Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Vail Pass Fee Increase Proposal

C

cokingcat

Active member
Vail Pass Fee Increase Proposal

Why a fee increase? The Vail Pass Winter Recreation Area provides unique backcountry winter access to over 55,000 acres of motorized and non-motorized use as well as access to 6 backcountry huts, providing a winter experience for a variety of National Forest visitors. The Forest Service wants to continue to provide essential operational services at VPWRA that contribute to the unique and unparalleled backcountry experience. The White River National Forest has not increased recreation fees at the Vail Pass Winter Recreation Area since 2005 and steady growth in visitation, rising costs for staffing and services, coupled with inflation, has prompted the Forest Service to propose a fee increase to continue to sustain this recreation opportunity into the future.

Fees pay for essential operational services that maintain the area such as parking lot plowing, grooming, ranger presence and informational services, emergency assistance, and signage and route maintenance. The Vail Pass Winter Recreation Area program has been operating at a deficit for the last three years and is projected to be operating at an estimated $60,000 deficit beginning in 2020. Without a fee increase, the ability to provide existing services is at risk.

Additionally, visitation has nearly doubled in the last 15 years from 16,726 visitors in the winter of 2002-2003 to 32,136 visitors in 2017-2018. Although growth in visitor use has added to annual fee collections, the additional visitation has been insufficient to offset steady increases in operational costs over the years. Additional visitation has created a need for more frequent grooming to maintain the same quality of trail surface, increased staff time to enforce travel zones and manage the Vail Pass trailhead parking lots, and increased need for materials such as maps, signs, winter equipment, route indicators and day passes. Grooming costs have also increased by over $35,000 annually in the past 3 winter seasons.

Fee Proposal Page: https://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/whiteriver/feeproposals

Timeframe for outreach & details: We will be seeking public comment Feb. 7 – April 14 on this fee increase proposal. The Forest Service will be conducting extensive outreach via local press, on-site at Vail Pass and Camp Hale, and through social media.

How to comment: Members of the public may submit comments electronically at the above link beginning on Thursday 2/7/19, via mail, or in person at any VPWRA fee station location or at the Dillon/Eagle-Holy Cross and Leadville Ranger Stations.
 
I like I believe most don't have a problem with the fee, as long as it keeps areas open to snowmobile and multi use. I have a problem with the increase when these area start to limit and cut back motorized use. This is an area I grew up riding in.
 
I like I believe most don't have a problem with the fee, as long as it keeps areas open to snowmobile and multi use. I have a problem with the increase when these area start to limit and cut back motorized use. This is an area I grew up riding in.

Upon further review I retract this statement. Those fees do not support anything except for the subsidization of the private businesses up there. Eliminate the fees, let the FS run it like they do everywhere else.
 
Upon further review I retract this statement. Those fees do not support anything except for the subsidization of the private businesses up there. Eliminate the fees, let the FS run it like they do everywhere else.

So what you are saying is that the grooming and lot plowing is handled by private contractors?

I would also argue that more USFS staffing isn't something I would be in favor of paying for. If they simplified the motorized/non motorized boundaries they wouldn't need all of the cops. It is like a checkerboard up there for a guy like me who doesn't know the area well...
 
So what you are saying is that the grooming and lot plowing is handled by private contractors?

I would also argue that more USFS staffing isn't something I would be in favor of paying for. If they simplified the motorized/non motorized boundaries they wouldn't need all of the cops. It is like a checkerboard up there for a guy like me who doesn't know the area well...

The Vail Pass Task Force received Colorado State Parks (administered by CSA) funds for grooming in the past. Then they seemed to struggle with working with CSA and left those funds on the table and abandon their groomer (also paid for by CSP funds). Now they want to increase the funds so that they have money to operate the way they want. It's a board made up of business owners in the area. A snowmobile guide/rental company, backcountry cat tours, etc.

Do not support the fee increase. Make your comments now. Don't give up the sledding areas, they are incredible once you get around the parking lot gapers. Make this group become efficient with the funds they already have. Several areas that are bigger than VP operate without daily fees. This is public land.
 
My experience is that everybody likes to fight over the trail grooming, regardless of the area. Bizarre though that they did not take advantage of the groomer and funds provided for the area by CSA. Seems that would help take the pressure off the funding end.

So it is all about control, imagine that. Sad that we just can't recreate in peace on public lands without these sorts of charades going on.

I will make an online comment of that option exists. Not my area but I hate to see such a popular one go down the tubes on you locals.
 
Grooming seems to be a big issue for VP. Despite the visitor numbers doubling, and hopefully the income from the trail fees too, they claim to still be short on the funds required to pay for grooming.
According to the public announcement, the grooming cost have increased by$35,000 per year. This is concerning because the trails are only groomed for approximately 4 months or 17 weeks per season. This means that the grooming costs have increased by about $2000 per week. Considering that the trails are only groomed about once a week, and poorly at that, I'm struggling to fathom that the cost of grooming has increased by essentially $2000 per day, or per groom.
I know that the VPTF contract with Mountain States Snow Cats which is out of Wyoming. In my opinion the grooming at VP sucks and is apparently very expensive. It really could use to be groomed at least twice a week.
I would like to see the folks at VP or the local snowmobile club buy or lease their own cat and be in control of their own grooming, instead of what they're doing now.
I would be ok with a fee increase if there was an increase in services/ grooming. Otherwise we're just giving more money to some guy in Wyoming to do a lousy job.
As a 20 year user of VP this is just my 2 cents anyway...
 
