Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 145
  1. #51
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,266
    I will ride all of these state parks that my taxes pay for. Simple. I buy passes at private places only. Will not pay to park in MOST state parks(pay to park, about 1/4 of the time at Annadel). I buy Tamarancho Pass each year. Poach State parks? I guess.

  2. #52
    Dropshot Champ!
    Reputation: redmr2_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,802
    Quote Originally Posted by hoolie View Post
    Poach State parks? I guess.
    plus, racing away from the rangers sounds like interval training to me. Wear a gopro and hammer, I wanna see vids!

  3. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    205
    Some of you guys are too much. Many repeatedly say that they will pay for private areas but not for state or county parks, etc. I imagine some of you can justify it to yourselves because you pay state taxes (which incidentally are fractional compared to federal) and despite massive cuts to parks across the board, they don't need your support and your feeling of entitlement exempts you. Other protests are based on the question of "What right do they have?" FOCC has been appointed by the state to manage the park, not any of you who have been protesting over the pittance of a fee to enjoy the park.

    In Japan, France and Italy, among other places, the simple act of driving on the freeway tends to be very expensive as all freeways are toll roads, not to mention that gas is around $8/gallon. That's just how it is and people deal with it and don't complain. The point is that in that case it's for essential everyday needs and day to day life. So here, we have so many things that are taken for granted, and people don't want to pay a few bucks to enjoy a great local recreational resource that many do take for granted.

    Spoiled whiny mountain bikers with 4 or 5k bikes on 30-50k rides crying about a few dollars to support a park. What do you spend at Starbucks or on an IPA? Claiming it's the principle or politics and demanding answers on the basis of whose right is it to charge? Just pony up, support the park and quit crying.

  4. #54
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,266

    You should re-read my post

    I am not complaining or entitled. Just stated the facts. I grew up in CA riding parks since BMX days in 1975. I will continue to ride them for free (minus my $1500 mo in state taxes I pay). I do not see any toll roads, and fuel is $4 gal here. State parks are generally free to walk/ride in. A fool and his money are soon parted, as the saying goes. I love how people are trying to SAVE state parks and it turns out that our officials are HIDING millions. Classic. Guns or butter. Parks or prisons. Does not really matter to me any more as I slide into the latter half of my life. I will continue to ride Most State parks for free. Often. You can pay more if you want. I respect your opinion, it is different than mine.

  5. #55
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post

    Some of you guys are too much. Many repeatedly say that they will pay for private areas but not for state or county parks, etc. I imagine some of you can justify it to yourselves because you pay state taxes (which incidentally are fractional compared to federal) and despite massive cuts to parks across the board, they don't need your support and your feeling of entitlement exempts you. Other protests are based on the question of "What right do they have?" FOCC has been appointed by the state to manage the park, not any of you who have been protesting over the pittance of a fee to enjoy the park.
    Let me be clear...

    I did not say that supporting FOCC was a bad idea.

    I did not say I would not pay.

    Whether it is okay with "you" or a good idea, a small thing to ask, or supports badly needed riding areas is irrelevant.

    How much your bike is worth is irrelevant.

    I ask a simple question about the right to charge in a place that has never charged in my experience.


    By analogy:

    Skyline in Napa is State land managed by the City of Napa which charges $6 for parking. I don't know how that started or by what right they can do that. We always park and pay. Locals and frequenters enter from the College or other spots and do not pay.

    It is in that vein that I ask this question. It is a fair question, which I have asked of FoCC.
    I don't rattle.

  6. #56
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,266

    I really don't like to pay at Skyline NAPA

    But I do sometimes pay to support. Last thur a worker was driving quad around and doing some trailwork while ice was still on parts. Awesome. I am due to pay there, it has been a few too many free times, and that reminded me to pay up. I know where some of the $ is going at Skyline. China camp trails have a dearth of state workers with shovels. San Quentin is a few miles down the road, those guys should be working those trails!

  7. #57
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    I am told by some long time CC denizens that the upper trail, now Bay View, was once known as Convict as the guys at Q built it.
    I don't rattle.

  8. #58
    Old,slow,still havin fun.
    Reputation: fgiraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    943
    I ask a simple question about the right to charge in a place that has never charged in my experience.
    The right to charge was granted in CA Bill 1589, aka California State Park Stewardship Act of 2012, authored last February and signed into law by the guv on 09/25/12.

