I hadn't been to Red Rocks State Park near Sedona, AZ for a number of years. I was in the area last week and thought I'd stop by for a half an hour and take some more shots, since I was close, the clouds wre gorgeous and it was great afternoon light. I've got commitments in Phoenix that evening, but I do want to take a few shots. I drive all the way to the Park (the whole region is getting more and more developed). I pull up to the unmanned entrance gate, and am
surprised that it's a Sunday afternoon, and the whole park is virtually empty, save for about 3 cars. No wonder, the entrance fee is now $10!!
I turned around and left. In retrospect,I should have paid the ten dollars for the half hour I planned to be there, but at the time, it was too shocking, plus I already had some nice shots from years before.
I can understand that there is upkeep for the parks, but a lot of that money comes from sales taxes and lotto tickets ( I believe).
The area survived just fine thousands of years prior. Plus, I get the sneaky suspicion that much of the fee money goes to salary for the folks who "work" in those parks, like the unmanned booth. So much of that money, I really do suspect, is simply 'make work' money for unneeded jobs. We'll never know for sure, but I do know the trend of the country is that direction everywhere.
So just be prepared to dish out $10 if you go there, plus it's $5 per day to hike any of the trails elsewhere around Sedona or Oak Canyon.
With the budget cutbacks and closures Arizona parks are experiencing, be glad it's still open. And if not from users, where is the money going to come from?
As for disparaging the workers for the decisions of politicians, that's offensive.
I have to assume you are not an AZ resident or you'd be well aware of the dire state of the Arizona budget now. The AZ economy was primarily based on the housing boom, and when the housing bubble collapsed so did the AZ economy and the tax revenues for the state. We residents have watched the Republican controlled government meet in special extended sessions trying to fix the shortage:
- cuts to AZ's already embarrassingly low education funds
- cuts to police
- cuts to social services
- a request from the Republican governor to temporarily raise sales taxes (but forced to a referendum vote so the Republican assembly doesn't get tarred for a tax increase)
- cuts to state parks (including plans to completely close many of them)
- proposed sale of the State Capitol building to private parties so it can be leased back
Some state parks that were scheduled for closure were "adopted" by local communities who didn't want to lose the associated tourist dollars from park visitors. It is possible that the $10 entrance fee at Red Rocks was imposed by a local agency now trying to keep a state park open, or it could be a state mandated fee.
Most residents who make regular visits to state parks buy an annual pass that covers all of them. I get free entry to any state park because I'm an active volunteer at one of them where I've been leading birdwalks since 2001 or so. I don't know about Red Rocks, but I do know that at Boyce Thompson Arboretum there's a lot of work to be done every day and I've never seen any sort of "make work" for unneeded jobs.
I can understand your frustration to some extent, but generally I agree with Hank. In fiscal crises, governments often (rightfully so) focus on schools, public safety, and the health and medical needs of the populations they serve. Parks fall to the bottom of the barrel. And don't necessarily underestimate the value of having a state or local parks department with employees trained to manage natural resources . . . it's a whole lot better than having a staff of folks trained to manage buildings in charge of your parks. Those employees might be invisible to you, but in the grand scheme I'll bet they make a difference.
Posted by Mike Sellers on May 11, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Here is a link to an article in Red Rock News on the possible closure of the Crossing
http://www.redrocknews.com/News/city-scrounges-to-keep-red-rock-state-park-open.html
Can anyone imagine a trip to Sedona and not being able to go to red Rock Park?
I'm downright PROUD to pay extra fees if it will help keep parks open. Though I buy the annual pass for national parks each year, I always go ahead and pay an entrance fee for the parks I particularly support. At least I have some say in where those particular dollars go without the "help" of politicians.
I do not mind paying the fees since the Arizona state parks budget has been cut drastically and more parks are going to be affected. I hike and photograph around Sedona several times a year. Every year I will buy a national park pass and a state park pass. The national pass will cover the red rock pass. One of the confusing items is that there are four areas that are not covered around Sedona with the red rock pass because they are operated by private permittee: Banjo Bill Picnic Area, Grasshopper Point Picnic and Swimming Area, Crescent Moon Day Use Area and Call O' the Canyon (West Fork Trailhead). To access these areas you will need another pass. See link http://www.redrockcountry.org/passes-and-permits/index.shtml.
