TRADITIONAL MOUNTAINEERING
™
www.TraditionalMountaineering.org
™ and also
www.AlpineMountaineering.org
™
™
FREE BASIC TO ADVANCED
ALPINE MOUNTAIN CLIMBING INSTRUCTION™
Home
| Information
| Photos
| Calendar
| News
| Seminars
| Experiences
| Questions
| Updates
| Books
| Conditions
| Links
| Search
Fees, forests don't always fit
By Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho
July 24, 2004
for "Writers on the Range"
The next time you visit your local public library, drive an
interstate highway through the West or attend a city council meeting, imagine
how frustrated and upset you'd be if you were charged a fee for the privilege of
doing so. In spite of the tax dollars you already pay to support these entities,
imagine if you were charged an extra "user fee" or "admission fee."
Managers might assure you that the fee will go toward more helpful signs on the
road, more comfortable chairs at city hall or a refreshment stand in the
library. These amenities might improve your experience while providing extra
funding for these institutions. If, after a year or two of paying these fees,
some of the promised services materialized and some didn't, you would rightfully
feel used, confused or angry.
Rest assured, highways, libraries and city halls won't be subject to fees like
this in the foreseeable future. Across the nation, however, some of our public
lands already are.
The authority to charge a recreation fee is provided to the agencies under the
Recreation Fee Demonstration Program, which is set to expire in December 2005
unless Congress votes another reauthorization. This program has provided us all
with insight into what we like, dislike and are willing to pay for when it comes
to using our public lands.
What I have heard overwhelmingly is that people around the country are willing
to pay for a service associated with actual use, but not simple access to our
public lands. I agree with this and have no problem with charging users a
recreation fee - or, more accurately, an amenity fee - for the maintenance or
related costs of areas with a Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management
campground, a public access boat ramp, garbage pickup or other such services.
But I do not agree with charging users a fee to hunt, fish, hike or otherwise
use unimproved public lands.
We pay to see a movie or concert in a public place; we might pay to enter a
museum. Sometimes, we pay a toll to finance roads or bridges.
In each instance, we pay for a finished product, something that has taken time
and money to build or create, or that will require funding to maintain. I cannot
support the policy of charging people fees to access lands and resources that
are already theirs, which certainly were not created or upgraded by the natural
resource agencies, and which won't be improved or altered as a result of these
fees.
In the case of a town or county that imposes a user fee for something like a
library, the citizens can use the ballot box to resolve their concerns about
administrators who overstep their responsibilities or the bounds of common
sense. In the case of the land managers who work for federal agencies, there are
no elections. That is why I am calling for recreation fee advisory committees in
each state to review and advise where and what fees should be charged.
I am also concerned that during the six-year Recreation Fee Demonstration, we
relieved the federal agencies from having to count these fees as part of their
gross receipts, which are shared with the counties through programs like the
Forest Service's 25 percent Payment to Counties.
Now that the demonstration is coming to an end and we are trying to determine if
and how to provide permanent authority to the program, we must also look at how
recreation affects the counties that host our public lands. Improved amenities
will bring more recreation, and as a result, increased pressure on counties. I
will demand that all fees collected from this and other programs continue to be
shared with county and local governments.
Larry Craig is a Republican senator from Idaho. Writers on the Range is a
service of High Country News in Paonia.
All contents Copyright 2004 The Denver Post or other copyright holders. All
rights reserved.
Fee Demo and Climbing Fees
The
Badlands Wilderness
Map of huge exclusive OHV areas adjoining the
Badlands
Read more . . .
Fee demo program discriminates
against our poor folks
Fee Demo looses to grass roots outrage
Fee Demo Forest Pass dropped at 20 sites on the Deschutes National Forest!
Senator Regula's
Fee Demo support and The Wilderness Center, Inc.
Senator
Craig calls Fee Demo a failed program
Outdoor recreation in Oregon far from free
Oregon
Field Guide: “Pay to Play on Public Land”
National
Park Service plans climbing fees increase!
Fee demo
rejected by USFS employees
Fee demo
has "fallen short" - Senator Craig
Fee demo demonstrations
New pole shows Badlands
Wilderness favored by voters
BLM posts Reward for information on
Juniper rustlers
BLM weighing public input on management plan
Oregon's Badlands hit by old growth Juniper rustlers
Photos
Congressman Greg Walden to visit The Badlands
Badlands Wilderness endorsed by COTA
OpEd
- Unregulated OHV use is being reviewed across the western states
OHV use curtailed by new USFS policy decisions
Sierra Club's Juniper Group
supports Badlands Wilderness
OHV regulation discussed at BLM meeting in Bend, Oregon
OpEd - Badlands part of
BLM's recreation management area
OpEd - We need the Badlands Wilderness
OpEd - Off-roaders have no reason to fear Badlands Wilderness designation
Speak for the Badlands at Town Hall Meeting
Hiking poles are becoming essential gear
Vandals destroy ancient
pictographs in the Badlands
Senator
Wyden tests support of Badlands Wilderness
Badlands Wilderness endorsed by Bend City
Commissioners
The Badlands:
proposed for Wilderness status
The
Badlands, a brief history
The Badlands
pictographs
reported 75 year ago