HikeArizona.COM

Looks like the temporary reprieve that the state parks got is going to vanish again. State legislators are planning on shutting all state parks and slashing pay for all state employees (does that include the legislators as well?) in order to save money. Never mind that the state treasurer said that the state could lay off every single state employee and still be in the hole, but oh well.
No much of a person to get on a political rant, but I feel that our legislature over the past decade or so has generally done us a terrible disservice, and their current behavior is right in line with that. Why not let the voters decide themselves if they want a sales tax increase? Uh oh, the uninformed masses might do something that goes ideologically against what you like. Guess what? The public should get the final word, not you. So irritated this morning.

As you can see, Gov. Jan Brewer totally ignored the recommendations of the requested task force a few months ago to make the parks fiscally sustainable. What gives??
http://azstateparks.com/publications/do ... Report.pdf

They are closing Lost Dutchman, even though the AZ State Parks predictions are that the park will turn a $58,000 PROFIT in FY 2010, and a $94,000 profit in FY 2011! Ridiculous.

See page 22 of this report:

So does this mean free hiking in these areas w/just parking nightmares? I mean you can't close the wildernesses represented by the park service.

nonot wrote:So does this mean free hiking in these areas w/just parking nightmares? I mean you can't close the wildernesses represented by the park service.

That's exactly what I was wondering. Haven't they already closed a few. I wonder if it's legal to enter?

dshillis wrote:Parks will be closed in a phased sequence starting on February 22, 2010 and include Homolovi Ruins State Park in Winslow, Lyman Lake State Park in St. Johns and Riordan Mansion State Historic Park in Flagstaff.

Anyone interested in a nick-of-time visit to Homolovi on the 20th (Sat.) or 21st (Sun.)?

Goldfish wrote:

nonot wrote:So does this mean free hiking in these areas w/just parking nightmares? I mean you can't close the wildernesses represented by the park service.

That's exactly what I was wondering. Haven't they already closed a few. I wonder if it's legal to enter?

Last I heard they were going to "Restrict entry" somehow. I doubt that they have the manpower or the inclination, however...

PageRob wrote:Anyone interested in a nick-of-time visit to Homolovi on the 20th (Sat.) or 21st (Sun.)?

You should post as an event rob. Maybe I can round some people from down here to come up and we can meet you there.

The State Parks that access federal wilderness (lost dutch) have no way of keeping you out of the National Forest or wilderness, just park a half mile further down the road and take the spur to treasure loop or siphon draw or any other lost dutchman trail to your liking. Literally none of the trails are in the State Park, like I mentioned earlier, lost dutchman is basically a Superstition wilderness trailhead that charges a fee, that is all. Catalina will stay open, same idea as lost dutch here, a Catalina trailhead that charges a fee, has a vc, and a campground.

I'm surprised they are having budget problems, I remember last year a state park ranger took advantage of me using the lost dutch campground, and I ended up paying $24 for the night (ridiculous). I considered the budget crisis to be solved after that.

I think this entire situation is a travesty and I utilize the Arizona State Park system frequently as an outdoor enthusiast. The most important question here is what can we do as a cohesive group do to postpone or completely eradicate the plans to close the parks? Does anyone have suggestions? I know there is a meeting on Feb 1st in downtown Phoenix which maybe a start.

rally_toad wrote:You should post as an event rob. Maybe I can round some people from down here to come up and we can meet you there.

I might do just that...

The State Parks that access federal wilderness (lost dutch) have no way of keeping you out of the National Forest or wilderness, just park a half mile further down the road and take the spur to treasure loop or siphon draw or any other lost dutchman trail to your liking. Literally none of the trails are in the State Park, like I mentioned earlier, lost dutchman is basically a Superstition wilderness trailhead that charges a fee, that is all. Catalina will stay open, same idea as lost dutch here, a Catalina trailhead that charges a fee, has a vc, and a campground.

Not to criticize, but by bypassing the parks to access the land, is that also cutting into their revenue, putting them in the situation they are in now - being closed because they don't make money?

PageRob wrote:Not to criticize, but by bypassing the parks to access the land, is that also cutting into their revenue, putting them in the situation they are in now - being closed because they don't make money?

But the difference is the land I am trying to access is not state land, but federal wilderness. I pay my fees when I go to Homolovi or Picacho, because I am accessing state land, and I also pay my fees when I am using the state park land (camping). However, when I want to go for a hike in the superstition wilderness and choose to and am hiking entirely on wilderness land, not on trails that are maintained or managed by the state, why should I have to pay the state a fee?

