charged for permits to control the season for different recreational activities

[keannu]

Can you tell me why they charged for permits to control the season? Is it like that if it was a high(peak) season, they charged for permits to reduce visitors to reduce their maintenance costs and they didn't charge in low seasons, not having to have maintenance burden?

st173)In the past, many public-sector recreation providers allowed people free access, or charged for permits to control the season for different recreational activities. However, governments are finding that funding to maintain sites and facilities, to cope with increased demand on the landscape, is becoming difficult to maintain. Opportunities to charge visitors for appropriate services to help offset these costs are being considered as one solution. This is a sensitive matter, as free access for all people to the outdoors is a much cherished right. There is also an additional dilemma for public agencies where recreation facilities are already provided from public money, and it could be argued that the taxpayer is being charged twice. Thus, care is needed by public bodies to ensure that charges are only made for services that are clearly additional to the provision of free access.

 

[Route21]

As with any operation, you need to have the appropriate facilities and infrastructure to cope with the maximum demand such as:

- commuter trains that are used for only a few hours in the morning and the evening rush hours.
- peak daily/seasonal electrical/gas demands
- peak road usage demands that fall off substantially during school holidays
- peak visitor demands at outdoor attractions such as zoos, recreational fishing sites, national parks and gardens

All peak requirements involve the provision of extra facilities/staff.

By charging/charging extra at such times it can help spread the peak load and/or compensate/offset some of the incremental cost, "wear and tear" and environmental damage caused.

I see no real downside and potential significant upsides for charging extra at peak times, provided it doesn't just deter people from using the facilities.

R21

 

[keannu]

Thanks a lot! Who could be "public-sector recreation providers"? In America, state-governments or any public organization? What could be such sites and facilities,? In Korea, I could quote a free arboretum, Seoul Grand Zoo(free entrace), any free amusement park(maybe not, amusement parks always charge customers).

ex)In the past, many public-sector recreation providers allowed people free access, orcharged for permits to control the season for different recreational activities. However, governments are finding that funding to maintain sites and facilities,

 

[5jj]

Thanks a lot! Who could be "public-sector recreation providers"?

They are any bodies owned directly or indirectly by national, regional or local government.

 

[Route21]

As an example, where I used to live in the UK, the local authority/municipality built, owned and operated a large Sports Centre, with swimming pools, gyms, squash courts etc.
Regards
R21

 

[SoothingDave]

You also have state and national parks.

 

[Route21]

.Yes. I was going to mention the National Trust properties in the UK that are supported by government grants.
R21