain, unappropriated land belonging to the Federal government that is subject to sale or other disposal under general laws and is not reserved for any particular governmental or public purpose.

Much of this land was acquired early in the history of the United States as a result of purchases, wars, or treaties made with foreign countries. The Federal government used this land to encourage growth, settlement, and economic development. Land that was not developed, homesteaded, or sold remained in Federal ownership as public land. Today, the Federal government employs principles of land use planning and environmental protection to preserve the natural resources and scenic beauty found on public land.

Each western state also received federal "public land" as trust lands designated for specific beneficiaries, which the States are to manage as a condition to acceptance into the union. Those trust lands cannot any longer be considered public lands as allowing any benefits to the "public" would be in breach of loyalty to the specific beneficiaries. The trust lands (two sections, or about 1,280 acres (5.2 km2) per township) are usually managed extractively (grazing or mining), to provide revenue for public schools

Most, if not all, Utah State Parks facilities are located on Federal government owned property.  Willard, Echo, East Canyon, Rockport are a few of these.  Utah has negotiated a contract with the Federal government agencies (Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, et al) and pays a fee to the Federal Government to develop and mange the site as a State Park.  There are other expenses associated with development & management such as building and maintaining the camping sites (primitive with no amenities & and better sites with different combinations of amenities), launch ramps & parking lots, restrooms with & without water/showers, cabins for non-RV owners, beaches with parking areas, etc, etc, etc.  ALL of this costs money and I’m 100% certain that most folks will agree the improved facilities increase almost everybody’s enjoyment of the facility.

And just where does the money for all of this come from?  From the Federal government?  Not a chance.  From wealthy philanthropists?  Yeah, right.  How about from state tax revenues?  Bingo!  Been that way from almost day one.  Except now, inflation is causing the revenue to lag way behind the real costs of running the state and ALL of it's agency's.  And John Q Public does NOT want his tax bill to increase so that all of these inflation increases can be covered.  ESPECIALLY, if he doesn’t give a tinker’s damn about outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, camping, etc.  So how is the State government going to keep covering the cost to develop and maintain our State Parks?

The State government is already doing it.  They are requiring the State Parks to become self sufficient and to pay their own way.  Day use fees HAVE to increase to cover the cost of running our State Parks at a level of use that is acceptable to the majority of the users.  Contrary to your political leanings, there ain’t no free lunch and there never will be.  State Parks are a creation of man, not a natural occurrence.  And as such, there is a real dollar cost to their creation and continued existence.  Nobody is forcing you to use any State Park or any of the amenities afforded patrons who do.  If you don’t like the State Parks fee system, then don’t use any of the State Parks.  If it's cheaper for you to stay in a motel to use Sand Hollow State Park, then by all means rent the motel room.  See how easy that was?

Utah has an abundance of recreational opportunities that don’t have ANY fees associated with them.  Use them instead of the State Parks.  The state isn’t forcing anybody to purchase an annual day-use pass to use any of the 44 State Parks they will work in.  You can pay as you go and if you only go a couple times a year, you are getting by a lot cheaper.  I visit State Parks probably 40 to 50 time a year, so for folks like me, the annual pass makes a lot of sense and is a real bargain.

Go ahead and complain all you want; your reasoning is very weak at best.  Self sufficiency is the way of the future.  Nobody wants the alternative – tax increases that cover lots of things you (the average Joe Citizen) don’t have a need for or interest in.  Deal with it.

  You know Bob, I have to strongly disagree with you here. Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park". You have no free use and or access to the public waters in Utah, this is wrong!

[dubob]

You know Bob, I have to strongly disagree with you here. Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park". You have no free use and or access to the public waters in Utah, this is wrong!

Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd,

You know deep in your heart that is absolutely false.  There are 44 State Parks in Utah.  Not all of those state parks have recreating water within their boundaries.  Here are a few that don't:

• Anasazi State Park Museum
  
  
• Camp Floyd / Stagecoach Inn State Park and Museum
  
  
• Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park
  
  
• Edge of the Cedars State Park Museum
  
  
• Etc., etc., etc.
  

