Tickets at castle wood canyon

Ben Brotelho wrote:This stuff pisses me off too...you shouldn't have to pay to access public land!!!

Sigh. Yes, because public parks are totally free to maintain right? (We aren't talking about NF or BLM land here). The reason that you have to pay is because everyone gripes about low taxes, but then when they get them and public services suffer then everyone cries bloody murder. The parks are just charging what they need in order to exist. Its not like they have shareholders on Wall Street. Its a pretty simple formula: getting services = paying for it. Either stop using the services (parks included) or quit your f*cking whining about paying $7 for it. Sheesh.

Services are different from raw access to a piece of land, which is where my bone of contention lies. Pay for services, including parking, yes...but nobody should have to pay to step foot on public land.

Except taxes, of course. I'm all fired up today about a parking ticket I am fighting as well (sign is faded beyond legibility), so I am using this thread as a place to rant.

Locker wrote:... Three, don't fucking post such DUMB shit! ...

I'm afraid we are going to have to call you out on this one.

David Appelhans wrote: Those are the two alternatives, taxes go up or parks go away? How about the park getting smarter with how they spend their money, or simply offering less "services". These things tend to build into little empires and become much more than they need to be. How about the park doesn't hire more rangers whose job is to give out tickets or collect fees at the gate? Why not challenge something instead of blindly accepting it? Remember the forest service charging people to drive up Mt. Evans on a road built and maintained by c-dot to arrive at Denver Parks property? People said it had always been that way for a long time, and the poor forest service needs our money. Then people got sick of paying the forest service so it could hire rangers to ticket cars and collect fees. Now you can drive up Mt. Evans without a fee, because some people decided they wouldn't "just deal with it".

This is a straw-man argument. I didn't say that every dollar that is spent in every state park is well-spent. If you think your park isn't spending money properly, be active and definitely fight authority! The park is there to serve the people, so if enough people go to meetings and call their local political representative, you can change things. All politics is local!

What I'm saying is that, generally, parks cost money to maintain. You need rangers to keep the place safe and clean. You need trail-builders. You need to print maps. You need to build bathrooms. Whatever. These things cost money, and that money has to come from somewhere. Because it's incredibly hard to raise taxes these days (thank you, tea party), parks have to find some other way to raise money. That means entrance fees.

If you read my post, you'll notice that what I responded to was Ben's statement that no state park should ever cost money to get into. ("Some do, some don't. None should!") I took this to mean that we shouldn't pay for parks. For the reasons above, this is dead wrong. Ben has since made clear that he thinks we should fund parks solely through taxes, not through entrance fees. I have no problem with that, except it's politically unfeasible. I'd rather pay for parks with taxes, but I'd rather have parks than not pay an entrance fee.

Now, you might say that you don't want rangers or trails or maps. Fine. In some wild areas of the country, you don't need them. Where there's more space than anyone knows what to do with, the lack of crowds means everyone can go for free and be left alone without much problem. But in parks close to urban areas, rangers are pretty much mandatory. Who stops crime? Who stops environmental damage? Who stops the ATV-ers from ruining the place? The idea that you can just let areas be "wild" simply doesn't fly when the land is close to a million or more people, all eager to use the land in the way they see fit, and often in ways that undermine others' enjoyment of that land. Someone needs to manage this land in an appropriate way, and it costs money to do it.

I don't know Castlewood Canyon. Maybe it's isolated and quiet and could survive easily with almost no oversight. But seeing as how it's about 40 miles to the heart of downtown Denver (thank you google maps), my bet is that, left to their own devices, the people who went there would soon destroy it.

"The idea that you can just let areas be "wild" simply doesn't fly when the land is close to a million or more people, all eager to use the land in the way they see fit, and often in ways that undermine others' enjoyment of that land."

You're describing both the Adirondack and Catskill state parks to a T. Neither charge for parking at any of the publicly owned trailheads, or charge any other sort of entry fee. We pay for its maintenance with our taxes, which I DO support. We pay for the programs run by the Dept. of Env. Conserv. to maintain both parks and enforce regulations. That is the way it should be.