Wow- not much agreement with my position on this! Hank. let's suppose you want to hike and photograph on the National Forest that exists near my home. Now, I realize the NF belongs to all of us, and we all should be able to benefit from it. Our taxes go to a general fund, in addition to high impact fees like hunting, help pay for NF employees. Fair enough.
Let's say, since it's near my home where you want to hike, I work out a deal with the NF where there should be an entrance fee, and those fees will go to me (but you don't see that since the flow of money is described as "Park operating expenses"), as an employee to help maintain the forest in my area. Now I have a neat and fun job. Nevermind the NF in my area has done just fine without these services for thousands of years, even with increased usage in the last few decades. Most people who use the area are pretty considerate, don;t leave a mess or destroy natural features. But, you never know, there might be one inconsiderate person, and that's where my job comes in handy.
My job is to go out and make sure debris is not littering the area, and geneneral observation to make sure messy hikers don't ruin the area. I might also clear up the trails once in a while (which most users had done for themselves in times past anyway). First, the fee was $5, and my salary was $35,000 a year. A friend of mine wants to get in on the action, so we all work out a deal, and he gets a similar job, and in theory, you get twice the benefits or our maintenance (whatever that might be). Plus, he goes around and checks to make sure everybody has paid their fees, that vehicles display the "paid receipts" and tickets the ones that do not.
Of course, as public employees, we need all the benefits, like health, retirement, etc, so due to the increasing costs, the entrance fee is hiked to $10. And that's what you pay for this wonderful privilege. And if you can't pay those fees, and my salary is stressing the system, then we should close off the National Forest to your access.
In tougher budget times, we may even consider raising the fees more. Nevermind fewer and fewer people as in Red Rocks Crossing want to use the area because of the higher fees. Richard (above) will argue it's good to raise the fees since the state budgets are hurting anyway. And if you don't want to pay the fees, then we can threaten close the NF in my area to any use whatsoever.
Hank, now tell me, would you still be "proudly" paying entrance fees for this privilege to hike and photograph in the NF near my home? You might say you have done this in years past. without paying fees, and ask why it's necessary now, realizing that fee essentially pays me a salary for a "make work" job. Would you be understanding of me or would you be outraged that I am essentially holding your freedom to move about on our public lands hostage?
Sorry about the absurdity to illustrate my point. Of course, I proudly pay fees for the National Parks. But, my broader point is that at some point, fees can get out of hand, and really become simply monies for unnecessary "make work" jobs. And then, when budgets are tight, our public lands access can be held hostage 'til we pay even more. We can't tax and fee ourselves into wealth. It won't work.
Jim, thanks for the link. Interestingly, there's a commentary by a photographer at the end of that article who feels the same way I do:
From Mike Sellers, the Good Old Days: I lived in Sedona in the early 1990`s and as a photographer I frequented this
park. In those days there was only a parking lot and no problems finding the
money to keep it open. I don`t understand why the park requires $330,000 to
operate for the next 13 months-that is a whopping $25,385 per month! I wonder
what it cost per month to keep open in 1990? I never thought I would see a park
closed to the public due to a lack of funds but then again I never thought there
would come a day when you would have to buy a pass just to pull over and snap a
picture or g...
As photographers, we should be more attentive to recent trends imho.
Wow, Mark. I hope you are wearing your tin foil hat and on guard from the Atomic Mole People. This is a pretty elaborate conspiracy theory that you concocted, and yet I still can't figure out your point here.
"Free" public access to public lands mostly went down the drain when Bush the First invented Use Fees so he could claim he was sticking to his election campaign claims of "no new taxes." The basic premise of this is that if you use the resource in some way then you pay a fair amount for that use.
Park personnel do a lot more than staff an entrance booth to extort money from visitors. As you note there's a lot of clean up required, no matter who the users happen to be. Trails need maintenance as well. Wherever groups of people occur you need law enforcement: I know AZ is a gun state and we are all supposed to pack our own protection so we can defend ourselves in random shootouts, but we do need some sort of law enforcement to clean up and sort things out afterwards. We also need park employees to check where the visitors have been and put out the illegal campfires they've left burning, and fight the larger fires that spring up when they don't find all of them in time.
I know its a shame that we have to pay these people a decent wage including benefits, but that's a fact of life in AZ now that Senate Bill 1070 has been signed into law by Gov Jan Brewer - no more illegal aliens here to work for less than minimum wages and without benefits!
I also have a fundamental issue with your belief that "the NF in my area has done just fine without these services for thousands of years" so that it isn't necessary to protect the resources from public use. That just isn't so. People will abuse the resources in many ways without some sort of maintenance, from planting their illegal drug crops there to stealing the big Saguaros, to cutting down any tree for firewood, to creating new roads for their ATVs, to making ad hoc shooting ranges so they can play with their guns. Without stewardship of our public lands we'd have the Sarah Palins of the world drilling everywhere, or more BP oil spills.
Jim, I was at that booth last weekend, Sunday afternoon. Nobody was there, but there was absolutely no indication that I could discern that my national parks pass was any good. It simply appeared that either $10 was due from me, or I leave, and there was nobody around to ask. (I never cheat on those places, but encounter many who do. USFS campgrounds are notorious, so maybe that's why fees are higher, in order to compensate for others. ) I still don't understand how the national parks pass would cover a state parks pass, or was that a typo? "The national pass will cover the red rock pass."
Confusing for sure.
Btw, real interesting. The old timer (soon to be 98) I visited in Phoenix said that he had been to Red Rocks many times in the old days when the area was simply a natural place to visit on our public lands, ie no Park hosts, entry booths, etc.
One summer, (I don't know how long ago, maybe in the 50's or 60's) he recalls, some Native Americans set up camp there for the whole summer, for whatever reason, all in view by the crossing, tipis, horses etc etc. He made several paintings of it. I would have shot the heck out of that. Not any more.
Richard- no need for this silliness :"I hope you are wearing your tin foil hat and on guard from the Atomic Mole People. This is a pretty elaborate conspiracy theory that you concocted, and yet I still can't figure out your point here. "
This only wastes our time and everyone elses..
We likely come from various ideological pov, and that's fine. First, there's no threat of Sarah Palin sanctioning oil wells at Red Rocks Crossing, so that too, was unnecessary. You may be unwitting spreading that false fear that results in us relenting more to government, lest we lose the things we cherish. Some call it the "Washington Monument Gambit", which was a ploy by government workers to threaten to close our favorite, cherished monuments, unless taxes (or fees) are increased to pay for salaries. The closing is unnecessary, but the 'gambit' is that threat for something we all cherish. Interesting concept, if you are not familiar. I'm no particular fan of Sarah Palin either; however, with false accusations, you only diminish your own credibility.
In your estimate, is that some $27.000 a month operating cost what it takes to protect Red Rocks from vandals and abuse? If so, then I stand corrected. But, I doubt it, frankly.
- Red Rock State Park is a 286 acre nature preserve and environmental education center.
- Park facilities include a visitors center, classroom, theater, gift shop, picnic tables, 10 developed trails, restrooms, and group area with Ramada and facilities. The restrooms are handicapped accessible. Camping facilities are not available at this park.
- The Red Rock State Park property was acquired by the Arizona State Parks Board in 1986 and the park was opened to the public in 1991. The park's 286 acres were originally part of the Smoke Trail Ranch, owned by Jack and Helen Frye. Arizona's famous Oak Creek meanders through this scenic park, creating a diverse riparian habitat abounding with plants and wildlife. This riparian habitat, the land-based ecosystem closely associated with Oak Creek, provides the setting and the opportunity for the park to offer a focus on environmental education.
- This Park is Scheduled to Close June 3, 2010
- Red Rock State Park is open 7 days a week from 8 am – 5 pm. The Visitor Center is open 9 am – 5 pm daily. Movie Theatre, Guided Walks, Jr. Ranger Program.
- Effective March 1st, the Park entrance fee is $10.00 per vehicle, up to four adults. Individual passes are $3.00 for pedestrians, bicyclists, and horses; $2.00 for children. The Arizona State Park Annual Fee is available for $75.00 (some restrictions apply).
Thanks for the Red Rocks facts sheet. I had not realized the history. In a sense, I am thinking in terms of how things were. But, now with greater and great numbers of people visiting such areas as they become more and more popular, and as our population grows, we all need to anty up a bit more to maintain the parks. Fair enough- we can agree to a point.
Good thing I didn't pay the $10 entrance fee, since it was darn near 5 pm when I was there. Just as the light was getting pretty good for a shot, I would have been kicked out.
I've been running into that a lot, that is even where I am a paid visitor, I can't have access for late or early light. Or worse, when those areas are supposed to be open, the gate is still locked.
On my next topic, I'll explain why photographers' fees in those places should be added onto the entrance fees and increased drastically.
$330,000 to run a a state park for a year? That really doesn't sound like all that much money. If you have the equivalent of 3 full time staff to run the place making $35,000 a year (which is a pretty crappy salary to live off of), by the time you pay for Social Security, taxes, health care, etc, you are looking at over $50,000 per year per person. Even if a lot of it is contracted out, they aren't working for free, That is half of the budget gone, even before park upkeep. Toss in a few vehicles, building maintanence, lawn mowers, gas, heating and cooling the buildings, trail maintance supplies, etc. and you run out of money pretty quick.
Yeah, $10 is pretty steep. Even the donation boxes in the national parks kind of tick me off but realistically, we (the US as a whole) would rather pave the world than save the world. Outdoor natural resources that don't have an immediate financial return simply aren't a priority for government. Photographers don't even rank as a non-priority.
So what to do? A rant here isn't going to help anything. Most people here are not fromthe area and have absolutely reaon to be listened to for what is essentially a regional issue. You live there. Address your local media and people who the influence to do something and do it as a well constructed argument, not the rant you have written here. You may fail but at least you have tried. It is more that what most people will do.
Let me clear up some of the confusion you are getting from my previous post. I can see how you might be getting confused since you are not familiar with the Sedona area. It was confusing to me when I lived in Prescott, AZ and would go over to hike in Sedona weekly. The red rock pass I was referring to is the $5/day pass needed to hike around Sedona/Oak Creek Canyon in the Coconino National Forest. If you have the national park pass you are covered for this.
For entrance into the Red Rock State Park or Slide Rock State Park around Sedona (or any AZ state park) you will have to pay the entrance fee or get the annual state park pass. The entrance fee use to be $8 for the last couple of years, now it is $10 due to state budget problems. For the first 2 years I lived in Arizona I would just pay the daily entrance fee because it was worth it to me to experience and photograph at these places. Now I just get the state park annual pass.
This is really no different than what I would expect if went out of state and wanted to visit a state park for a day in another state. Most state parks charge for entrance.
I do believe you are way off base with stating -
"Plus, I get the sneaky suspicion that much of the fee money goes to salary for the folks who "work" in those parks, like the unmanned booth. So much of that money, I really do suspect, is simply 'make work' money for unneeded jobs."
I visited Red Rock State Park many times over the last couple of years and did not see any evidence of your sneaky suspicion. In fact most of the daily activities were done by volunteers or workcampers (they get a free full camper hook up at the park for working in the park).
You made a choice not to pay the entrance to a state park, no big deal but to assume other things about state employees is another. I would suggest we just need to keep things in perspective.
Jim
I think you're assumptions about where the money goes are mostly unfounded. I'm a general contractor and often get the "this is so simple to build, how can it cost so much" line. I changed my proposals to give very detailed, line-item pricing so that the uneducated client can understand all the things involved that aren't readily apparent. Another similar case is how photographers can charge $200 for a small print, "my gosh it's only a piece of paper and some ink, how could it cost so much". Well, there's buying multiple thousands of dollars in camera and gear, computers, software, printers, paper, ink, travel expenses, time, insurance, etc., etc., etc. I'd be a little less belligerent towards the local park staff until I knew the whole story. As for the notion that everything has been fine for thousands of years, why do anything now? - It's a different era and the natural resources do have to be cared for. Would you really support the NPS abandoning Sequoia NP and letting loggers tear down every last tree? How about hunting in Yellowstone NP until everything is killed? I for one would rather pay a small fee than have a place closed down or be trashed from overuse or neglect.
Scott, I too was an independent contractor for a number of years so I could afford the luxury of being a photographer on the side, giving me extra cash, and freedom to travel when I wanted too. Yes, of course, I agree with all the hidden costs you mention. What I see often when the subject comes up about government spending, the issue always refers to something like "Well, do you want to see loggers cutting down Sequoia or oil wells in Yellowstone?".
My point is more along the lines is "How much government do we really need?". I mean why not charge $50 per entry at Red Rocks, screw the unwealthy and most photographers, and double the staff there? Afterall, we need to save that wonderful treasure. Let's take the approach that money is no object. Maybe the greater the treasure, the more government can charge for entry fees. Yosemite- how wonderful that place is, how about a $200 entry fee? Afterall, we need to protect it from development, and plenty of people with lots of money want to go there. It would certainly cut down on the crowds too.Do you want to see a MacDonalds there? So, let's protect it even more.
