Pasted below is an unusually candid article about fee-demo opposition in Ouray Country. It has real people, representing a diversity of interests and political suasions, speaking truth. Neither ideology nor ignorance sways this article.  Read on and imagine what it would be like if newspapers were filled with reporting such as this.

Scott

Quoted from appended article:

[Recreation groups hope their changes will be incorporated into Regula's bill, Jourdain said, She does not expect the controversial program to he approved before the presidential election, But interior Department Assistant Secretary Lynn Scarlett, who oversees the Park Service, and Mark Rey, the USDA undersecretary in charge of the Forest Service, said the Bush administration supports the bill and will not introduce its own recreation fee legislation.]

That's not exactly they way I heard it. I heard Scarlett and Rey say that THEY could work with the Regula Bill as a starting point for meeting their needs. But it was far from clear whether Mr. Bush is taking his cues from his employees or directly from corporate interests representing the recreation/ tourism industry.

The bottom line, as I heard it spoken yesterday, is that the recreation industry is no longer supporting any of the existing fee-demo bills... not ever the Regula bill (HR 3283) which they, themselves, created. They are instead now working directly with the President's staff to introduce new legislation --- legislation that presumably would make the Corporate Takeover of public lands explicit and unambiguous. Their plans were made clear in their testimony given last month at Senator Craig's fee-demo oversight hearing.  Their plans were repeated yesterday when three Board Members of the American Recreation Coalition gave testimony.

What it appears we have is Lynn Scarlett and Gale Norton pushing a version of user-fees which will permit recreational services to be provided without requiring tax dollars to be spent funding them .... i.e., the free-market vision as best expressed by Terry Anderson of PERC.

On the other hand we have the recreation and tourism industry looking to commercialize, privatize and motorize the public lands in keeping with the vision developed by ARC's Derrick Crandall and other commissioners who sat upon Ronald Reagan's President's Commission on Americans Outdoors.

The battle lines are drawn. It will be interesting to see whether the public gets a say in the outcome. It will be interesting to see to what extent organizations with interests in public lands become engaged in this issue. And it will be interesting to see how many such organizations remain seated on the sidelines without participating,  as the future is decided for them.

Scott

Quoted from appended article on recent Carlsbad National Park visit by NPS Director, Fran Mainella:

 [White said in 1990, it cost a family of four $12 to visit the park, and now, it costs $54. And people without reservations for special tours are discouraged, he said. Mainella said the reservation system works well in Washington, D.C., where it allows people to spend money at other attractions instead of standing in line.  As for fees, she said she's seen participation in recreational events increase when the fees are higher because "we've become a value added society."]

Is Fran Mainella's problem one of extreme arrogance, extreme insensitivity or perhaps extraordinary lack of judgment.  Or is she perhaps parroting the lessons taught to top brass within the land management agencies --- persons who have received instruction in "value added society" at Walt Disney World's cast-training program.    ----   I'm not making this up, read on!

Here's a quote from a document I obtained though contacts within the US Forest Service. Please note that those in attendance included persons at the very highest levels in the land management agencies, including Cabinet level persons:

    The Partners Outdoors VII program opened with an excursion to Disney University where Ten Yanovich conducted a very informative session on Walt Disney World's cast-training program, especially the means used to introduce and reinforce an appreciation and understanding of the company's corporate culture. Attendees were given the opportunity to evaluate their own organization's approach to training and orientation, leading many to conclude that at least some improvement was needed in those areas.

    Following the return to the hotel, each of the federal-agency and private-sector groups involved in the conference met briefly to discuss plans and assignments for the next two days. From there, they moved to the Welcoming Reception where Dick Nunis's forceful opening remarks focused on the history and mission of Partners Outdoors. He also emphasized an important lesson drawn from his Disney experience: price your product in a way that allows your customers to rate the product highly and feel that they received good value for their money.

