Arizona State Park camping fees

monkey44 wrote:
But a $12 a day increase by a vendor doesn't help the forests either, it only goes to the vendor. We need to take care of the forests, absolutely need to do it, and it can't be on the campers backs -- we need to protect those watershed areas in California or there will be no civilians living in the state ...

I lived in CA over thirty years - half that time in rural Sierras, and spent time hiking those forests years ago when a campsite was $2, and the forest were beautiful and the watershed lush - now, with the drought hurting it, we need even more protection - but we DON'T need vendor taking the money out of the campgrounds funding ... I'm all for paying a bit more IF and only IF it goes to protecting the forests.

Even tho' we now live in Florida, we still spend lots of time on the road, and lots of that road time in the western states. Ask me to support the forests, you get a yes, as me to support a vendor with higher fees, you get a no. Imagine what the forestry rangers could do with a $12 a night fee increase ... instead of a vendor more than likely removing that revenue from our country to another nation.

I agree about the vendors and privatization. But, even if the money goes back to the state parks, the government will end up cutting the general funds going to the park so they can appease another segment of the public - putting that money into schools, military, business, etc., because the parks are now getting "extra" funds from the fees.

It's really a matter of there isn't enough money in taxes and fees to pay for all the things that people think are important. Because people all have different opinions as to what is important and they want what is important to them and think that what isn't important to them should be eliminated - but the next person comes along and thinks the opposite. What do you cut and what do you fund? Then add on "no new taxes" and "must cut taxes" and you've got to cut even more.