I'm curious how much money Nova Guides, the outfit in Red Cliff, and the Cat place all contribute to grooming and costs? Clearly they benefit from it. Do they just pay a "per day" use or anything additional?
 
These are questions I have too. The VPTF need to be fully transparent about their operational finances.
I did comment and can only urge others to comment too. I have little faith that my voice is worth a flip but at least I’ve chimed in.
 
Last edited:
I recall that years back Nova guides did the grooming or at least some of it. I don’t know how long Mountain States Cats have been doing it. All I know is that I go up to VP frequently, mostly only weekdays, and the trails are typically shelled out.
 
Remember when the fee first started, and it was called an experimental fee, for 3 years? That didn't last long.

Government can't stand the idea of having to stop collecting a fee once it starts. I see zero value with anti-snowmobile government employees who think we are bothering them when we use their land.
 
Remember when the fee first started, and it was called an experimental fee, for 3 years? That didn't last long.

Government can't stand the idea of having to stop collecting a fee once it starts. I see zero value with anti-snowmobile government employees who think we are bothering them when we use their land.


Agreed...

What exactly do we need the USFS for up there in the first place? Because they divided up the land in such a way that it promotes sledders going where they are not supposed to go? So they created a problem where none existed and then for our benefit they want to manage it, and charge for the service we never needed in the first place?

There are hundreds of sled areas in the state where lots are plowed and trails groomed without the need for a fee station, rangers, maps, etc etc. Why is there a fee and a ranger at this site? Seems like we had it covered just fine until the other user groups insisted we be regulated so they could benefit. I don't envy you guys that have to deal with this. I would, and do, ride elsewhere. Unfortunately that is the exact result they are seeking, running sleds off the mtn...
 
Grooming at VP is a joke, last time I was up there two weeks ago it was whooped to hell and back, and the board showed nothing had been groomed in over 2 weeks???? I brought a newbie friend up and it was miserable for him, especially since his limited skills keep him on the trail more then off. After 2 days we elected to hit other places even though it added an extra hour of driving, these places had no pay station, and trails were very nice. I love VP, but I would like to either see more grooming action prior to any increase or at least a somewhat set schedule. I don't mind paying, but when the 3 other non lay spots we hit all had nicer rides in and out ( and for those who aren't very off trail savvy) it makes the day so much better.
Code:
I also left the same comments on the link above.
 
Last edited:
Yep... My last VP day was three years ago. I took my newbie brother in law up, he and my sister were staying my my folks Vail condo for a ski holiday. They made me ski one day so Frank and I went for a ride one day. I will echo the sentiment that the grooming was horrible. Still plenty of wood cops around but the trails were awful and it was far from the CO sledding experience I was hoping for...
 
And it was whooped up still friday..... and the rangers were closing up for the season so no more services, I spoke to one because people were not parking in any type of considerate fashion, there were several SUVs that were not towing and pick ups with one sled where normally you could get 2-.3 trailer taking up large spaces were trailers could have been, the ranger lady was super nice and told me they really weren't working the lot because they ran out funding and were closing up, saving grace for me was she moved their trucks and let my wife and I go there. Luckily I down sized to a 2 place trailer for just this reason.

I have always had pleasant experiences with every ranger I have encountered, but if they want a big rate hike, we should see better trails, and at least some improvements to the parking.

This time my friend brought his newbie fiance and I talked them into driving an additional hour the next day to another place and she had such a better second day, kind of sad...
 
VP has been a joke for many years. Unless we were doing some sled skiing or a night ride to the bar in Redcliffe, VP was never top 10 in places to ride save for very early season dumps when nowhere else had snow.
Can a local not rode in from Redcliffe anymore?
 
VP has been a joke for many years. Unless we were doing some sled skiing or a night ride to the bar in Redcliffe, VP was never top 10 in places to ride save for very early season dumps when nowhere else had snow.
Can a local not rode in from Redcliffe anymore?

It's funny I hear people say this and that's fine, but There is some excellent riding up there. Every time I go, I rarely see anyone else. :juggle:
 
Parking situation could be helped a lot if people would jackknife their trailers a little instead of needing 20 or 30 feet between their trailer to unload & load. On to grooming. VP never received Colorado Parks money for grooming once it became a fee area. Before that there were a couple of dodge van bodies on 2100 cat chassis running a back country skiing operation and snowmobile deep powder performance was so poor there just wasn't that many of them up there. When Nova Guides groomed it was rare for the grooming to connect to the I-70 side. That was bad for Nova business to encourage more riders into their area. Vail Powdercats was paid to groom for a couple of years too with a tiller on their ski cat. VP did own or lease their groomer for awhile, with several different machines, I don't know why that didn't work out but they did try. I agree it sucks to lose motorized terrain as it condenses what we have left. This is a nationwide issue, vote accordingly. Bottom line is the area is becoming insanely popular and if a higher fee encourages some to go elsewhere so be it.
 
I’ve been up to VP a few times in the past few weeks. Grooming seems to be a little better than it has been in the past. It could and should be much better though. With the amount of money you have to pay, and the high traffic, this should be one of the most well groomed trails in Colorado. I think eventually the hippie skiers will get VP shut down to snowmobiles. I do know the summit county board continues to bend to the environmentalist left and closes more areas to sleds. Meanwhile the entire south end of the county is an environmental disaster that they refuse to even acknowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Premium Features



Back
Top