We strive to ensure that Wilderness areas, roadless areas and other areas now substantially free of development will continue to provide outstanding opportunities for high quality, non-motorized, recreation.

The appended article from the Society of American Foresters does a remarkably good job of explaining what's going on with the increasingly controversial Recreation Site Facility Master Planning process now being implemented nationwide.  In this article, the US Forest Service's director of Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness Resources, Jim Bedwell, appears to have stepped into a deep puddle. Bedwell is quoted as saying:

[ "There's no intent to pull back or curtail recreation. What we're seeing so far is that less than ten percent of sites will either have operations modified or closed." ]

The facts suggest that Bedwell's ten percent isn't even in the right ballpark.

Here is the summary of RS-FMP proposed actions for my local forest, the Deschutes. This condensed document was handed out at a USFS meeting I attended last week. It can now be read here. The unedited parent document can be read here.

The bottom line for the Deschutes is this -- out of 212 developed recreation sites, "NO CHANGE" has been proposed for just 50 sites.

Operations will be modified at more than 75% of all developed recreation sites on this forest and I've seen similar figures for other forests.

In the appended article, Funkhouser's version of reality is more believable than Bedwell's, or so I would suggest.


-- Highlights from USFS condensed document --

 The Deschutes National Forest currently manages 212 developed recreation sites.  The following is a summary of the proposed changes ...

• Remove constructed features at 23 sites and manage them as dispersed recreation sites.
  

• Change the season of management at 85 sites
  

• Change operator or work force at 9 sites by seeking partnerships to operate and maintain 5 sites, where possible partners have been identified; and by including 4 sites, currently managed by the Forest, in the next (FY 2009) campground Concession permit prospectus.
  

• improve 12 day use sites to meet public demand, protect resources, and increase recreation opportunities and begin charging day use recreation fees at these sites.
  

• implement fees at 2 overnight sites where we do not currently charge.
  

• No change is proposed for 50 sites.
  

Scott

Pasted below is an article that ran on the Front Page of the Denver Post under the banner headline -  "Forest Plan Trims Access".  

There are a number of important issues that are not addressed here. Not the least of those are the RSFMP's heavy reliance on access fees to achieve its goal of self-sustainability (profitability), thereby replacing appropriated funding. We are very concerned about the enormous negative impacts to local economies, lack of public comment through the federally mandated NEPA process and additional barriers to public use and enjoyment of public land. The Western Slope No-Fee Coalition has estimated that between 3,000 and 5,000 sites are to be decommissioned, closed, or "returned to dispersed use" with many sites being gated. Having reviewed additional forest RSFMP 5-year Plans we stand by those numbers. We will update estimates when and if additional RSFMP 5-year plans are made available to the public for review. Closures and decommissionings are just one aspect of the RSFMP. Additional fee sites, reduced operating seasons, turning sites over to concessionaire operation and other barriers to public use add to impacts of the RSFMP. The WSNFC's ground-breaking report on RSFMP can be read at http://www.westernslopenofee.org
 
Robert Funkhouser
President, Western Slope No-Fee Coalition 

In today's Fresno Bee there is an article under the headline: "Judge Halts Plans in Park -- Construction projects put on hold over fears about damaging Merced River."   It begins with these words:

  [ In a clear victory for environmentalists, a federal judge has stopped nine construction projects in Yosemite Valley - including the $35 million effort to rebuild Yosemite Lodge - to protect the Merced River.]

This is a clear victory for the Merced River, Yosemite Valley and for the people of this nation, but that's not what the National Park Service is saying. Here's how they are spinning their illegal actions:

 [ "It's sad that a few people are stopping the public from seeing improvements that will make Yosemite Valley a better place for the environment and visitors," spokesman Scott Gediman said. ]

I'd like to offer you the rest of the story and to set Scott Gediman straight.
Here is a link to a message I distributed EXACTLY five years ago to this very day. It's what Paul Harvey would call, "The Rest of the Story."

 Scott

Quoted from appended news release:

   [Greg Adair, Director of FOYV, stated; "The problem in Yosemite is the Park Service vision of upscale hotel rooms, reduction of family camping opportunities, and the implementation of an urban mass transit busing scheme and with that, price increases that will push average Americans away. In addition to failing to protect the river, the park's invalid planning documents accommodate this growing threat of commercialism."

Adair added: "The court's order also is a vindication of the role of small citizen groups holding the government accountable to the law, and protecting places we all love. The Park Service recently grumbled that citizens are standing in the way of the agency moving forward in Yosemite. They're wrong. The direction given by this court suggests that NPS has it backwards."]