    Look at section 5080.42, or search for "operating agreement".

  9. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FKFW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    I am told by some long time CC denizens that the upper trail, now Bay View, was once known as Convict as the guys at Q built it.
    Almost true. Bayveiw was built with help from inmates of the Delta Crew, State Park workers and a core group of volunteers who later built Tamarancho. We started building Tamarancho 19 years ago with B-17. At the time the state would only allow low risk inmates to volunteer for work duty outside of the prision. No way in heck they would let inmates from the Q out to help with anything.

  10. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: squareback's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,436

    Always read the fine print...

    Quote Originally Posted by fgiraffe View Post
    The right to charge was granted in CA Bill 1589, aka California State Park Stewardship Act of 2012, authored last February and signed into law by the guv on 09/25/12.

    Look at section 5080.42, or search for "operating agreement".
    5019.92. (a) The department shall develop a prioritized action
    plan to increase revenues and collection of user fees at state parks.
    The plan shall include strategies for generating new revenues and
    fee collection methodologies at state parks.......
    Last edited by squareback; 01-10-2013 at 05:53 PM.

  11. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Let me be clear...

    I did not say that supporting FOCC was a bad idea.

    I did not say I would not pay.

    Whether it is okay with "you" or a good idea, a small thing to ask, or supports badly needed riding areas is irrelevant.

    How much your bike is worth is irrelevant.

    I ask a simple question about the right to charge in a place that has never charged in my experience.


    By analogy:

    Skyline in Napa is State land managed by the City of Napa which charges $6 for parking. I don't know how that started or by what right they can do that. We always park and pay. Locals and frequenters enter from the College or other spots and do not pay.

    It is in that vein that I ask this question. It is a fair question, which I have asked of FoCC.
    You just copied and pasted your "Let me be clear" post from weeks ago. You have your answer now, since it appears FoCC never got back to you. ("I have sent them an email to this effect and will report.")

    "The right to charge was granted in CA Bill 1589, aka California State Park Stewardship Act of 2012, authored last February and signed into law by the guv on 09/25/12.

    Look at section 5080.42, or search for "operating agreement"."

  12. #62
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    Quote Originally Posted by FKFW View Post
    Almost true. Bayveiw was built with help from inmates of the Delta Crew, State Park workers and a core group of volunteers who later built Tamarancho. We started building Tamarancho 19 years ago with B-17. At the time the state would only allow low risk inmates to volunteer for work duty outside of the prision. No way in heck they would let inmates from the Q out to help with anything.
    Thank you!
    I don't rattle.

  13. #63
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    That FoCC has not gotten back to me says nothing about the discussion.

    Between squareback and fgiraffe this is still is not clear.
    Then there is the issue of different fees for different users.

    Clearly there will be pushback on fees.

    I'm not sure this is a done deal.
    I don't rattle.

  14. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    985
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    Some of you guys are too much. Many repeatedly say that they will pay for private areas but not for state or county parks, etc. I imagine some of you can justify it to yourselves because you pay state taxes (which incidentally are fractional compared to federal) and despite massive cuts to parks across the board, they don't need your support and your feeling of entitlement exempts you. Other protests are based on the question of "What right do they have?" FOCC has been appointed by the state to manage the park, not any of you who have been protesting over the pittance of a fee to enjoy the park.
    Tax paying Californian's are -in effect- paying twice to access public lands. Furthermore, the tiered fees are inherently unfair simply because FOCC "thinks" that bikes should pay more for -and I can only suppose here- that they do more damage; an opinion not based on any modicum of science. Therefore I will also eschew paying these "fees."

