Another new fee...$90/yr for kananaskis users

[I’d rather be outdoors]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

If you believe this will make any difference with abuse problems, I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for sale. It's just another cash grab with a crusading message.

Grizz

Hands down. Another TAX grab.

[buckbrush]

At least they made an exemption for low income and FN...

[Gary K]

yall know the mclean, wiaprous, and ghost are not included in this ya?
those seem to me the areas the fees would benifit most.

[FCLightning]

The west country is being quickly destroyed by the hordes of people - it costs significant amounts of money to mitigate the damage. A user pay system is about as Conservative as it gets. Another option is the NDP system where you shut the entire west country down and no one gets to play.

[I’d rather be outdoors]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

The west country is being quickly destroyed by the hordes of people - it costs significant amounts of money to mitigate the damage. A user pay system is about as Conservative as it gets. Another option is the NDP system where you shut the entire west country down and no one gets to play.

Or...you just severely fine/punish those causing issues. No, a punishing Tax isn’t conservative. Please don’t respond with “but it’s a user fee”. It’s premise is about as “user fee” as the carbon tax. Seems to me like this gov’t has forgotten how to cut & live within it's means like every other Jack or Jill has to.

[JDK71]

Originally Posted by buckbrush

At least they made an exemption for low income and FN...

there is always a loop hole for some

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by I’d rather be outdoors

Or...you just severely fine/punish those causing issues. No, a punishing Tax isn’t conservative. Please don’t respond with “but it’s a user fee”. It’s premise is about as “user fee” as the carbon tax. Seems to me like this gov’t has forgotten how to cut & live within it's means like every other Jack or Jill has to.

What this guy said

[mac1983]

Originally Posted by I’d rather be outdoors

Or...you just severely fine/punish those causing issues. No, a punishing Tax isn’t conservative. Please don’t respond with “but it’s a user fee”. It’s premise is about as “user fee” as the carbon tax. Seems to me like this gov’t has forgotten how to cut & live within it's means like every other Jack or Jill has to.

If $90.00 a year for 2 vehicles is punishing then you would qualify as low income and get in for free.

[Simplefarmer]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

The west country is being quickly destroyed by the hordes of people - it costs significant amounts of money to mitigate the damage. A user pay system is about as Conservative as it gets. Another option is the NDP system where you shut the entire west country down and no one gets to play.

Have to agree with the above post.

Jim

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by mac1983

$90.00 a year for 2 vehicles is punishing?

Yup...I find the complaining here laughable.
You can afford to run two vehicles...meaning with gas and insurance alone, not counting purchase price you are spending $$thousands$$ a year and 90 bucks is a big deal.
Take the other thread here about the garbage being left near Wetaskiwin...maybe if there was user fee there the mess wouldn't be there.

[Cigarguy]

Originally Posted by Gary K

yall know the mclean, wiaprous, and ghost are not included in this ya?
those seem to me the areas the fees would benifit most.

There is the new $30/year camping fee. So no those areas are not exempt. Most of the Mclean area is part of k-country so the k-country fee applies.

And you can bet your bottom dollar that the this is only the beginning and there will be other fees for other areas then fees on top of fees.

If I know and trust that the government will use 100% of this fee towards conservation and upgrades for that particular targeted area it would not be so bad. But governments lie all the time. The new "conservation" officers will be too busy at Tim Horton's and being parking attendant, as that is where the money is, then being conservation officers.

This fee will not stop the pigs and the garbage. People will continue to be people. Legislation and taxes do not stop anything. This is the photo radar equivalent in the backcountry.

[FCLightning]

Originally Posted by I’d rather be outdoors

Or...you just severely fine/punish those causing issues. No, a punishing Tax isn’t conservative. Please don’t respond with “but it’s a user fee”. It’s premise is about as “user fee” as the carbon tax. Seems to me like this gov’t has forgotten how to cut & live within it's means like every other Jack or Jill has to.

You do realize that your post has diametrically opposed statements in it. Cutting spending on enforcement and maintenance certainly won't get you to more fines for wrongdoers. I'm all in for more enforcement but you can't hire more officers with nothing. The old adage applies here "It takes money to make money."
Remember - the government only has one source of income - always has and always will. The people will pay.

[Deer_Hunter]

Found this map on reddit

The area this 'parking pass' is supposed to cover is larger than what I traditionally thought of as Kananaskis .... it even conveniently includes Canmore!

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

If you believe this will make any difference with abuse problems, I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for sale. It's just another cash grab with a crusading message.

Grizz

It will just shove more of the slobs and citiots up to our neck of the the woods.

[Cigarguy]

Originally Posted by sjemac

It will just shove more of the slobs and citiots up to our neck of the the woods.

It will but not to worry they can always impose a fee there too. Additional fees and legislation will solve all our problems (strong sarcasm).

The number of people fined for littering will be negligible vs the number fined for not having a proper pass. Fining people for not having a proper pass is much much easier and more profitable.

Knowing me, I can't wait till next year when the 1 year pass expires and I forgot to renew. Will probably only know about it via a ticket in the mail. At least with a national park pass the date is right on the pass. A national park pass is also good for other parks inside and outside the province.