I offer congratulations to Friends of Yosemite Valley and everyone involved in this effort to watch-dog the National Park Service and ensure that the laws of the land are followed.

More to the point, I thank FOYV for being one of America's most effective grassroots organizations when it comes to actually slowing the industrial tourism juggernaut that currently threats our National Parks with increased commercialization and rampant Disneyfication.

Scott

Federal land management agencies have prepared a special treat in recognition of those who have served in the military. On Veterans' Day (and ONLY on Veterans' Day), current and past members of our Armed Forces will be allowed to visit America's National Parks, Forest and other public lands without having to pay basic entrance and access fees.

Pasted below are two articles representative of the dozens that have begun to appear in newspapers from coast-to-coast. Both are extraordinarily offensive. Both are extremely disingenuous. In fact, the arrogance of those who tout this hollow gesture is almost unbelievable.

Let me state this clearly. With every passing day, the rights of all American are being stolen.  Permitting veterans one free day of access to their public lands is little more than spitting in their eye. The single free access day granted to all citizens is equally insulting.

The bureaucrats quoted below have, apparently, forgotten that they are NOT talking about federal lands, but rather are talking about PUBLIC lands. Denying citizens access to their lands and then, with a wave and a flourish, restoring a small taste of rights lost, is not what America is all about.

Read what the US Forest Service has to say below and then decide whether they are truly honoring America's veterans or whether they are perhaps simply honoring themselves.

Scott

Quoted from this VERY interesting article published today in Helena Montana:

"If the National Recreation Area designation results in preserving openness and accessibility, as well as extending conservation efforts around the lake, wonderful," Hallinan said. "If the designation ends up doing the opposite, drawing national development to the borders of the recreation area, hemming the lake with a perimeter developments and two-acre ranchettes, limiting access to only those who can afford it, then let us leave things as they are."

The closely-related issues of recreation user fees, Recreation Site Facility Master Planning, defunding of outdoor recreation, tourism development and promotion, public private partnerships, evolving land management approaches and much more all come together in what might, at first blush, appear to be an article of local interest only.

Gosh, do I wish that a cracker-jack investigative reporter could turn this into a feature story and publish it in a nationally read venue.  Gosh, do I wish the entirety of the conservation community could read this article, fully appreciate what it is all about and respond appropriately.

Perhaps when that feature article is published, the importance of what's going on at Canyon Ferry Reservoir will become clear to all.

Scott

Today it was announced that the National Marine Manufacturers Association  and the US Forest Service signed a new Memorandum of Understanding (see below). According to the announcement, "This MOU is the foundation of what  we hope will be a long-lasting public-private partnership committed to working together to resolve water access issues."

For those unfamiliar with this powerful lobby and their ongoing efforts to throw America's National Parks wide open to motorized recreation, I've provided here excerpts from two recent NMMA press releases.  In the first you see what the NMMA wants. In the second you see how they go about getting it.  They have been remarkably successful in getting what they want. 

Chicago, IL - A revised national parks plan released by Interior Department Secretary Dirk Kempthorne on June 19 is causing concern for outdoor enthusiasts across the country.  Rather than reflecting the appropriate balance of both conservation and recreation, the new plan seemingly drops the importance of recreation in the parks.  The nation’s largest recreational boating trade association, the National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA), warned against this dangerous reversal in parks policy that would prohibit public use at a time in which park attendance is declining.

 "Congress did intend for parks to be used and enjoyed by the public," said Monita Fontaine, NMMA Vice President of Government Relations.  "The National Park Service cannot allow itself to be held hostage to those who argue for minimal public access.  It goes against the spirit in which these parks were created."
 

Chicago, IL - The nation’s premier recreational boating trade association, the National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA), today announced its largest record breaking political fundraising quarter ever, shattering all previous records.  The NMMA Political Action Committee (NMMA PAC) ended the second quarter of 2006 with an all-time record of $86,958 in contributions from 177 donors.  This brings NMMA PAC’s 2006 totals to $153,415 from 247 donors with the entire 2006 election year cycle (2005 and 2006) to a record $349,429.

"Thanks to the continued strong support of the industry, NMMA PAC is raising our profile around Washington, D.C. with government leaders," said Monita Fontaine, NMMA Vice President of Government Relations.  "It’s evident that the boating industry means business, and your support allows us to advocate for pro-business, pro-boating policies."

Scott

(To explore similar USFS MOUs, click here.)