    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    In Japan, France and Italy, among other places, the simple act of driving on the freeway tends to be very expensive as all freeways are toll roads, not to mention that gas is around $8/gallon. That's just how it is and people deal with it and don't complain. The point is that in that case it's for essential everyday needs and day to day life. So here, we have so many things that are taken for granted, and people don't want to pay a few bucks to enjoy a great local recreational resource that many do take for granted.
    Nice straw-man argument. The Japanese and Euros may pay more to drive, but they also have a public transportation system that allows them to go almost anywhere they want; affordably, rapidly, often, and with their bikes, whereas it is virtually impossible to do any of these things in the states as there is very limited transportation options, even fewer that allow bikes (and those that do only have room for 2 in most cases), these few services don't run frequently, they rarely go anywhere near where we ride, and in most cases, you'll spend 4 times more time getting to your ride and home -while changing and waiting between multiple buses- than actually riding...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    Spoiled whiny mountain bikers with 4 or 5k bikes on 30-50k rides crying about a few dollars to support a park. What do you spend at Starbucks or on an IPA? Claiming it's the principle or politics and demanding answers on the basis of whose right is it to charge? Just pony up, support the park and quit crying.
    Way to throw out stereotypes. Most riders don't have 5K bikes or 50K rides. For those that do, are we supposed to believe that they should just spend, spend, spend without thinking about what they are spending it on? This statement alone makes me suspect that you are not a mountain biker. Whether or not you are, you shouldn't make gross generalizations based on some bias you may hold. It doesn't matter how wealthy, poor, or whether or not they drink coffee; just because they ride a bike doesn't mean that they have an obligation to pay twice -or that they should pay more- to use public property.

    Here's another thing: since I live in Marin these days, I have a pass to Tamarancho. Now I'm "required" to buy one for CC. There's talk of Annadel SP may be going the same way, and there are plenty of people out there that think that all public parks should be "managed" in this way. Conjecture would suggest that Marin Water, Mid Pen, EBRP and organizations farther afield will follow suit. So, how many different passes will I have to pay for to ride within a 2 hour drive (drive of course, since I can't realistically use public transport) of my home and how much will they all cost?
    Last edited by huntermos; 01-10-2013 at 10:37 PM.

  15. #65
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702

    second that....

    Quote Originally Posted by Plim View Post
    Yes. I am serious.

    Like I said, I have no problem paying to use private land. I've had season Tamarancho passes for years. I do have a problem with fees for a public park.

    If CA isn't going to have public parks - and I no longer consider China Camp a public park - it needs to completely get out of meddling with them and owning them. China Camp a private nature preserve with trails: fine, I'll pay a fee. China Camp a new housing development - at least my government would get some money out of the deal (which they'd then waste). But the current situation of pretending to have public parks but not really having them is a bunch of ********. It's also something I expect is here to stay.
    We the people own the park, and we the people pay taxes to maintain the park. I don't think I should have to pay a day fee to use the park I (we) already own and pay taxes for with everybody else.

    I'll gladly accept a tax hike (I in fact voted for one), donate money, or help out with maintenance work, but this is silly.
    Last edited by pimpbot; 01-10-2013 at 10:48 PM.

  16. #66
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,266

    As usual, I will be paying mostly zero.

    Picture a goose egg in your head.

  17. #67
    Old,slow,still havin fun.
    Reputation: fgiraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    943
    Quote Originally Posted by squareback View Post
    5019.92. (a) The department shall develop a prioritized action
    plan to increase revenues and collection of user fees at state parks.
    The plan shall include strategies for generating new revenues and
    fee collection methodologies at state parks.......
    Read the rest of that same sentence:
    and may include, but is not necessarily limited to, all of the following..

    squareback I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Please clarify. Sincerely. 5019.92 is not contradictory to 5080.42.


    Between squareback and fgiraffe this is still is not clear
    Mike, what is not clear? You keep asking over and over who gives FoCC the right to charge. That law, amended by the legislature and signed by the governor gives the state the right to designate non-governmental entities the right to operate the park. FoCC is the operator for China Camp. The law allows 20 parks in the state to be operated like this.


    Tax paying Californian's are -in effect- paying twice to access public lands.
    Correct. Because the state has said the first payment is insufficient. They crudely communicated this by threatening to close 70 parks. The situation sucks. CA has a deep-seated, multi-facted $$$ problem. I'm not arguing that anyone las to like this solution, or that the state does not waste a huge amount of money, or State Parks doesn't hide millions away (!!!) or that things should be different. But this is the current reality.
    Last edited by fgiraffe; 01-11-2013 at 10:22 AM. Reason: bold, for emphasis!

