> > From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/05/02 Tue PM 12:35:18 GMT > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Re: Paying to shoot in US National Parks > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "mike wilson" > Subject: Re: Re: Paying to shoot in US National Parks > > > > > Most Britons (maybe mainland Europeans as well?) will find it amusing that > > you (generic you) are getting rather exercised about the idea of being > > charged for photography when you have to _pay to get into_ your "National" > > Parks.... > > It's a no win situation. The parks have to be maintained, which costs money, > so they put an admission fee on entrance to the park to partially cover this > cost. > People get worked up because the parks belong to the people, so they > shouldn't pay admission. > I guess they think other people should work for free...... > > Perhaps the best way is to do it through the tax base, therefore it wouldn't > matter if you use the park or not, you could take respnsibility for > maintaining it as part of your responsibilities as a citizen. > Of course, taxes would then go up....... >
That's the way it works in the UK. Like medicine, et al, National Parks are part of everyone's culture so everyone should pay for them. At least, I assume that's the rationale. ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
