Residents, counties urge state parks to remain open

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Mary E Petty Sandy, UT
    Oct. 20, 2011 5:55 p.m.

    Too many people think if they pay taxes, they are free to play. No. Taxes simply aren't enough and never were intended to pay for me and thee to have recreation. Except for a city park or school playground, almost every other recreational venue has entry and use fees. Rightly so! If you want to play, you have to be willing to pay. And I have supported many recreational sites through the economical annual pass programs because I have wanted my family to have the most experiences for the buck.

    Now I wonder what would happen if all Utah parents and grandparents would buy an annual pass every year from such places as the Utah State Parks, the Federal Parks, Hogle Zoo, This is the Place Park, and wherever such annual passes are available. Might cost around $500 a year per family but think of the fun you would have and contribution it would make. Over the years annual passes have made it possible for us to visit so many exiting places to learn about the world and nature, our family history, make and share memories, and build relationships. Buy Annual Passes and go on more family adventures.

  • Conservative Veteran Layton, UT
    Oct. 20, 2011 12:49 p.m.

    Why does closing down operations from the state in these parks mean that access to these areas needs to be closed?

    Additionally, the state should return state parks to smaller communities that they took over through strong arming over the years.

    Snow Canyon, outside of St George is an example of this. It was city property and the state basically took it over. The state should return parks that were taken over first to the orignal communities. Perhaps if this is done, they could then maintain other parks from their budget without raising more fees.

  • T-Jeff Uinta Basin, Utah
    Oct. 20, 2011 10:33 a.m.

    Seems to me that golf courses are a nitch recreation. The bulk of the population doesn't golf. Golf courses use huge amounts of water which is a waste here in the desert. Be that as it may, I don't mind golf but I think golfers should bear the full cost of their recreation and the state should not be involved at all. The free market should determine how much golf is worth to the people that enjoy it. Far more people utilize the lakes and public lands and this is where any money spent should be used. However, even here there is much waste. At a recent stay at the Deer Creek Campground there appeared to be several people in authority, including a deputy patrolling the area. We may have to rough it a bit but that should add to the experience.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Oct. 20, 2011 9:43 a.m.

    DN Subscriber summed it up nicely.

    "We cannot afford to provide every "nice to have" service or benefit that big spenders in the past have dreamed up.

    Back to basics, and if there is no money, we cannot afford it. Just like your family and mine."

  • Serenity Manti, UT
    Oct. 20, 2011 8:46 a.m.

    It seems to me that any time we have an economic downturn we start threatening state parks. These parks are places of refuge for families. They are a retreat from everyday life with monotonous routine.

    Perhaps if the counties in which there are state parks would start advertising and promoting the parks, there would be more people interested. For instance, Palasades State Park in San Pete County gives the apperance of being closed and neglected. I was here for a few years before I even knew they had a golf course with a restaurant and it was only recently I found out that they are supposed to have boating at Palasades Lake.

    Raising prices now would not have a good effect on the parks. Just about everyone, especially families, is being touched by the recession in the country. I believe that not raising the prices and promoting the parks with some kind of advertising would be more beneficial.

  • Ricardo Carvalho Provo, UT
    Oct. 20, 2011 7:24 a.m.

    It is important to be open to options such as differential pricing. I enjoy our state parks and would be willing to pay more for peak time usage. Compared with other entertainment options such as taking the family to a movie, these parks are huge bargains. I, for one, would find a user fee increase to be reasonable.

  • Chuck E. Racer Lehi, UT
    Oct. 19, 2011 11:00 p.m.

    The state parks are very important to our state. They have already been cut back more than they ought to be. (No, I'm not affiliated with them at all.)

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 19, 2011 9:45 p.m.

    We cannot afford to provide every "nice to have" service or benefit that big spenders in the past have dreamed up.

    Back to basics, and if there is no money, we cannot afford it. Just like your family and mine.

    Raise fees as needed to match costs, and close some of the marginal areas.

    By "close" I mean eliminate any activities that generate costs- maintenance, rest rooms, fee collection, security, etc. Call them "unimproved scenic areas" or something instead of a "park."

    The Sierra Club and other greenies will welcome getting rid of all that man made stuff. Other users will lament the loss of "civilized" improvements that make park visits family fun instead of primitive hardships.

    Oct. 19, 2011 8:31 p.m.

    These state parks are increasingly important to families and communities who so desperately need them in this economic (and, dare I say it, even cultural) recession. It would be such a loss if they were closed!

    Perhaps there could be a way for the state to match donations from local governments, communities and private individuals in order to fund specific parks? Such a program could create a sense of ownership in the parks by the community.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 19, 2011 8:22 p.m.

    Cut them all. They do not make a profit. Then taxes could be lowered.