[I’d rather be outdoors]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

You do realize that your post has diametrically opposed statements in it. Cutting spending on enforcement and maintenance certainly won't get you to more fines for wrongdoers. I'm all in for more enforcement but you can't hire more officers with nothing. The old adage applies here "It takes money to make money."
Remember - the government only has one source of income - always has and always will. The people will pay.

You know they’re not opposed... will enforcement catch everyone? No. Make the fines extreme enough though, and you’ll see less bad actors as nobody will want to pay it. When caught, they’ll need to pony up. We don’t need to pay for more enforcement. The goal is quality over quantity here. Call it a dream. 2020 was an outlier for park usage and the provincial govt knows it. Once things open up more, usage will go down. That logic contradicts a nice new revenue stream for them though. This just isn’t conservative (and yet somehow, here we are).

[StiksnStrings]

Just finished reading all 4 pages on this thread. TBH I see booth sides of this but, I can't get on board with yet another fee/tax or what ever you want to call it. I don't, nor will I likely head to K counrty anytime soon as I live north and tend to spend my time further north. But, I wonder how long before I have to pay more (above and beyond the new back country fee) to enjoy my neck off the woods?

[Scottmisfits]

I am opposed to it. It's not that $90 is a lot of money for a lot of people, but it is for others, I get that. It's the start of something bad. Yeah, pay for use. We already pay for different licensing that is supposed to help pay for this. If they actually enforced the laws currently on the books, that would help pay for this. Maybe I've been lucky but all I saw were the crowds, but not messes everywhere.

One bit of enforcement would be the F&W or RCMP walking through some of these day use area's during lunch or dinner hours and seeing the BBQ's going during the fire bans and stuff like that. We saw it quite a few times this year.

There is one more glaringly obvious way to help alleviate the stress on the area, but that is a highly contentious topic and already has it's own thread here.

[Bigfeet]

User fee? More like an abuser fee....

Get pretty frustrated with having to pay services for everyone who messes things up. I have hiked, fished, hunted K country for years. Never have left a mess or any scars on the land. I understand the need for more enforcement - have called in numerous times about abuses in that country. But am frustrated with having to pay more because of the issues brought about by who disrespect the land. If the current laws would be enforced, there would be a lot less abuse. But rules without enforcement don't seem to mean much.

[hilt134]

Originally Posted by Deer_Hunter

Found this map on reddit

The area this 'parking pass' is supposed to cover is larger than what I traditionally thought of as Kananaskis .... it even conveniently includes Canmore!

So if I want to go fish my local river I need a pass to park down stream... seems fair. May as well make it a provincial fee.

[NaturalBornKilla]

They should put a program similar to the K-country one in place on lease lands and grazing reserves for hunting season.
It might improve access and cut down on the Wild West Show some leases experience.

[lead chucker]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

If you believe this will make any difference with abuse problems, I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for sale. It's just another cash grab with a crusading message.

Grizz

Yup!

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by JDK71

there is always a loop hole for some

so a FN chief who makes over a 100k gets to travel through K country for free and my motorcycle trip will cost me an additional 90 bucks?....hmm hope the money is well spent....might have to take another route

[Mavrick]

I have lived in Alberta my whole life and never been to K country, don't see that changing now with the gong show taking place down there. I feel sorry for those that live in the area though where this is their back yard. They have been using and playing in it for years with respect, and now need to pay the price along with new comers that don't care. I have my little back yard up north here that I hunt and play in, I would not be a happy camper if i had to pay 90 bucks to use it. ( or maybe I will soon the way things are going.)

[Cigarguy]

Originally Posted by Bigfeet

User fee? More like an abuser fee....

Get pretty frustrated with having to pay services for everyone who messes things up. I have hiked, fished, hunted K country for years. Never have left a mess or any scars on the land. I understand the need for more enforcement - have called in numerous times about abuses in that country. But am frustrated with having to pay more because of the issues brought about by who disrespect the land. If the current laws would be enforced, there would be a lot less abuse. But rules without enforcement don't seem to mean much.

I hear you man. It's not like we don't pay income tax plus a whole lot of other hidden and not so hidden taxes and fees. It's the accumulation and the trend of more and more that is worrisome.

I used to believe in taking nothing from the backcountry. But over the past 5 years I've been taking from the backcountry. I usually take at least a bag of garbage out each trip.

[JDK71]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

so a FN chief who makes over a 100k gets to travel through K country for free and my motorcycle trip will cost me an additional 90 bucks?....hmm hope the money is well spent....might have to take another route

i hear ya

[MrDave]

So they decided to test both systems at once. Which one do you think they will settle on? Gates at all the accesses to the Eastern Slopes, and charge you like the national parks? Or even the costs all the way from North to South, so the fees are equal? Kind of like a Provincial Park, but not calling it one?
So far everything people claimed was going to happen under the NDP, has been used as a template for the UCP. Instead of user fees to use the Bighorn Park, everyone will be paying to use the Eastern Slopes. I seem to remember saying that the UCP would do their own version of it.