The Recreation Site Facility Master Planning document for the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest was recently made available to Wild Wilderness by the USFS.  Significant changes are planned. According to this proposed 5-year program of work:

Of the 135 existing sites, 61% are augmented with non-appropriated operational funds. This includes 59 sites that are approved as Federal Land Recreation Enhancement Act (REA) fee sites, 2 which receive State funding for maintenance and 11 will be operated by concessionaire. The 11 concessionaire sites are expected to continue for the next 5 years, and additional concession operations are being explored at 18 more sites. Changes proposed at the fee sites are focused on producing a more efficient program: proposed fee increases at 27 sites fees; elimination of fees and removal of facilities at 5 fee sites due to low revenue of less than $500/year; and the addition of 8 more non-concession sites to the REA fee program. The POW also proposes to restore 11 sites to dispersed recreation.

Our careful reading of this document reveals that gates have already been purchased for installation in 2006. Numerous campgrounds on the Wallowa Whitman National Forest that are going to be converted from development recreation to dispersed recreation are, in reality, going to be gated. The same this is true for other kinds of developed recreation sites. For example here is what the document says about the fate of Mason Dam Boat Launch.

"Add other feature to site. Begin charging a fee at site. Increase fee compliance effort. Install gate to limit off-season use; Pursue concession operation & initiating new fee for site use as part of new 2006 Concession package."

Those who have interest in outdoor recreation on the Wallowa Whitman NF might wish to explore this document in greater detail to learn what more has been planned.

Scott 

I have written many times, and with increasing frequency, about how federal land management agencies are closing and shuttering public recreation facilities. Budgets are being cut and/or less money is making its way to the ground as a result of allocated tax-dollars being diverted from their intended use by Washington bureaucrats and/or Regional mangers.

As a consequence of field managers being starved of adequate operating budgets, public services and facilities are disappearing. Land managers at all levels in all agencies are engaged in the process of identifying facilities that can be operated by private concessionaires, or by volunteers or through the collection of ever-higher user fees.  The rush to pare the size of government and privatize all that can be privatized is now, or will very soon be, in virtual free fall.

That said, the problem is not that there isn't enough money. Yet as the Treasury is bled dry, money shortages will increasingly threaten every social service and public benefit traditionally associated with government. The problem is the prevailing IDEOLOGY within Washington DC and its aggressive and unbridled implementation, freed from the checks and balances long associated with our constitutional republic.

We've been witnessing this process unfold in the National Park System and within the US Forest Service. A quick search of the Wild Wilderness website will provide numerous examples.  Pasted below is the newest example of this snowballing process with deep cuts and massive closures now occurring within US Fish and Wildlife System.

I'm going to make a suggestion. We, as a nation, can either hang onto our hats and prepare ourselves for a wild ride, or we can bring about the change in government we want to see. The choice is ours to make.

Scott 

A Wild Wilderness supporter from the Land Between the Lakes (LBL) area of Kentucky wrote to report a new threat:

>But rest assured its purpose is to be a tourist
>attraction, and fees will be a part of the plan.
>I'm as serious as a heart attack about this.

Scott Replied:

This heritage program is primarily about economic development and turning genuine heritage into discrete marketable consumer products. It is about supporting the travel-tourism industry. It is about TARGETING that which is authentic in our culture and then selling access to it.

For those who value authentic heritage and traditional culture, my advice would be to HIDE from the President's new Preserve America Initiative and from the Forest Service's Heritage Program.  Stay off their radar if you possibly can. Protect your heritage FROM those who are vacuuming up the remnants of authentic America.

What's at stake is the Disneyfication of culture. Nothing less.

I'd suggest that he MOST VALUABLE product is that which is most authentic. In today's McDonaldized world, people crave that which is not plastic. People will pay handsomely to observe, touch, feel and be close to anything that is the GENUINE article.

The market would love to get its hands upon LBL's culture and heritage and package it up so that it can be sold in precisely the way that Disneyland sells the Pirates of the Caribbean.

Unfortunately, doing so would destroy everything that still is authentic about LBL's culture and heritage. Doing so would quickly devalue that culture and that heritage, yet for a while people would willingly pay to get close that which was real and was rapidly being depleted. After a while the tourist would pay to visit LBL not for those original, authentic, values, but to partake of similar values as those found at Disneyland. When the tourism promoters were done raping and pillaging the authentic LBL, they'd find another piece of Americana to plunder. LBL would be kept in service as a tourism attraction, but that which had been authentic would have already been consumed and depleted.