Same goes for hiking Romero and other trails whose trailheads are in Catalina State Park. Was it one of the ones to stay open, though?

Anyway, I wanted to say I did speak to the woman last night from the Homolovi AAS chapter. (Incidentally, her talk last night was about petroglyphs on ranches near Caborca, Sonora. Amazing! Huge!) We didn't have time to have a deep discussion about it, only that they are very worried about looting, they have no idea where they are to store all the artifacts that are in the Visitors' Center, and that they hope that a particular employee will be retained to watch the place.

I can email her for more info. And she was interested in seeing this thread!! So I am going to email it to her.

rally_toad wrote:

PageRob wrote:Not to criticize, but by bypassing the parks to access the land, is that also cutting into their revenue, putting them in the situation they are in now - being closed because they don't make money?

But the difference is the land I am trying to access is not state land, but federal wilderness. I pay my fees when I go to Homolovi or Picacho, because I am accessing state land, and I also pay my fees when I am using the state park land (camping). However, when I want to go for a hike in the superstition wilderness and choose to and am hiking entirely on wilderness land, not on trails that are maintained or managed by the state, why should I have to pay the state a fee?

Okay, I misunderstood the situation.

Trishness wrote:I think this entire situation is a travesty and I utilize the Arizona State Park system frequently as an outdoor enthusiast. The most important question here is what can we do as a cohesive group do to postpone or completely eradicate the plans to close the parks? Does anyone have suggestions?

Re-elect no one! ;)

Trishness wrote:I think this entire situation is a travesty and I utilize the Arizona State Park system frequently as an outdoor enthusiast. The most important question here is what can we do as a cohesive group do to postpone or completely eradicate the plans to close the parks? Does anyone have suggestions? I know there is a meeting on Feb 1st in downtown Phoenix which maybe a start.

Where the heck is the Sierra Club?! Access and governance are supposed to be their forte'...Seriously!! They want all that money out of their members...well, I want something BACK!!

rally_toad wrote:When I want to go for a hike in the superstition wilderness and choose to and am hiking entirely on wilderness land, not on trails that are maintained or managed by the state, why should I have to pay the state a fee?

Because its a popular area and the state/county/city manages access to the federal land. The state park allows for an infrastructure that regulates traffic, contains parking, trash removal, restrooms, potable water, and subsequently less environmental impact than if all those people decided to park anywhere they could find a spot, and therefore spread the impact of high-use across a much larger area.

While you alone may not make much of an impact by parking "around the corner", if everybody does, (and many of those people probably don't have the same understanding or respect for the land that you do), then effects which we all consider to be undesirable will occur.

That's me playing devils advocate however, because I don't want to pay the fee either when I can park just up the road and access land that my taxes already pay for. But that's the short answer to the question even if you and I don't necessarily agree with it.

Does anybody know what the expenses are that make it so expensive to be open. I'm obviously missing something thinking you pay one or two rangers to hang out at an entrance booth. Is there a big electric bill at Picacho? For instance at Tonto Bridge, they still owe on the place if it's open or not. right?

Well I don't know anything for sure about state parks, but at a National Park it is definitely much more than 2 rangers hanging at an entrance station. I'd imagine each state park has at least a few maintenance workers, law enforcement rangers, and interpretive rangers, plus housing for rangers and state vehicles etc. The cost of upkeep of the housing, vehicles, gas for vehicles, upkeep on vc, etc. It can add up.

At a national park (obviously going to be quite a bit more ppl working than at a state park), but at one like PeFo there are several interpretation/education ppl working in offices, then frontline ppl, law enforcement rangers, HR people, superintendent and some other office going people, then you've got Biologists, Archeologists, Paleontologists, etc. depending on the resources of the park doing research and field work and whatever else they are mandated to do (air quality readings etc). That is for a national park as I mentioned, so I'd picture the same situation at the state parks in a reduced form (law enforcement, interpretation, and maintenance people would be the bare minimum to keep a park open).

A lot of the people I've met working @ our state parks are volunteers

JamesLyding wrote:A lot of the people I've met working @ our state parks are volunteers

I've had the same experience. Catalina SP, for example, is patrolled by sheriff deputies and LEO from Coronado through some kind of cooperative agreement...at least that's what the guy at the gate told me last year.

Sredfield wrote:

Trishness wrote:I think this entire situation is a travesty and I utilize the Arizona State Park system frequently as an outdoor enthusiast. The most important question here is what can we do as a cohesive group do to postpone or completely eradicate the plans to close the parks? Does anyone have suggestions?

Re-elect no one! ;)

Shawn...better yet I think one of US should be elected!!!!