FYI for those of you who did not attend

http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/

Thanks for your service.

So, lets say all the state Beaches in California have to fund themselves with user fees. Would they be able to support themselves?

I would assume not.

So that is part of the problem with all these land grabs, they can't afford to keep acquiring all this land and "protecting it" (they haven't been able to since the 60's and 70's).

Problem is every little pretty spot on highway 1 is state park that requires Rangers and gates and paths and maintenance.

I say rip out the gates and the parking lots and the guard shack and let truly be a place of natural beauty. Then it will in every sense of the word, be 'free'.

If we have to pay to play at our own (7) State Parks, and they are maintainable by our contributions , why are the rest of the State Parks in CA not able to pay for themselves?

Let me guess....there's not enough visitors to the parks? Or is it too many parks and not enough elitist anti- motorized snobs that will pay their fair share to maintain their system?

Go ahead and triple the entrance fees to the non motorized parks, low income folks already head to the National Forests for free - cheap camping and recreation.

I think t would be a good lesson to eliminate these parks one by one because they can't sustain themselves. I think it would prove how greedy the anti - motorized crowd is.

Let Karen and the Sierra Club cough up the 213 million dollars (763K per park) to pay for their (279) non- motorized Parks. It's already apparent that they can't afford them.

What a tangled web has been woven.....

The budget issue is having (and will continue to have) a significant impact on every aspect of life in the State of California.

The cost of living in the state will go up....

I guess it is time to move to Carson City. That way I can be closer to the Rubicon, and other trails here in Ca, but not have to deal with paying high taxes in the state when I retire.

Todd