[pct-l] Mt. Rainier Climbing fee to double

[CMountainDave@aol.com (CMountainDave@aol.com)]

> Therefore $30 or $75 or even $100 is nothing when put in
> >> proper perspective...!!

 I went to several user fee question and answer sessions sponsored by the M=
ountaineers in Seattle. Someone there mentioned that the propaganda that wo=
uld be used would equate a visit to a national Park or wilderness to a fami=
ly vacation to Diney World or Las Vegas or even skiing and going to a baseb=
all game. The inference being that if a family is willing to pay $100 to $2=
00 dollars for a weekend of "tickets" for fun, why should they not expect t=
o pay the same to do ANYTHING in a national park or wilderness. Seems only =
fair and it's for a good cause. Only problem is, it's then a short hop to s=
imply leasing out the whole she bang to some company like Disney or Harveys=
 where  big buck guided  back country tours will become the rule- at minimu=
m only 50% of "permits"(quotas subject to company cash flow needs) issued t=
o private citizens. Or so the theory goes. Some people see a gold mine in c=
harging for recreation on public land via "concession leasing." The whole w=
orld is waiting to be their customers.And leasing would turn the NPS/NFS in=
to a money makers instead of a money users for the Govt. Business wins, the=
 Govt wins, and we get to keep 50% of what we had as long as we don't whine=
 too much about it.
     Looks like they've made a good start when people start saying it's all=
 about "proper perspective" when viewing user fees.