Brian, and Jim- I worked for the federal government for a bit over a year once, and saw it from the inside. I've seen much of this topic from all sorts of angles. Now, I am not slandering public servants per se, and you don't need to take offense. I am not the kind that slams the post office, for instance, as I do observe all those folks staying busy on the job. But, you must admit there is an overall inefficiency in government that far exceeds that in the private sector, correct?
I personally don't mind paying fees at state or national parks. My thought is that it helps to prevent overuse. Great Smoky Mtn. Nat Park would be much more pleasant to visit if they had a fee in place. I do realize because of the originial contract or treaty that it is not possible. Just my 2 cents. Ron
Posted by Brian Gatlin on May 11, 2010 at 10:58 PM
am not slandering public servants per se, and you don't need to take offense. I am not the kind that slams the post office, for instance, as I do observe all those folks staying busy on the job. But, you must admit there is an overall inefficiency in government that far exceeds that in the private sector, correct?
seems to me there is a big difference between questioning the efficiency of government and impugning the work ethics of all those who work for government. You might win more converts to your positions if you thought them through more clearly and articulated them less offensively.
My point is more along the lines is "How much government do we really need?"
Don't know the answer to this, but I do know that no government = no parks. It all ends up private, and sold to the highest bidder. Red Rock SP, Yosemite, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon all end up as gated communities. Hope you can afford access then.
It's the same (il)logic of the tea-baggers who bemoan heath care reform as socialism, yet not a one has renounced their Medicare or Social Security.
Anyway, I've resisted my better instincts to avoid this altogether and should sign off. Kudos to Rich Ditch for an excellent synopsis of the state's economy and politics.
Brian, I once complained about private industry practices to a friend, and in that case it happened to be about tricky pricing done by grocery stores. Some of the stores would pull all sorts of sneaky things to trick you, like having all the scales at the checkstands calibrated a bit high, so you'd pay more. Independently I had noticed this, later saw a big expose on tv about the subject. Apparently I was not the only one.
Unfortunately, the friend I mentioned this to happened to be a grocery store worker, and he was deeply offended. There is no connection as I can see. It's like if I slammed the oil companies for oil spills in the ocean, guys working in gas stations shouldn't be offended. And why should there be? There's no connection. You may already have a pre-conceived defensive posture and be making unwarranted assumptions about my opinions.
I don't think you should take offense at all for what others in government may do, Like I said, I spent time in government work, and was appalled with much of what I saw. Many see no problems with it as though it's normal, others like me are offended with how some (not all) employees behave with other peoples' money. One thing I notice a lot of (among myriads of other things) is taking sick, paid days off, as though they are vacation days. Not right imo since that is taking from all of us, but others think it's just fine.Sorry if there;s misunderstanding, I am ready to lay this to rest anyway.
We all have our perspectives and opinions,. so be it,
The Grand Canyon was real nice to visit last weekend, snow storms followed by clearing skies, great, quiet camping, etc.
Edward Abbey is turning over in his grave over what is happening to the public lands. When he was a Ranger at a National Park in Utah many years ago the entrance road was dirt. One day a tourist asked him when the road would be paved and he said "the day before I leave". The motive to develop a park like Red Rock Crossing isn`t to "protect the area" it is to bring in the maximum amount of money as possible from the public. To this end maybe they should put in a Starbucks with a Wi-Fi connection? Back when I lived there before it got "developed" it was a place where the locals would picnic with their families on the weekends but now it is too expensive for them. Now,nobody is happy. Profit motive+bureaucrat=disaster
Thanks Mike! As photographers, we are also inclined to be naturalists with a bit of Edward Abbey in all of us. (Pave it to save it) I think we can see eye to eye on a few things,
Discussion
25 repliessurprised that it's a Sunday afternoon, and the whole park is virtually empty, save for about 3 cars. No wonder, the entrance fee is now $10!!
I turned around and left. In retrospect,I should have paid the ten dollars for the half hour I planned to be there, but at the time, it was too shocking, plus I already had some nice shots from years before.
I can understand that there is upkeep for the parks, but a lot of that money comes from sales taxes and lotto tickets ( I believe).
The area survived just fine thousands of years prior. Plus, I get the sneaky suspicion that much of the fee money goes to salary for the folks who "work" in those parks, like the unmanned booth. So much of that money, I really do suspect, is simply 'make work' money for unneeded jobs. We'll never know for sure, but I do know the trend of the country is that direction everywhere.
So just be prepared to dish out $10 if you go there, plus it's $5 per day to hike any of the trails elsewhere around Sedona or Oak Canyon.
As for disparaging the workers for the decisions of politicians, that's offensive.
- cuts to AZ's already embarrassingly low education funds
- cuts to police
- cuts to social services
- a request from the Republican governor to temporarily raise sales taxes (but forced to a referendum vote so the Republican assembly doesn't get tarred for a tax increase)
- cuts to state parks (including plans to completely close many of them)
- proposed sale of the State Capitol building to private parties so it can be leased back
Some state parks that were scheduled for closure were "adopted" by local communities who didn't want to lose the associated tourist dollars from park visitors. It is possible that the $10 entrance fee at Red Rocks was imposed by a local agency now trying to keep a state park open, or it could be a state mandated fee.
Most residents who make regular visits to state parks buy an annual pass that covers all of them. I get free entry to any state park because I'm an active volunteer at one of them where I've been leading birdwalks since 2001 or so. I don't know about Red Rocks, but I do know that at Boyce Thompson Arboretum there's a lot of work to be done every day and I've never seen any sort of "make work" for unneeded jobs.
http://www.redrocknews.com/News/city-scrounges-to-keep-red-rock-state-park-open.html
Can anyone imagine a trip to Sedona and not being able to go to red Rock Park?
For convenience I've converted that to a link.
I'm downright PROUD to pay extra fees if it will help keep parks open. Though I buy the annual pass for national parks each year, I always go ahead and pay an entrance fee for the parks I particularly support. At least I have some say in where those particular dollars go without the "help" of politicians.
Let's say, since it's near my home where you want to hike, I work out a deal with the NF where there should be an entrance fee, and those fees will go to me (but you don't see that since the flow of money is described as "Park operating expenses"), as an employee to help maintain the forest in my area. Now I have a neat and fun job. Nevermind the NF in my area has done just fine without these services for thousands of years, even with increased usage in the last few decades. Most people who use the area are pretty considerate, don;t leave a mess or destroy natural features. But, you never know, there might be one inconsiderate person, and that's where my job comes in handy.
My job is to go out and make sure debris is not littering the area, and geneneral observation to make sure messy hikers don't ruin the area. I might also clear up the trails once in a while (which most users had done for themselves in times past anyway). First, the fee was $5, and my salary was $35,000 a year. A friend of mine wants to get in on the action, so we all work out a deal, and he gets a similar job, and in theory, you get twice the benefits or our maintenance (whatever that might be). Plus, he goes around and checks to make sure everybody has paid their fees, that vehicles display the "paid receipts" and tickets the ones that do not.
Of course, as public employees, we need all the benefits, like health, retirement, etc, so due to the increasing costs, the entrance fee is hiked to $10. And that's what you pay for this wonderful privilege. And if you can't pay those fees, and my salary is stressing the system, then we should close off the National Forest to your access.
In tougher budget times, we may even consider raising the fees more. Nevermind fewer and fewer people as in Red Rocks Crossing want to use the area because of the higher fees. Richard (above) will argue it's good to raise the fees since the state budgets are hurting anyway. And if you don't want to pay the fees, then we can threaten close the NF in my area to any use whatsoever.
Hank, now tell me, would you still be "proudly" paying entrance fees for this privilege to hike and photograph in the NF near my home? You might say you have done this in years past. without paying fees, and ask why it's necessary now, realizing that fee essentially pays me a salary for a "make work" job. Would you be understanding of me or would you be outraged that I am essentially holding your freedom to move about on our public lands hostage?
Sorry about the absurdity to illustrate my point. Of course, I proudly pay fees for the National Parks. But, my broader point is that at some point, fees can get out of hand, and really become simply monies for unnecessary "make work" jobs. And then, when budgets are tight, our public lands access can be held hostage 'til we pay even more. We can't tax and fee ourselves into wealth. It won't work.
From Mike Sellers, the Good Old Days: I lived in Sedona in the early 1990`s and as a photographer I frequented this
park. In those days there was only a parking lot and no problems finding the
money to keep it open. I don`t understand why the park requires $330,000 to
operate for the next 13 months-that is a whopping $25,385 per month! I wonder
what it cost per month to keep open in 1990? I never thought I would see a park
closed to the public due to a lack of funds but then again I never thought there
would come a day when you would have to buy a pass just to pull over and snap a
picture or g...
As photographers, we should be more attentive to recent trends imho.