Derek Lawrence wrote: You can drive up but you can't stop... If you are going to park or use any of the facilities on Mount Evans, you are supposed to pay the fee

Is this still the case? I was up there a couple of weekends ago, near the Summit lake parking lot. All of the signs at the lot appeared to specify that the land is owned by Denver Mountain Parks and there was no mention of fees for parking there.

Dan G0D5H411 wrote: Is this still the case? I was up there a couple of weekends ago, near the Summit lake parking lot. All of the signs at the lot appeared to specify that the land is owned by Denver Mountain Parks and there was no mention of fees for parking there.

I looked more into it and per the FS website
"The fee is required at: Mount Goliath Natural Area and the Summit of Mount Evans Interpretive Site." So the side of the road (like David said) and Summit Lake should be no-fee

Ben Brotelho wrote:"The idea that you can just let areas be "wild" simply doesn't fly when the land is close to a million or more people, all eager to use the land in the way they see fit, and often in ways that undermine others' enjoyment of that land." You're describing both the Adirondack and Catskill state parks to a T. Neither charge for parking at any of the publicly owned trailheads, or charge any other sort of entry fee. We pay for its maintenance with our taxes, which I DO support. We pay for the programs run by the Dept. of Env. Conserv. to maintain both parks and enforce regulations. That is the way it should be.

The Daks and Catskills are very far from the closest urban center. (Ok, Albany's close, but NYC is where most of the people are.) What works there simply doesn't work in places much closer to major urban centers, especially when that urban center is FULL of people who want to use the outdoors.

But, Ben, we both agree that taxes are the way to do it. I think we share more ground than not. I suppose I'm just more of a realist in that I recognize states are running out of money, and parks budgets are being cut all over the country. Nobody will come out in favor of a tax increase, so the only way to save some parks is to charge at the gate. It sucks, but it's better than the only other realistic alternative, which is to close the parks, or let them be destroyed.

Again, I really think we agree on the major issue, which is that public spaces should be paid for with public funds! Unfortunately, I just don't think it works in the current political climate.

OP- Your question was "What can you do?? I would say- 1)Get a park pass. Colorado has a bunch of cool state parks. You only have to go to state parks ten times in a year to make it worth the money. 2)Find somewhere else to climb. There are a lot of free places to climb. Castlewood is close, and one should expect to pay for the convenience. 3) Ride your bike from your house. If you're cheaping out on the entry fee, I am sure it kills you to pay for gas to get there. Just be sure not to use any of the parks facilities. It costs to keep them maintained and should only be used by people who appreciate the parks and support them.

Suka D. wrote: It costs to keep them maintained

Castlewood has the additional expense of stocking the inner canyon with rattlesnakes, poison ivy & ticks to help keep the crowds down. Pretty good deal for $7 really.

Locker wrote:"What can I do? Suggestions?" For one, quit being a baby! Two, be accountable! Three, don't fucking post such DUMB shit! Four, pay the ticket! Five, quit being such a cheap MoFo and buy a pass (An ANNUAL pass is the BEST bet!) ;-)

You should check out whether or not you were inside the park as it is legal to park along county or state roads as long as you are 6 feet off the raod (the white line on paved roads). To those who want only taxes to pay for parks, would you be willing to pay more than 50% of your curent income in taxes to pay for things like nice parks? Or should only someone else pay more taxes, not you? Furthermore, CO State Parks are highly supported already by gambling taxes, enabling the purchase of about 1/2 of Castlewood Canyon SP and other parks.

$7 is about what a microbrew costs and those don't usually last 2 hours so that's not a big fee compared to a lot of things. There are some free Open Space Parks in the vicinity too with bouldering and hiking.

Just on the Alec 32's thought that "left to their own devices, the people who went there would soon destroy it"...it used to not be a state park. I know some folks who used to go there back in the old days, when it was much less regulated. They went there frequently and they didn't destroy it. They loved it and took care of it. It's just different now.

Alec32 wrote: So then taxes go up. Or parks go away. These things cost money to run. I'm not opposed to higher taxes to pay for parks, but for the most part, that's politically unfeasible. So, if you want the park to stay, you gotta pay... (I'm not a CO climber, but the same general economic principles apply everywhere...)

Ah, yes. Tress and bushes and dirt cost money to run. I love to hear this from a New Yorker, the land of absurd fees and ridiculous taxes. It is just not so. But, New Yorkers that claim to be tough, just lay down and roll over to fees and taxes everywhere. I lived there for 23 years. New Yorkers might even allow a tax on soda. Funny.

To the OP: If you enter into a park that requires a fee, pay it. If you park on a road that requires no fee, you should pay nothing. Nobody has any evidence where you went after you parked you vehicle. It's that simple. Is parking allowed on that county road? If so, fight the ticket. Remember, the only rights you have are the rights you know you have and are willing to defend.

Taxation is theft and government is force. Geologic anomalies like CWC and Eldo should be protected by localized non-profit land trusts.

The road into the West side is a shoulder-less dirt road with fencing on either side. we used to park alongside it outside of the park 20 years ago, but I can't see how to get 6' off now. There is an Open Space p-lot a little over a mile away to the West on CO 86

WARNING--this is getting slightly political. I apologize. If you hate that shit, skip this post.

Leo Paik wrote:Just on the Alec 32's thought that "left to their own devices, the people who went there would soon destroy it"...it used to not be a state park. I know some folks who used to go there back in the old days, when it was much less regulated. They went there frequently and they didn't destroy it. They loved it and took care of it. It's just different now.

Leo, as you know the area and I don't, you are probably right. I tried to be careful about making a general statement. Surely some wild areas are best left truly wild. That said, the world was a lot different back in the "old days." There are a lot more people now who want to use these resources, and the community who uses them has gotten much more diverse. When everyone knew everyone else, it was more likely that people took responsibility for their own actions, because they could get called out for failing to be good stewards of the land. But now with more people comes more anonymity, which lets people think they can get away with bad behavior.

That is a very general statement. I could be wrong about this particular park. But generally these arguments tend to raise the issue of "back in the good old days..." which I think is dangerous. Times have changed for outdoor recreation, and we need to change with it.

Greg D wrote: Ah, yes. Tress and bushes and dirt cost money to run. I love to hear this from a New Yorker, the land of absurd fees and ridiculous taxes. It is just not so. But, New Yorkers that claim to be tough, just lay down and roll over to fees and taxes everywhere. I lived there for 23 years. New Yorker might even allow a tax on soda. Funny.

I supported the soda ban! Honestly, I think this may be an east/west thing. New Yorkers certainly don't "roll over to fees and taxes everywhere," but we know that, with 8 million people that have to get along in a very small space and have to be taken care of when they need it, taxes are necessary.

Mike Lane wrote:Taxation is theft and government is force.

"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes (who, if you read about him you will find, was no communist).

You supported the soda ban?!?!

What a crock!

A few facts about Colorado State Parks:

1) Parks receives no money from the General Fund (AKA "your taxes"). It did in the past, but does not now and will not for the foreseeable future.

2) Parks receives some money from GOCO (aka Lottery money). That money has very specific uses - land purchases, new facilities, new equipment. It does not contribute to operating budgets.

3) Parks receives some federal grants. I think a lot of that ends up in the trails program. That money does not go into operating budgets for parks.

4) The park I work at, Eldo, has consistently increased visitation every year. In the last five years, we have reduced the numbers of full-time personnel and seasonal employees. Many parks in the system face similar challenges.

In short - our taxes don't pay for doodley-squat in Colorado State Parks. Entrance fees are it.

Now, back to the regularly scheduled circular debate.

Paying fees sucks...but it's better than free. When everything is free and unregulated you end up with meth heads camped there for months at a time. Here in OR we have (or "had") lots of places for free and unregulated camping/hiking. What you end up with is a bunch of people on meth living there and they all look like extras from the movie "The Road."

When parks are "free" people generally fuck them up. What I object to is paying for multiple passes that cover the same area.