  18. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTT77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    348
    Did anyone catch that California is projecting an $850mm budget SURPLUS for 2013? News story I read said "Democrats are planning to use the surplus to restore funding for programs that were cut"

    And guess what - I'm not paying to ride CC.

  19. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    62
    Hey everyone,

    Thought I'd let you know that FOCC has already collected over $2,000 in just 7 days, mostly coming from mountain bike passes, and they couldn't be happier! I'm going to buy mine now. And if Annadel goes this route I'll happily buy that pass too. Support our best riding places!

  20. #70
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193
    I'm curious, would you willingly buy a permit to ride the trails in Henry Cowell State Park that are adjacent to UCSC? What if you could park in the main parking area as part of that permit, and legitimately cross the river and head west, and never face the risk of a ticket?

    Patty
    "...So forget all your duties, oh yeah! Fat bottomed girls, they'll be riding today..." Freddie Mercury

  21. #71
    I'm really diggin it!
    Reputation: Davey Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,372
    I will gladly pay to ride China Camp. However, I am still very concerned that the rates are different for hikers and mountain bikers. I've never even seen a horse in 20 years of riding at CC. I think the different rates enforce the incorrect thinking that mountain bikes some how cost the parks more money. Marin has a long standing tradition of making the mountain bike a scapegoat for poor trail design.

    Again I'm not going to poach China Camp. If I wasn't so busy with the flow trail build and I was actually riding I would join the bike patrol that FOCC are going to set up. If you are worried about what is going to happen at CC the best thing to do would be join the FOCC and make a difference from inside the organization. Quoting state law and claiming you will poach the park are equally unproductive. Be the change you want at CC, man up and do something about it.

  22. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Davey Simon View Post
    I will gladly pay to ride China Camp. However, I am still very concerned that the rates are different for hikers and mountain bikers. I've never even seen a horse in 20 years of riding at CC. I think the different rates enforce the incorrect thinking that mountain bikes some how cost the parks more money. Marin has a long standing tradition of making the mountain bike a scapegoat for poor trail design.

    Again I'm not going to poach China Camp. If I wasn't so busy with the flow trail build and I was actually riding I would join the bike patrol that FOCC are going to set up. If you are worried about what is going to happen at CC the best thing to do would be join the FOCC and make a difference from inside the organization. Quoting state law and claiming you will poach the park are equally unproductive. Be the change you want at CC, man up and do something about it.
    I have not seen an explanation for the price difference yet, so I'll hold off judgement for now. I beleive FOCC is preparing a respond to the many questions people have about the pass system. It should appear in the MCBC newsletter as soon as it's available. It's a good group of people over at FOCC. Heck they raised 1/2 a million dollars to keep the park open and they've bent over backwards to enfranchise mountain bikers in the process.

    BTW, there's a Trail Work Day coming up at China Camp on Sunday, January 27. You can get the details at MCBC website, marinbike dot org. Hope to see you out there!

  23. #73
    Lusus Naturae
    Reputation: NoBalance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,841
    How about this. I pay the fee and FOCC opens up the "backside" of china camp and adds trail signs, maintains the trails, etc?

  24. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by NoBalance View Post
    How about this. I pay the fee and FOCC opens up the "backside" of china camp and adds trail signs, maintains the trails, etc?
    It's not their land.

  25. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MarinRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    28
    Speaking of China Camp, how are the trails looking for riding this weekend?

  26. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by ninertom View Post
    I have not seen an explanation for the price difference yet,
    I talked to the head of FOCC and asked about the price difference. He said that he was pressured to not charge a fee for hikers at all which he did not agree to. The reason mountain bikers pay more is that they use more of the park than a hiker would. I cannot argue with that. I don't like the price differences but I think the FOCC is doing a great job in saving a very important state park. I just hope that they can keep it up. Raising 500k is tough enough, imagine doing it year after year.
    I also heard that that the Terrapin Family Band will be playing the fundraiser in June at China Camp Village. Don't miss it!

  27. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: somanygoodbikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by MarinRR View Post
    Speaking of China Camp, how are the trails looking for riding this weekend?
    I did a frontside loop yesterday (all of Shoreline and Bay View) and there was a lot of surface water running on the trails, but very little mud. Fenders would have been nice. Visibility from the vista points was incredible.

    The pay station at the Miwok entrance didn't seem to have a functioning card reader. Fortunately I had some small bills.

