Schwarzenegger to Close 220 State Parks - Page 7

Morrigoon · 05-31-2009, 02:00 PM

So out of this article on the closures, I found this rather interesting tidbit:

Quote:

Laird wrote a proposal to increase vehicle registration fees by $10 a year, which would have raised $260 million for state parks. All California residents would have been given free entry. Montana has a similar plan already in place. The idea passed the Assembly, but died when then-Senate President Don Perata killed it in an attempt to find compromise with Republican leaders on wider budget issues.

What do you think of that idea? Given that park entry costs more than $10, I'd totally be up for this. Provided those funds were guaranteed to go to the parks.

JWBear · 05-31-2009, 02:30 PM

Sounds like a good idea to me as well.

Betty · 05-31-2009, 04:10 PM

I'd vote for that - but only as long as the money HAD to go to state parks and they would be guaranteed to remain open.

Snowflake · 07-02-2009, 09:18 AM

Grants, Land at Risk if CA State Parks Close

Quote:

California could lose millions of dollars in federal grants and the National Park Service could seize land in six parks, including Angel Island, if the state goes through with a proposal to close 219 state parks, officials said Wednesday.

Fully story: Link

innerSpaceman · 07-02-2009, 10:26 AM

Would it be a bad thing if State Parks were converted to National Parks?

It's what happened to Yosemite. Just sayin'

Alex · 07-02-2009, 10:55 AM

The question is, would they be so converted automatically? Some of these things weren't parks when the Feds handed them over (and a lot aren't really useful all on their own such as one parking lot on Mount Diablo.

I doubt the National Park Services wants management responsibility for many of them.

Morrigoon · 07-02-2009, 10:58 AM

Our state park facilities (especially as applies to campgrounds) are quite nice compared to the national ones. I would not like to see that change.

Morrigoon · 07-02-2009, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Democrats in the Legislature have proposed keeping state parks open by raising the vehicle license fee by $15, but Republicans have been opposed to that plan.

It doesn't say whether that's the "access pass" plan or not, but if it is, the R's can fvck off. It's a good idea.

05-31-2009, 02:30 PM	#62
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	Sounds like a good idea to me as well. __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

05-31-2009, 04:10 PM	#63
Betty Kicking up my heels! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The Silver State Posts: 3,783	I'd vote for that - but only as long as the money HAD to go to state parks and they would be guaranteed to remain open. __________________ Nee Stell Thue
	Submit to Quotes

07-02-2009, 10:26 AM	#65
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Would it be a bad thing if State Parks were converted to National Parks? It's what happened to Yosemite. Just sayin'
	Submit to Quotes

07-02-2009, 10:55 AM	#66
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	The question is, would they be so converted automatically? Some of these things weren't parks when the Feds handed them over (and a lot aren't really useful all on their own such as one parking lot on Mount Diablo. I doubt the National Park Services wants management responsibility for many of them.
	Submit to Quotes

07-02-2009, 10:58 AM	#67
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	Our state park facilities (especially as applies to campgrounds) are quite nice compared to the national ones. I would not like to see that change. __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes