I agree with Bill. have you seen some of the areas that have been destroyed by people that have no Idea what could hapend to them if they get caught . I figure $75.00 a year is not bad for as much as we use the land if it may help clean and police the area. Patrick Brown YCSRT 3213 PANDA77 N7FHB Bill Nolan wrote: > > Well, I expect that this may be an unpopular point of view... > > > > As some have mentioned, state trust lands and national forest lands > are public lands, which means that they are owned by the people, so I > can look upon them as "my" lands, and that is not an incorrect way to > look at them. That immediately brings up the question which has been > raised here in this thread: "Why should I have to pay a fee to use my > own land?" > > > > Just because it is public land doesn't mean that it is free of costs. > There are fences, roads, and other facilities to maintain. There are > services, such as law enforcement, wildlife management, cleanup, etc. > that have to be provided. These things cost money, so the next > question is: "Who should pay?" > > > > These costs can be paid for by either a general tax or by user fees > (or a combination of the two). Personally, I have no problem with the > users of these areas bearing a higher proportion of the costs in the > form of user fees. Why should people with no interest in entering or > using these areas bear the cost so that someone who does use the area > can do so without paying a fee? Nope, I think it is very fair for > those who use the areas to pay a fee, and, as the costs go up, so > should the fees. > > > > Bill in Willcox > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ____________________________________________________________ > Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com > To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit: > http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching > > Arizona's Geocaching Resource > http://www.azgeocaching.com >