  28. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by ninertom View Post
    I have not seen an explanation for the price difference yet, so I'll hold off judgement for now. I beleive FOCC is preparing a respond to the many questions people have about the pass system. It should appear in the MCBC newsletter as soon as it's available. It's a good group of people over at FOCC. Heck they raised 1/2 a million dollars to keep the park open and they've bent over backwards to enfranchise mountain bikers in the process.

    BTW, there's a Trail Work Day coming up at China Camp on Sunday, January 27. You can get the details at MCBC website, marinbike dot org. Hope to see you out there!
    Could someone enlighten me on how FOCC bent over backwards to enfranchise moutain bikers? No sarcasm intended.

    I have mixed feelings about this group and do not intend to give them any money at this point. That's because the quality of the "product" (ie: trail) I'd be paying for will be reduced as the funds and volunteers are used in an attempt to close trails. I think park regulars will know what I'm talking about. Perhaps in the long term they have good intentions for bikes, but I dont have a lifetime to grind away in the civic process as the bureaucracy/hiker/horse interests block efforts to create trail in Marin. Yes I understand apathy is part of the mtb community's problem and I should participate etc., but with results like the 680 trail...there isn't much incentive. Trancho flow trail? different story-there's a lot of light at the end of that tunnel and a great example of how easy it can be without the bureaucracy. Stafford lake? great that it got approved, still about 800k short though. It's just that on public lands in Marin it's nearly hopeless and I hate losing what little we have.

    On the other hand, the same groups opposed to bikes have done an amazing job of keeping the condos and freeways away in this county for the last 70 years...so they aren't all bad.

  29. #79
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    Quote Originally Posted by vernonator View Post
    I talked to the head of FOCC and asked about the price difference. He said that he was pressured to not charge a fee for hikers at all which he did not agree to. The reason mountain bikers pay more is that they use more of the park than a hiker would.
    I was afraid we would hear something like this; a total contrivance, a sham, sustaining the usual bias. I can certainly argue this point. How much of the park we use is irrelevant. Should runners pay $2.50? Mountain bikers came forward big time to make that money possible, too, and are the major park user in terms of numbers and frequency. And we still get the short end of the stick.

    Same old wine in a brand new bottle. Come on you guys!
    I don't rattle.

  30. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    939

    What the...??????

    Quote Originally Posted by NoBalance View Post
    How about this. I pay the fee and FOCC opens up the "backside" of china camp and adds trail signs, maintains the trails, etc?

    Those trails are maintained better than the China Camp trails will ever be, any under level of funding. Why screw up such a good thing?
    Live to Ride, Ride to Live

  31. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,650
    i think we should consider filing a formal complaint around the differential pricing. this isn't even a govt body discriminating against bikers....

  32. #82
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    A fee for something that was always free is awkward. Failing to consider and embrace the largest and most important user group at China Camp and then skewing the fee structure against them by contrivance makes the institution of these fees harder to take.

    What this actually boils down to is the fees, and the rate charged, are done because they can do it. That makes it an edict; our way or the highway. As someone who drove substantial numbers of mountain bikers to support the FoCC and will have to represent these "facts" (same old same old) I am now in an uneasy position.

    We just held an event at Rockville. Rates are $3 per person and $1 for each dog which must be leashed. We spoke to Ranger Teri in advance as a large number of folks would be descending on their fairly small park. They accommodated us concerning our beverage choice and arranged to take care of our refuse.

    Most of us paid our $3 with the line at the Kiosk of nearly 80 riders being problematic. In consideration of this we collected donations on behalf of the park later at the social hour. The BTCEB also made a nice donation. We support Rockville and Rockville respected our needs. Goodwill begets goodwill.

    You all know as well as I do that if mountain bikers feel unfairly treated they will ignore what they feel are unfair restrictions. This is hardly a modality of behavior limited to mountain bikers but a well-known social phenomonon. If a social body is ill-considered they will sabotage the consideration.

    What ultimately happens then is that such riders become defined as scofflaws and are demonized. Fingers get pointed by folks who want to have things their way.
    Sound familiar?