There are at least 42 dams listed in Utah and not all of them are associated with State Parks.  I have no idea how many river/stream/creek miles exist in Utah, but the number is well up into the thousands of miles if not tens of thousands of miles.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of those river miles are available to the public to recreate on or in.  There are several hundred natural lakes within our state that are open to recreation for anybody interested in doing so.  So when you say: "Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park"."; that is blatantly false.

[MSM1970]

WET1" You know Bob, I have to strongly disagree with you here. Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park". You have no free use and or access to the public waters in Utah, this is wrong!"

I think its funny you believe water in Utah is public. there is no a drop of water in Utah that someone doesnt own even what comes out of the sky, try getting a permit to store rain water. there are only 3 natural lakes in Utah well 4 that I know of including seviere res, all 4 have access that you do not have to pay for to use, HOW ever is you want to use the facility's the DNR parks and rec have built and maintain then you will have to pay to play,

All the reservoirs in Utah only have on purpose and that is to store water for someone to use in the summer, ie: drinking, irrigation, industrial.
Recreation is hardly a close second when it come to the water you float your boat on. we should feel lucky to even be able to use them cuz that's someones water and if they want it they will take it. (see yuba res)

There are access points on most that you do not have to pay for, BUT if you want to use the facility's, you pay for it,
I like using the ramps and toilets,

As far as contracting out campground and ramps on fedral lands, remember that's someone water, ie strawberry, it is no different than having to buy a stick of gum to use the restroom at the gas station.

I hope I have explained it correctly, maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it.

[dubob]

There are only 3 natural lakes in Utah well 4 . . . .

That's funny right there.  Three or four you say?  Ahhhh - no.  There's more than 3 or 4.  Try hundreds.  Here's a link that lists most of them: Utah Lakes!

Let me know when you get tired of scrolling through them all. 

Here's a link to 40 'rivers' in Utah (there may be more): Utah Rivers!

---

I hope I have explained it correctly,  maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it.

  Deer Creek State Park is a watershed, thus dogs are only allowed in the campground.  Some watersheds around the state (Dell Reservoir for one) don't allow dogs at any time.  Some nonsense about folks not wanting their drinking water polluted with dog doodoo. 

[WET1]

You know Bob, I have to strongly disagree with you here. Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park". You have no free use and or access to the public waters in Utah, this is wrong!

Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd, Todd,

You know deep in your heart that is absolutely false.  There are 44 State Parks in Utah.  Not all of those state parks have recreating water within their boundaries.  Here are a few that don't:

• Anasazi State Park Museum
  
  
• Camp Floyd / Stagecoach Inn State Park and Museum
  
  
• Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park
  
  
• Edge of the Cedars State Park Museum
  
  
• Etc., etc., etc.
  

There are at least 42 dams listed in Utah and not all of them are associated with State Parks.  I have no idea how many river/stream/creek miles exist in Utah, but the number is well up into the thousands of miles if not tens of thousands of miles.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of those river miles are available to the public to recreate on or in.  There are several hundred natural lakes within our state that are open to recreation for anybody interested in doing so.  So when you say: "Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park"."; that is blatantly false.

I'll clarify for you Bob. Name the reservoirs where the boat ramp is open to the public without having to go through a state park gate.
You make an argument that the general public shouldn't be required to pay for state park support of all the great amenities that they do not use. I make the same argument that public water users should only have to pay for what they use. If all these amenities are in such high demand, why is the government providing that. Open up the access for just boat ramp use and let the free market take care of all the amenities. If they are truly in such great demand the free market will provide. Government trying to compete with free market business is never the answer as we've seen throughout history. 

[MSM1970]

There are only 3 natural lakes in Utah well 4 . . . .

That's funny right there.  Three or four you say?  Ahhhh - no.  There's more than 3 or 4.  Try hundreds.  Here's a link that lists most of them: Utah Lakes!

