Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 145
  1. #51
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,545
    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
    4,527
    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
    194
    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
    1,545

    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
    11,182
    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
    1,545

    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
    11,182
    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
    825
    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:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    83
    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
    1,005

    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 04:53 PM.

  11. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: three3nine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    194
    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
    11,182
    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
    11,182
    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
    789
    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 09:37 PM.

  15. #65
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,639

    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 09:48 PM.

  16. #66
    Poacher
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,545

    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
    825
    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 09:22 AM. Reason: bold, for emphasis!

  18. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTT77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    299
    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
    34
    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
    1,179
    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
    1,054
    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
    34
    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
    2,798
    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
    34
    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
    16
    Speaking of China Camp, how are the trails looking for riding this weekend?

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 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
  •