    This is not 1988 or 1998 or even 2008 anymore folks. Mountain bikers are powerful and numerous. They have jobs, businesses, homes, pay taxes, provide jobs, donate to the community, they vote, have kids, grandkids for crissakes. They are folks just like anyone else though may be a bit healthier. They deserve to be treated with respect.

    The fee at least has precedent with other parks. Contributors here have cited "law." So okay. This fee structure, in spite of contrivances driven by special influence explaining it, is unfair.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Trail Use and Parking Fee Program Announced at China Camp-130112_721e.jpg  

    Last edited by Berkeley Mike; 01-14-2013 at 02:34 PM.
    I don't rattle.

  33. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    62
    For those concerned with the fee structure - why not buy the Parking Pass for $60? You can park anywhere you like and that Annual Pass includes trail use for up to 4 hikers, bikers or equestrians.

    Problem solved!

  34. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTT77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    348
    Maybe because I don't want to subsidize beaurocracy and an unprofitable concession venture?

  35. #85
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    Quote Originally Posted by ninertom View Post
    For those concerned with the fee structure - why not buy the Parking Pass for $60? You can park anywhere you like and that Annual Pass includes trail use for up to 4 hikers, bikers or equestrians.Problem solved!
    No it isn't:

    1) It ignores the unfairness.

    2) It is a flagrant sleezy car salesman manipulation which presses people to spend more than they otherwise would have. It suggests that whatever line one has drawn is irrelevant if you look at a number a different way.

    3) It continues to implement it on mountain bikers who do not benefit from a pass by infrequency.

    4) It continues to implement it on mountain bikers who are not a party to discussion.

    It perpetuates and supports unequal treatment of mountain bikers to their disadvantage. Other local parks who have these fee structures don't do this. It is time for this sort of thing to change.
    I don't rattle.

  36. #86
    Old,slow,still havin fun.
    Reputation: fgiraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    943
    You guys will type a lot to justify not spending $3. Now it's because FOCC didn't kiss your ring first?
    Please either pay the fee, or work to change the system.

  37. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: exocetaaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by NoBalance View Post
    How about this. I pay the fee and FOCC opens up the "backside" of china camp and adds trail signs, maintains the trails, etc?
    WHA???!!!!! No lets not do that.

  38. #88
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,799
    Can't you guys just go in, pay $2 and call it a day?
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  39. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,399
    I paid my three dollars today at the automatic kiosk at Miwok. I also got stopped TWICE by the same ranger. Once at the Miwok Porta-Potties, and once where Peacock dumps back down towards the ranger station. I am a retired police officer, with credentials, so the second time he stopped me, I checked his. This particular ranger is a sworn Ca. Peace officer, fully able to write citations, effect arrests, etc. If this is going to be the norm there, not sure if I will continue to ride it. Also, the "Day Pass" is printed out on super thin "lottery results" type paper, and was saturated with sweat by the second time he stopped me, and almost unreadable. This same machine can print out a yearly pass, so I have questions about the durability of a so called season pass. The signs mandate that you carry the pass with you while using the trail. No problem paying, but will have a problem if everyone is stopped all the time.

  40. #90
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,731
    Quote Originally Posted by fgiraffe View Post
    You guys will type a lot to justify not spending $3. Now it's because FOCC didn't kiss your ring first?
    Please either pay the fee, or work to change the system.
    That is precisely what is needed but any successful advocacy requires discussion to find understanding. One of the most valuable functions of MTBR is facilitating discussion. It provides a venue for the exchange of ideas. In the time we have spent here much has been revealed. We have all heard things we don' t support and things we do but clarity is coming.

    As has been said before, getting mtb'ers to act politically is very hard. Their force can only be harnessed if we can find, first consensus, second where to place the energy, and third creating a way for a busy Mtb community to participate.
    I don't rattle.

  41. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: scootdogss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    93
    I have no problem paying fees if I feel the money is well spent.

    $500K annually to run CC.

    I would like to see a budget from FOCC. If I am going to pay I want to know how my money is spent.

    Majority of money should be for trail maintenance and trail expansion. Not to pay some bureaucrat a salary to hand out tickets.

