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

The extent to which public lands managers cooperatate and collaborate  with tourist industry leaders is not commonly appreciated. The level of influence that this industry holds over public lands management is much greater than many might assume.

The appended article was recently published as part of a larger White Paper. It describes a session from the "Partners Working For Tourism - Federal State Tourism Summit."

Here is a short overview:

Session Title: "How communities can leverage public lands to increase economic development and grow entrepreneurship." ... The session will examine how U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Forest Service lands and programs benefit visitors, communities and the tourism industry, fill travel market niches such as eco-tourism, learning travel, adventure travel, cultural and geo-tourism, and "volun-tourism," and promote the development of joint marketing products.

The complete article is appended and the complete White Paper can be found here.

Scott

The appended (condensed) article is about a proposed billion dollar theme park in Las Vegas. It will be constructed upon private land using private funding. It has nothing to do with public lands, or the management thereof --- or does it???

These days we hear much about declining visitation to America's National Parks. We are told that our great outdoors and iconic parks are becoming "IRRELEVANT" to today's youth.

Suggestions are being put forth, telling us that it is necessary to reshape and reconfigure our National Parks in order to make then places of fun so they can better compete in today's globalized tourism market. What does that mean???

The appended article has much to do with the public lands and the management thereof ---  the connection, however, can be easily missed.

Scott

The following article describes a Judge's ruling which, in effect, makes it illegal to float/boat upon navigable waters in the US. And, as most states have laws that say that if a river is navigable in fact, then it is navigable in law ... this ruling will, more or less, end public boating on rivers.

Will it stand?  Let's hope not.

I couldn't help but wonder whether this judge was a graduate of the Libertarian training program for Federal judges operated by the folks at FREE . This is massive privatization by judicial action.

Scott

Did you know that the National Park Service charges a fee for scattering of ashes ???  They do.
 
Imagine waiting in the queue at Mt. Rainier's information desk and when you got your turn to (presumably) ask for a map or directions to the snack bar, you looked the volunteer straight in the eye, told her you wanted to scatter the remains of your mother (pointing to the shoebox under your arm) and asked her to please sell you a permit.
 
Actually, if you make that mistake .... you'd probably be to return to the park some other time.
 
To scatter ashes at Mt. Rainier, you will need to apply for a special use permit at least 4 days in advance. You will need to provide your name, address and Social Security Number plus a cashiers check or money order for $25.  (see below)
 
To learn more and or to download the "Scatting Ashes" permit application, go to http://www.nps.gov/archive/mora/general/ashes.htm
 
Scott

Last week a federal judge, in effect, found the USFS guilty of breaking the law. The Forest Service had been charging forest visitors fees for parking, walking and picnicking --- and doing so in violation of clearly written prohibitions upon charging for precisely such things.

After being caught in so flagrant and act of disrespect of the people of this nation, the Forest Service might have shown a little humility. They might, for instance, have apologized to all of the forest visitors whom they defrauded and from whom they extracted a fee without having the authority to do so.

Unfortunately that's not what they are doing.  The PR machine is spinning a mile a minute and articles such as the one which appears are already starting to fly off the printing presses and go out over the radio waves. The Forest Service is, so it does appear, threatening to get even with the public. They are threatening to close down facilities and shut people out of the forest altogether.

Something is wrong.  Something is severely wrong.

Scott

An important court case was decided in Tucson Arizona last week, one that will likely have major repercussions. A woman was ticketed by the USFS for failure to pay a recreation fee. The judge did not merely find the woman innocent, he found the USFS guilty. I've made the judge's ruling available on the Wild Wilderness website and am providing here a condensed version of the full article which appears below.

Tucson, Arizona | Published: 09.13.2006
U.S. judge's ruling could end forest user fees

A federal magistrate's ruling could end, or scale back the scope of, the $5 daily user fees charged on Mount Lemmon and in Sabino and Madera canyons.

The case could set a national precedent, possibly ending fees in other national forests around the country, said the chief Forest Service official for the Mount Lemmon-Sabino Canyon area.

Magistrate Charles Pyle ruled that the Forest Service went beyond its congressional authorization when it charged fees for parking to use a trail, for roadside or trailside picnicking, for camping outside developed campgrounds and for roadside parking in general.

The federal government hasn't decided whether to appeal the ruling. But if the ruling stands, it appears that the Forest Service will have to charge fees only for use at specific sites — not for driving up the mountain and parking at certain areas, as it does now.

Opponents of the fees both locally and nationally call Wallace's case a landmark.

--

Scott

WESTERN SLOPE NO-FEE COALITION P.O. Box 135, Durango, CO 81302
www.westernslopenofee.org

More information:
Robert Funkhouser 802/235-2299 This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Kitty Benzar 970/259-4616 This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

FEDERAL COURT FINDS ARIZONA FOREST SERVICE FEE PROGRAM IS ILLEGAL

Hiking and Parking Fees Are Not Authorized In Fee Law

A mild-mannered, churchgoing, Tucson legal secretary has pulled the legal rug out from under a major Forest Service fee program, and potentially from hundreds of similar programs nationwide.

When Chris Wallace decided to fight the two tickets she received last September for going on backcountry hikes on Mt Lemmon without displaying a $5 access pass on her parked car, the Forest Service got more than they bargained for. With the help of California attorney Mary Ellen Barilotti, she challenged whether the Forest Service has legal authority to charge the fee.

On September 5, United States Magistrate Judge Charles R. Pyle agreed with Wallace. He dismissed both her tickets because the Mt Lemmon fee does not meet federal requirements. The Court found that:

-    The legal prohibition on fees for certain activities applies even within a High Impact Recreation Area

-    The Forest Service does not have authority to charge a fee for parking along roads, or for undeveloped, minimally developed or semi-developed sites

-    The Forest Service has no authority to charge fees for trails, trailsides, or developed trailheads

-    The agency is prohibited from charging for camping at undeveloped sites.  

<CONTINUES>