"Free" public access to public lands mostly went down the drain when Bush the First invented Use Fees so he could claim he was sticking to his election campaign claims of "no new taxes." The basic premise of this is that if you use the resource in some way then you pay a fair amount for that use.
Park personnel do a lot more than staff an entrance booth to extort money from visitors. As you note there's a lot of clean up required, no matter who the users happen to be. Trails need maintenance as well. Wherever groups of people occur you need law enforcement: I know AZ is a gun state and we are all supposed to pack our own protection so we can defend ourselves in random shootouts, but we do need some sort of law enforcement to clean up and sort things out afterwards. We also need park employees to check where the visitors have been and put out the illegal campfires they've left burning, and fight the larger fires that spring up when they don't find all of them in time.
I know its a shame that we have to pay these people a decent wage including benefits, but that's a fact of life in AZ now that Senate Bill 1070 has been signed into law by Gov Jan Brewer - no more illegal aliens here to work for less than minimum wages and without benefits!
I also have a fundamental issue with your belief that "the NF in my area has done just fine without these services for thousands of years" so that it isn't necessary to protect the resources from public use. That just isn't so. People will abuse the resources in many ways without some sort of maintenance, from planting their illegal drug crops there to stealing the big Saguaros, to cutting down any tree for firewood, to creating new roads for their ATVs, to making ad hoc shooting ranges so they can play with their guns. Without stewardship of our public lands we'd have the Sarah Palins of the world drilling everywhere, or more BP oil spills.
Confusing for sure.
Btw, real interesting. The old timer (soon to be 98) I visited in Phoenix said that he had been to Red Rocks many times in the old days when the area was simply a natural place to visit on our public lands, ie no Park hosts, entry booths, etc.
One summer, (I don't know how long ago, maybe in the 50's or 60's) he recalls, some Native Americans set up camp there for the whole summer, for whatever reason, all in view by the crossing, tipis, horses etc etc. He made several paintings of it. I would have shot the heck out of that. Not any more.
This only wastes our time and everyone elses..
We likely come from various ideological pov, and that's fine. First, there's no threat of Sarah Palin sanctioning oil wells at Red Rocks Crossing, so that too, was unnecessary. You may be unwitting spreading that false fear that results in us relenting more to government, lest we lose the things we cherish. Some call it the "Washington Monument Gambit", which was a ploy by government workers to threaten to close our favorite, cherished monuments, unless taxes (or fees) are increased to pay for salaries. The closing is unnecessary, but the 'gambit' is that threat for something we all cherish. Interesting concept, if you are not familiar. I'm no particular fan of Sarah Palin either; however, with false accusations, you only diminish your own credibility.
In your estimate, is that some $27.000 a month operating cost what it takes to protect Red Rocks from vandals and abuse? If so, then I stand corrected. But, I doubt it, frankly.
State park budget problems link.
Facts:
- Red Rock State Park is a 286 acre nature preserve and environmental education center.
- Park facilities include a visitors center, classroom, theater, gift shop, picnic tables, 10 developed trails, restrooms, and group area with Ramada and facilities. The restrooms are handicapped accessible. Camping facilities are not available at this park.
- The Red Rock State Park property was acquired by the Arizona State Parks Board in 1986 and the park was opened to the public in 1991. The park's 286 acres were originally part of the Smoke Trail Ranch, owned by Jack and Helen Frye. Arizona's famous Oak Creek meanders through this scenic park, creating a diverse riparian habitat abounding with plants and wildlife. This riparian habitat, the land-based ecosystem closely associated with Oak Creek, provides the setting and the opportunity for the park to offer a focus on environmental education.
- This Park is Scheduled to Close June 3, 2010
- Red Rock State Park is open 7 days a week from 8 am – 5 pm. The Visitor Center is open 9 am – 5 pm daily. Movie Theatre, Guided Walks, Jr. Ranger Program.
- Effective March 1st, the Park entrance fee is $10.00 per vehicle, up to four adults. Individual passes are $3.00 for pedestrians, bicyclists, and horses; $2.00 for children. The Arizona State Park Annual Fee is available for $75.00 (some restrictions apply).
Good thing I didn't pay the $10 entrance fee, since it was darn near 5 pm when I was there. Just as the light was getting pretty good for a shot, I would have been kicked out.
I've been running into that a lot, that is even where I am a paid visitor, I can't have access for late or early light. Or worse, when those areas are supposed to be open, the gate is still locked.
On my next topic, I'll explain why photographers' fees in those places should be added onto the entrance fees and increased drastically.
Yeah, $10 is pretty steep. Even the donation boxes in the national parks kind of tick me off but realistically, we (the US as a whole) would rather pave the world than save the world. Outdoor natural resources that don't have an immediate financial return simply aren't a priority for government. Photographers don't even rank as a non-priority.
So what to do? A rant here isn't going to help anything. Most people here are not fromthe area and have absolutely reaon to be listened to for what is essentially a regional issue. You live there. Address your local media and people who the influence to do something and do it as a well constructed argument, not the rant you have written here. You may fail but at least you have tried. It is more that what most people will do.
For entrance into the Red Rock State Park or Slide Rock State Park around Sedona (or any AZ state park) you will have to pay the entrance fee or get the annual state park pass. The entrance fee use to be $8 for the last couple of years, now it is $10 due to state budget problems. For the first 2 years I lived in Arizona I would just pay the daily entrance fee because it was worth it to me to experience and photograph at these places. Now I just get the state park annual pass.
This is really no different than what I would expect if went out of state and wanted to visit a state park for a day in another state. Most state parks charge for entrance.
I do believe you are way off base with stating -
"Plus, I get the sneaky suspicion that much of the fee money goes to salary for the folks who "work" in those parks, like the unmanned booth. So much of that money, I really do suspect, is simply 'make work' money for unneeded jobs."
I visited Red Rock State Park many times over the last couple of years and did not see any evidence of your sneaky suspicion. In fact most of the daily activities were done by volunteers or workcampers (they get a free full camper hook up at the park for working in the park).
You made a choice not to pay the entrance to a state park, no big deal but to assume other things about state employees is another. I would suggest we just need to keep things in perspective.
Jim
plenty of public servants on this board. You've managed to slander them all. congrats.
My point is more along the lines is "How much government do we really need?". I mean why not charge $50 per entry at Red Rocks, screw the unwealthy and most photographers, and double the staff there? Afterall, we need to save that wonderful treasure. Let's take the approach that money is no object. Maybe the greater the treasure, the more government can charge for entry fees. Yosemite- how wonderful that place is, how about a $200 entry fee? Afterall, we need to protect it from development, and plenty of people with lots of money want to go there. It would certainly cut down on the crowds too.Do you want to see a MacDonalds there? So, let's protect it even more.
Brian, and Jim- I worked for the federal government for a bit over a year once, and saw it from the inside. I've seen much of this topic from all sorts of angles. Now, I am not slandering public servants per se, and you don't need to take offense. I am not the kind that slams the post office, for instance, as I do observe all those folks staying busy on the job. But, you must admit there is an overall inefficiency in government that far exceeds that in the private sector, correct?
seems to me there is a big difference between questioning the efficiency of government and impugning the work ethics of all those who work for government. You might win more converts to your positions if you thought them through more clearly and articulated them less offensively.
Don't know the answer to this, but I do know that no government = no parks. It all ends up private, and sold to the highest bidder. Red Rock SP, Yosemite, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon all end up as gated communities. Hope you can afford access then.
It's the same (il)logic of the tea-baggers who bemoan heath care reform as socialism, yet not a one has renounced their Medicare or Social Security.
Anyway, I've resisted my better instincts to avoid this altogether and should sign off. Kudos to Rich Ditch for an excellent synopsis of the state's economy and politics.
Unfortunately, the friend I mentioned this to happened to be a grocery store worker, and he was deeply offended. There is no connection as I can see. It's like if I slammed the oil companies for oil spills in the ocean, guys working in gas stations shouldn't be offended. And why should there be? There's no connection. You may already have a pre-conceived defensive posture and be making unwarranted assumptions about my opinions.
I don't think you should take offense at all for what others in government may do, Like I said, I spent time in government work, and was appalled with much of what I saw. Many see no problems with it as though it's normal, others like me are offended with how some (not all) employees behave with other peoples' money. One thing I notice a lot of (among myriads of other things) is taking sick, paid days off, as though they are vacation days. Not right imo since that is taking from all of us, but others think it's just fine.Sorry if there;s misunderstanding, I am ready to lay this to rest anyway.
We all have our perspectives and opinions,. so be it,
The Grand Canyon was real nice to visit last weekend, snow storms followed by clearing skies, great, quiet camping, etc.
Best to you all, MM