  42. #92
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,266
    Well, after re-reading this entire thread, I can honestly say I will not be comfortable paying to ride my bike at Chinacamp State Park. I will continue riding here and paying my state taxes (Property tax, sales tax etc.). I will see what changes occur over the next 2 or 3 years and maybe it will make more sense to pay double tax then. I have been riding here since 1979 (age 11 on a stingray), and will continue to support all state parks, the politicians can appropriate the funds as they see fit. I will admit, If I made $100,000 per year, I would whore myself out and buy passes, but it already costs me $20 in fuel/bridgetoll (lots more tax in those 2 items, huh?). Sorry folks, I am taxed out. I would rather pay tickets.
    Last edited by hoolie; 01-14-2013 at 11:17 PM.

  43. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timetraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    312
    When the potential park closures were first announced this is exactly what I feared would happen. Local groups would come together to "save" the parks. Now that the state has a few test cases look for them to threaten closure of more parks where they think a local group will take over the costs. And we who ride in many state parks will have to pay at every one of them. I had mixed emotions when FOCC was putting together their proposal. I respect them for taking the steps to ensure it remained open but also worried that once the process started it was over for riding in a tax payer supported "free" state park. Found park money? 2013 CA budget surplus? Doesn't matter anymore. When I look at how much the state takes out of every paycheck and the roads and services continue to drop it gets me pissed to pay another fee. Even more so with the BS higher fee for biking. "we use more of the park". Bulls#$t!!! Call it what it is, an antibiking let's make them pay more attitude.

  44. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    985
    ^^^^^^What he said...

  45. #95
    I'm really diggin it!
    Reputation: Davey Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,372
    Quote Originally Posted by ninertom View Post
    For those concerned with the fee structure - why not buy the Parking Pass for $60? You can park anywhere you like and that Annual Pass includes trail use for up to 4 hikers, bikers or equestrians.

    Problem solved!
    I don't drive there. I ride. Same as I have since I was in middle school.

  46. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: exocetaaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    102
    I seriously doubt that they are going to give anyone a ticket for not having a pass. I think that it is going to be more voluntary. Also the best trails out there are not within the state park so i wouldn't worry too much about this.

  47. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,650
    looks like the headlands for me...it is horrible to raise sales and income taxes and also increase fees. how much money could they possibly need to run this state....uhhh, forget that last question.

  48. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    I was afraid we would hear something like this; a total contrivance, a sham, sustaining the usual bias. I can certainly argue this point.

    Same old wine in a brand new bottle. Come on you guys!
    Same old whine all right.

    Even though I usually try to hit it on weekdays I'm looking forward to lighter crowds at CC.
    If you do find yourself arguing with a ranger or getting a ticket because you refuse to pay, please stay to the right as to not block the trails.

    Thanks in advance!

  49. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    985
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie_G View Post
    Same old whine all right.

    Even though I usually try to hit it on weekdays I'm looking forward to lighter crowds at CC.
    If you do find yourself arguing with a ranger or getting a ticket because you refuse to pay, please stay to the right as to not block the trails.

    Thanks in advance!
    Ollie, what will you say when you have to pay a separate "fee" for every public place you ride and that you already support with your taxes? Are you so wealthy that it means nothing to you, or is it that you only ride one place? Doesn't it bother you that you pay more than hikers or runners, whose impacts are the equal of bikes? Of course, since you're so excited on kowtowing to the new "managers" of CC and double paying for your "right" to use our public lands, I assume that you would have no problem paying to ride on Marin Water lands, GGNRA lands, City of San Rafael lands, etc. I bet you'll welcome paying 3 different fees at 3 different kiosks while enjoying one ride around CC from Dominican. I won't pay, I'll still be out there riding, and I won't be alone. The park doesn't need FOCC, FOCC has no right to charge me again for public lands of which I already support through taxes, and it certainly has no legitimate reason to attempt to charge me more for the same "product" as it does other user groups.

  50. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: raleigh5's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    177
    i have less of a problem forking over $3 to ride china camp, than paying $6 to drive into the city or sitting through a donation spiel at willow creek to ride there. our tax dollars get dumped into those 'projects' as well. china camp is just such a superb feel good ride.....at least to me. i think a lot more is being read into this FOCC thing than is warranted. maybe it at least deserves a chance eh? i do have 1 question--> do u guys building/riding the unsanctioned trails give a **** that our tax dollars get spent restoring those areas u tear up?
    I bet you'd do the same if they was you!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •