Let me throw in a little bit of a U.S. perspective. Many, if not most, of our
National Parks now charge an entrance fee. There is usually an additional fee
for use of camping facilities.
The reason for this is clear. In theory, it would be nice to see tax dollars
pay for the maintanance of the parks and for the programs that go on their,
includding those designed to attract and protect birds and other wildlife. But
the reality is that tax dollars only go so far, and if left strictly to the
government budget, the park system would be even more poorly maintained than it
is today, and there would be mainy fewer parks. So compromises are necessary.
One compromise is user fees, such as entrance fees and charges for certain
specirfic facilities, like camping. Those who use the parks a lot can reduce
the cost by purchasing an annual pass.
Another compromise, of greater controversy, is the partnership with hunting
groups that provide a great deal of money for conservation, but in return have
a large say in how and what the parks conserve and may have hunting seasons,
etc.
While the idea of totally free national parksis a nice ideal, at least in our
country it is hardly a workable reality. But user fees seem a reasonable
compromise, in that they impose some of the additional costs on those who reap
some of the greatest benefits, and letting those who apparently care the most
help preserve what they love.
Eric Jeffrey
Falls Church, VA
USA
--------------------------------------------
Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
www.birding-aus.org
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