Let me know when you get tired of scrolling through them all. 

Here's a link to 40 'rivers' in Utah (there may be more): Utah Rivers!

---

I hope I have explained it correctly,  maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it.

  Deer Creek State Park is a watershed, thus dogs are only allowed in the campground.  Some watersheds around the state (Dell Reservoir for one) don't allow dogs at any time.  Some nonsense about folks not wanting their drinking water polluted with dog doodoo. 

I meant lakes with state parks on them, and yes thats why, it is in they bylaws of the contact for using DC as a state park  from the bureau of reclamation.  how ever they can doodo in jordy and all 3 sections of the provo  river, so SLC is still drinking doodo water,   


oh and I can access UL, bear lake and great salt lake state parks without paying the STATE park fee

[Kent]

"I hope I have explained it correctly,  maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it."

It is much better (or worse, depending upon how one looks at it) than it used to be up at Deer Creek.  When I was probably around age 4 or 5 (it has been a few years) I was fishing Deer Creek, with my parents, from the shore.  I took off my shoes and was wading in water maybe a foot deep.  The official boat that we would often see up there came by and one of the two guys on the boat yelled at me, "Get out of the water, don't you know that Deer Creek is drinking water!"  I'm sure that guy would turn over in his grave if he saw all of the people playing in his "drinking water" these days.

[MSM1970]

"I hope I have explained it correctly,  maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it."

It is much better (or worse, depending upon how one looks at it) than it used to be up at Deer Creek.  When I was probably around age 4 or 5 (it has been a few years) I was fishing Deer Creek, with my parents, from the shore.  I took off my shoes and was wading in water maybe a foot deep.  The official boat that we would often see up there came by and one of the two guys on the boat yelled at me, "Get out of the water, don't you know that Deer Creek is drinking water!"  I'm sure that guy would turn over in his grave if he saw all of the people playing in his "drinking water" these days.

playing in it is one thing, the the other stuff they are leaving, It kinda makes you wonder why everyone is swimming but there are no bathroom breaks,

[dubob]

I'll clarify for you Bob. Name the reservoirs where the boat ramp is open to the public without having to go through a state park gate.  I've only lived in Utah since 1977, so I wasn't here when probably all of the reservoirs were built.  I can probably do a lot of work researching the development plans of each of those dams to find out which ones if any were ever initially developed with recreation as the primary purpose.  I doubt that any were, but will leave open the possibility that some could have been.  I do know of a couple of reservoirs that are open to the public and are not State Parks that have concrete boat launch ramps - Newton & Cutler Reservoirs in Cache County.  I've been their and used them.  I have no knowledge of when any of those ramps were built, be it at dam construction time or as an afterthought.  And for me, at least, at isn't worth my time to find out.  But there are some out there.  So, once again Todd, your statement "Utah is one of the few states I've been where they have locked up every public water inside a "state park"." is still blatantly false.

You make an argument that the general public shouldn't be required to pay for state park support of all the great amenities that they do not use.  I know of no such argument that I made that would intentionally support that line of thought.  I firmly believe that the cost of admittance to the park should be one fee for everybody regardless of which amenity they choose to use or not use.  It would be a management nightmare to try to police who has paid for what amenity and is allowed to use it.  How do you propose to verify who has paid to use the restroom, picnic table, pavilion, or boat ramp?  How many more employees will be required on a daily basis to check every patron?

I make the same argument that public water users should only have to pay for what they use. If all these amenities are in such high demand, why is the government providing that. Open up the access for just boat ramp use and let the free market take care of all the amenities. If they are truly in such great demand the free market will provide. Government trying to compete with free market business is never the answer as we've seen throughout history.  The Federal government agencies have been doing that for some time now.  Strawberry & Pineview are two such right here in Utah.  That's really been working well so far - hasn't it Todd?  Let's see; I can buy an annual day pass for 40 some State Parks for $75 (Under 65)/$35 (Senior)  and it costs $120 (I don't know if they have a Senior discount) for a Recreation Utah annual pass that's good for just 2 reservoirs _ Strawberry & Pineview.  Boy, I guess you're correct; the State can't compete with that.

For the record, I think doubling the cost of the annual pass is out of line with inflation.  But inflation exists and eventually the cost will go up.  Go to any State Park reservoir on any weekend between Memorial Day and Labor Day and count the boats that cost over $50,000 coming and going.  Some of them will be worth over $100,000.  Does anybody really think that the owners of these boats have any concerns about paying $150 a year to use that boat anytime they have a couple hours of spare time?

   

[a_bow_nut]

"I hope I have explained it correctly,  maybe this will help, look up why you cannot have dogs on Deer Creek res, the answer will surprise you, Im not even sure if Bob knows. but I bet he can find it."

It is much better (or worse, depending upon how one looks at it) than it used to be up at Deer Creek.  When I was probably around age 4 or 5 (it has been a few years) I was fishing Deer Creek, with my parents, from the shore.  I took off my shoes and was wading in water maybe a foot deep.  The official boat that we would often see up there came by and one of the two guys on the boat yelled at me, "Get out of the water, don't you know that Deer Creek is drinking water!"  I'm sure that guy would turn over in his grave if he saw all of the people playing in his "drinking water" these days.

My how times have changed. If you come past Jordanelle and look into the valley below the dam you will see two red buildings that look like barns. They in fact are a sewage treatment plant. They are working on a deal to dump the treated water into our irrigation canal through the summer but once the irrigation season ends they will dump that treated water right into the Provo River through the winter months. We've been trying to fight it but the outcome doesn't look good.

[Gone Forever]

another money grab and the result will be only the elitists will be able to afford our parks. Those with a $70K truck pulling a $120K Momba.
Personally I think there should be a tiered fee.
If you are coming to use a table and the lake you pay $10, If you are coming to use the launch ramp too, that's another $20. Why should people without boats be paying for ramps, docks and patrol boats, they are not using them? They are subsidising people with enough money to spend on those boats and trucks. People that will dump $150 on fuel into their vehicle and boat in a weekend.
Why should the person with a tube they launch from the beach pay the same thing?
Bob, you are arguing for argument's sake, pointing out one or two words and using them as your strawman argument. Most of Utah's boat usable or easily accessible lakes are state parks as RPF pointed out. Jordanelle, Deer Creek, Rockport, Echo, Willard...
I want to know about the accounting, where will these fees be held until spent, how will the spending take place, who will decide what money gets spent on and who will keep track of it?
Will the parks buy more $12K side by sides to ride around in? New trucks to be auctioned off with 60K miles on them, Boats?

[dubob]

another money grab and the result will be only the elitists will be able to afford our parks.  Those with a $70K truck pulling a $120K Momba.  Personally I think there should be a tiered fee.  That's a great idea; all you have to do is convince your state legislators how wonderful, equitable, and manageable that will be for everybody and get them to sponsor legislation to make it happen.  Good luck!

If you are coming to use a table and the lake you pay $10, If you are coming to use the launch ramp too, that's another $20.  Another good idea.  How are we going to get our legislators onboard with it? 

Why should people without boats be paying for ramps, docks and patrol boats, they are not using them?  Hmmmm - please correct me if I'm wrong here.  Aren't patrol boats there to allow park personnel to ensure ALL water users are obeying the law, to assist ALL water user experiencing distress, and to rescue ALL water users in danger of drowning from a mishap?  Correct me if I'm wrong here; aren't all water users - boat users, float tubers, kayakers, paddle boarders, and yes, swimmers - benefitting from patrol boat usage by park personnel?

They are subsidising people with enough money to spend on those boats and trucks.  People that will dump $150 on fuel into their vehicle and boat in a weekend.  Why should the person with a tube they launch from the beach pay the same thing?  I don't know GF, why should they?

Bob, you are arguing for argument's sake, pointing out one or two words and using them as your strawman argument.  Most of Utah's boat usable or easily accessible lakes are state parks as RPF pointed out.  Jordanelle, Deer Creek, Rockport, Echo, Willard...A strawman argument is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack.  RPF's stance is that State Parks are public lands, when, in fact, by definition, they are not.  I pointed that out with supporting information.  How is that a fallacious argument?  WET1 said that Utah locked up every public water inside a "state park".  That simply is not true and I gave a couple of examples that support the truth of the matter.  How is that a fallacious argument?

I want to know about the accounting, where will these fees be held until spent, how will the spending take place, who will decide what money gets spent on and who will keep track of it?  All that information is carefully hidden in the Utah Code.  Please feel free to do your own research and uncover it.  There are literally thousands of pages of Utah Code that covers all aspects of how the state collects and distributes all sorts of financial assets.  I'm not at all inclined to digging it out for you.

Will the parks buy more $12K side by sides to ride around in?  New trucks to be auctioned off with 60K miles on them, Boats?  Don't know; don't care.  Decisions like that are way above my paygrade which is retied and on a fixed income.

I can do this all day long.  But the moderators (and probably a lot of members) are growing weary of it and it has drifted away from the OP comment about fees possibly going up.  I'm done making any more comments on this thread.  I've tried to make what I consider salient points and counter less than factual information with the truth as I understand it.  Some of you agree; some of you don't.  I won't loose any sleep over it one way or the other.

If you feel like you have a dog in this fight, my final thought is this; contact your legislators immediately after the election in November and you know who they are and tell them what your position is on raising the fee to $150.  Based on my involvement with a couple of past law changes in the boating realm, I can say that waiting until the legislature convenes in January is too late because the bill will already be written and the sponsor will not be inclined to change it based on citizen comments.  Tight lines to ALL of you and go catch some fishies.  

[Anglinarcher]

dubob, you need to go back to duck hunting.  LOL

I know you love to argue, and you do it quite well.  But it is true, you do use Straw Man arguments!  Some of the comments from some of the people are less than accurate, but you have more holes in your logic than the torn net I use for fishing.

I once saw a line in a movie that said "I never tire of a good fight".  I think they stole that from you. 

I would suggest personally that those opposed to the doubling of the fees, which I see as a money grab in a state that already has a surplus, should start a Face Book page and organize!  I think sending emails and petitions would be useful.  Still, your best weapon is your vote, and make it clear that if your candidates are supporting this that you will vote for someone else.

The one thing a politician fears most is the loss of power, and loosing that power in an election is more than they can take.  They do NOT stand on principle, any of them.  (OK, now I am getting off the rail)



Now, should the fees have been raise before to meet inflation?  Perhaps, but to force those of us that cannot afford 100K boats and 100K trucks to not visit the public parks because we are not wealthy enough is not right.  A sudden doubling of the fees, especially during a time of economic disaster caused by a Virus, well No Republican, and No Democrat would openly support that.

Should the legislature dedicate the "new funds" to a trust that they cannot use for anything else except park management (I don't even think that this is legal in this state), and should they raise the fees a little each year for the next few years to catch up with inflation, then I would consider this a compromise that I could support.

Let me make it clear, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL in it current form.  Those legislature that I vote for will understand this before I vote this year.  If you agree, then I suggest you make it clear to them as well.

Arguing with dubob is like talking to a rock.  It will not change the rock and the rock will be there long after you have grown tired of speaking to it and walked off.  Worse yet, you can do little to it to hurt it but if hit by it you are hurt.


I strongly suggest that this thread be abandoned.  Perhaps starting another that states the facts and provides contacts or a new Facebook page would be more productive?

[Gone Forever]

I don't think someone with the initials DB should be calling people GF.

[dubob]

I don't think someone with the initials DB should be calling people GF.

Is that the best you've got?