What I find so offensive about these tourism promoters is that they SPECIFICALLY TARGET that which is the best! They seek out that which is MOST DIFFERENT from Disneyland or McDonalds and then they quickly convert that unique treasure into another piece of plastic junk.

Thanks for fighting to protect LBL and to protect it FROM the heritage tourism promoters.

Scott 

Yesterday the Chief of the US Forest Service was the guest of the American Recreation Coalition and the groups listed here:

American Association for Nude Recreation
American Horse Council
American Motorcyclist Association
Association of Marina Industries
BoatUS
Kampgrounds of America
Motorcycle Industry Council
National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds
National Recreation and Park Association
Personal Watercraft Industry Association
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association
Recreation Vehicle Industry Association
ReserveAmerica
Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association

Over lunch, Chief Bosworth laid out his vision for outdoor recreation in the 21st Century. An account of his presentation, as prepared by the American Recreation Coalition, is provided below. Simply and plainly stated, almost nothing in Bosworth's presentation is worth supporting. Although couched in warm, fuzzy, and sometimes positive sounding language, Bosworth lays out an ambitious agenda that will result in further commercialization, privatization and commodification of those recreational opportunities which will remain available upon our public lands. Bosworth lays out plans that are predicated upon shifting the primary funding of outdoor recreation away from tax-receipts and to increased user fees, concessionaire fees, volunteer labor, and more.

What Bosworth touts as ACHIEVEMENTS are nothing of the sort. Bosworth's achievements represent some of the greatest failures in the history of Forest Service recreation management.

The good news is Bosworth was only laying out an agenda and his agenda has yet to be FULLY implemented.  The bad news is, the organizations listed hold the inside track with respect to outdoor recreation management and Bosworth is their man.  The bad news is, Bosworth's agenda is currently being implemented.

Who will stop them!?

Scott 

Rarely does a National Park Service official dare to suggest that today's increased entrance fees have taken a toll upon visitation. In 2004 I commented upon an article that was refreshingly honest.

It stated that at Hopewell Furnace National Historical Park visitation has fallen from 112,492 visitors in 1993 to 55,888 visitors in 2003. It goes on to say that in that same period, entrance fees have increased by 150% and that "when you go from $2 to $5, that may affect some people..." 

Pasted below is an article that takes  the opposite approach. It explains that Park Visitation is DOWN and Park Fees are UP. It then  fails to even suggest the possibility of a correlation. On does, however, propose all kinds of explanations.

I suspect no one would refer to this article as being "refreshingly honest."

Scott

The following statement appears on page 79 of the White River NF Travel Management Plan.

The Forest Service will continue to rely more heavily on resources besides congressional appropriations for the operation, maintenance, and management of roads, trails, and other facilities needed to serve forest users. User groups will need to increase their involvement in assisting the forest with maintenance of many of these routes either through volunteer labor, grant acquisition, or user fees of some type to continue their availability unless congressional appropriations increase dramatically and keep up with increased use. It is unlikely that new opportunities will be considered unless they can be constructed and maintained from resources originating outside Forest Service budgets.
(WRNF TMP DEIS p.79)

That statement leave little to the imagination. It is, however, such a contrast to what the USFS was saying just a few years ago.

Scott 

Just days ago I drew attention to what I considered to be a revealing, and thoroughly offensive, slide presentation originating from Utah State University's Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism.

I said:

"for those wishing to better appreciate what's been going on behind the scenes, I can share with you a few slides from a powerpoint presentation titled "Our Federal and State Partners: Opportunities for Partnerships in Tourism" . This is one of several informative  documents available on the State of Utah's travel-tourism website"

Today I see in the news the item pasted below. It says the Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism is being paid $200,000 to survey the recreation preferences of visitors to the Uinta national Forest.
I'd like to believe that the survey will be on the level and that its interpretation will accurately reflect public opinion. But is that possible when the Forest Service is paying to have the survey performed and has gone specifically to academic departments that have already done so much to promote the Corporate Takeover of Nature agenda???

The USFS has  paid a fortune for similar surveys in all parts of the country. Here's a link to one I described in 2000 that took place here in Oregon. I titled my blog entry "BEWARE the goons in orange vests"

Scott

Six organizations recently sent a joint letter to National Park Service Regional Director Michael Snyder expressing their concern over a new $25 lottery application fee. The new fee is part of the first ever online Grand Canyon Colorado River lottery, awarding non-commercial river permits to conduct a float trip through the park.

In a letter dated August 12, 2006, the groups, River Runners for Wilderness, High Country River Rafters, North West Rafters Association, Wild Wilderness, Private Boaters Coalition and Pikes Peak River Runners expressed their concern over the amount of the fee, noting that application fees charged for other river lotteries range from $15 to nothing.

In a reply to the groups sent September 19, 2006, Regional Director Snyder asserted that the $25 fee is needed to fund the River Permits Office. Snyder went on to say that the old waiting list had roughly 1,100 new additions a year, netting the park “approximately $110,000 in funding for the River Permits Office. Park managers have predicted there will be 4,000 to 5,000 applications submitted in this October’s first Weighted Lottery. If this procedure is correct, total costs recovered will be very close to what is needed to operate the office.”

But Jo Johnson, Co-Director of River Runners for Wilderness, says Snyder has neglected to mention the $357,100 the park also generated in the past by charging $100 per person in trip fees in addition to the $100 fee to join the waiting list, which the Park previously collected.

“There’s a lot of fuzzy math here” continues Johnson, who points out the new lottery includes a doubling of river launches. “The park will charge $100 per person and generate a whopping $705,100 on top of the anticipated $110,000 collected in the lottery.”

Johnson also wonders what the park is doing with the $815,000. “A few patrol trips and operating an online lottery for 198 launches at that price sounds a little steep to me. The park continues to look at non-commercial river runners as a cash cow, something they have done since the implementation of the Fee Demonstration program in 1997.”

The groups were also concerned that the lottery requires losers to pay year after year, subsidizing the park for a river trip they may never be lucky enough to win. In his reply, Snyder noted that the park may consider changing the fees in the future. According to Snyder, “We fully expect to re-evaluate both the $25 lottery fee and the $100 per person permit fee each year as actual numbers of applicants and permit participants become known.”

The on-line lottery application, only open October 1 to October 21, can be found at http://www.nps.gov/grca/planyourvisit/weightedlottery.htm.
 

The appended article opens many different cans of worms and provides considerable food for thought... if one enjoys the taste of canned worms.

Here are some of the questions that went through my mind after reading this interesting article:

1) Is it acceptable to intentionally create what are understood to be exclusionary user fees as a mechanism for regulating Wilderness Use?
2) Do such exclusionary fees not perpetuate the notion that Wilderness is the domain of an elitist class?

3) Will the presence of more uniformed patrollers improve the Wilderness experience?

4) Is the use of national forests and wildernesses really going to double over the next decade, as the USFS predicts?

5) How and why did the USFS ever permit things to get so, apparently, out of control at Brainard Lake Recreation Area?

Scott

On rare occasions I recycle an introduction. A year and a half ago I sent a message titled "Closing Down, Selling Off, Forest Recreation" and shared an article from the Oregonian  I described it as a 'MUST READ'  that  "deserves Action."

Appended is an updated article from today's Oregonian. It too is a 'Must Read" and whereas the previous warning fell largely upon deaf ears, this warning can not be ignored. Too much is at stake.

Scott

Introduction originally written 4/12/05:

If you currently hike, bike, hunt, fish, camp, float, bird, ride, climb, swim or engage in any other form of outdoor recreation on National Forest managed pubic-lands, the appended article from today's Oregonian is a MUST READ. It is more than a 'MUST READ'... it deserves ACTION.

Simply stated, opportunities to enjoy your public lands are about to be severely limited. The USFS will, in the months ahead, begin to close many of the places you now enjoy. They will be selling those resources they no longer intend to maintain. They will be privatizing those sites concessionaires wish to operate. They will be "improving" the places they choose to keep and doing so in order to maximize revenue collection and to better cater to a new customer base they hope to lure to the forests. They intend to cater to an entirely new class of forest users ... the kind that expect their entertainment pre-packaged, neatly presented and easily purchased.

If you currently hike, bike, hunt, fish, camp, float, bird, ride, climb, swim or engage in any other form of outdoor recreation on National Forest managed pubic-lands --- you are about to get a very raw deal.

Scott

PS.... Official documentation explaining what is happening can be read online at:  http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/measures/Prioritize/RS-FMP.htm

The appended article is about the commodification, depersonalization and electronification of heritage interpretation.

Visitors to Mt. Rushmore should be offered guided groups tours led by well-trained National Park Service professionals and perhaps, even better, by Native American employees of the NPS. Instead, and offered only to those customers willing and able to pay, impersonal heritage interpretation will be provided through rented "audio wands."

At each of 29 stations, a prerecorded message will be delivered to those who have paid for this service...

The application of this technology does not constitute a fitting tribute to either justice or democracy. Borrowing this particular technology from the likes of Disneyland is a step in the wrong direction.

Scott