FOR FULL DETAILS, list of attendees, resumes of attendees, etc .... www.wildwilderness.org/docs/po8sum.htm
www.wildwilderness.org/docs/po7.htm
www.wildwilderness.org/docs/po.htm

Scott

The appended message, I have been told, comes from Dave Barna of the National Park Service's Washington, DC, Public Affairs Office.  It was recently distributed to NPS employees via e-mail. I can not confirm this, but I have no reason to doubt it's authenticity.

Barna, BTW, is listed as the NPS contact person at the website of the brand-new National Parks public-private tourism marketing website.

"Related websites" to which links are provided on that page are: 

National Park Service
National Park Foundation
National Parks Conservation Association
*National Parks Hospitality Association
*American Recreation Coalition
*National Scenic Byways Program
*National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds

(Those marked with the "*" are intimately tied to the American Recreation Coalition.)

Strangely enough, in the following internal e-mail, Barna singles out NPCA as though its mild criticisms were somehow threatening to the NPS. What Barna fails to mention, is that the "Business Plan Initiative" of which he speaks is a JOINT project of NPCA and the NPS or that these business plans are being written in ways that further promote privatization and commercialization of the parks and park services, or that NPCA and the NPS are partner organizations and enjoy a common, shared, history that dates back 100 years.

Likewise, Barna never mentions that the "Take Pride in America" initiative to which he refers, is a pro-privatization effort orchestrated and implemented by the American Recreation Coalition and Gale Norton.

Barna never mentions that the National Park Service has become the victim of a hostile taken-over by pro-privatization ideologues lead by Gale Norton and Lynn Scarlett.

I can say with confidence that Barna is that he's a PR-pro who serves Gale Norton extremely well. That being the case, I hope you will find it interesting to read what such a PR-pro has to say about the Bush Administration's management of the National Park Service. Believe him, or reject him, as you will.

Scott

The contradictions in the appended article about the new $85 public-lands recreation pass are astounding. One the one hand, the BLM is quoted as saying:

 "The primary reason for it is that the customers asked for it, and it provides better customer service and responds to the demands of the customer," said Maya Fuller, public affairs specialist for the Bureau of Land Management. "From word of mouth and customer surveys we've heard a lot of, 'Boy, it would be awfully nice if one pass was offered.'"

On the other hand, the Oregon Dept. of Parks says:

 "We don't think we'll sell a lot of these passes. We do think it's a good idea and that the customer service and the good will felt by the few will offset any minor financial setback that might occur."

So are the citizens of Oregon and Washington ("the customers") really clamoring for this $85 pass??? Clearly there's some difference of opinion.

I would offer that the REAL reason for the introduction of this new recreation pass, is because the corporate sponsors/backers of fee-demo have been calling for it (demanding it actually) for 20 years.  This new $85 pass is only a stepping stone on the way to the ULTIMATE pass... the one they have long called "The America the Beautiful Passport".

To read the legislation NOW before the US House of Representatives to create and permanently authorize the recreation industry's America the Beautiful Pass, go to: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:HR3283:

To learn more of the story, go to: http://www.wildwilderness.org/aasg/passport.htm

Scott 

Quoted from appended feature article from Ski Magazine:

[At the moment, Forest Service officials appear to be leaning toward a policy change that would allow more visible displays of sponsors, whose logos, names or ads could appear on items they underwrite.]

What's happening with respect to commercial advertising on the National Forests today is an almost carbon copy of what happened just recently with the controversial Beeline Pass debacle.

You might recall that when Copper Mountain Ski Resort proposed issuing a ultra-premium-priced lift ticket (called the "Beeline Advantage") that would allow the bearer to cut in front of all non-advantaged skiers, local USFS decision makers said: ABSOLUTELY NO WAY - regulations do not allow this.

You might also recall that it was Dave Holland, Director of Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness Resources Management for the USFS who overruled those local managers and authorized the issuance of these elitist, undemocratic, passes. Today Dave Holland is at it again, further bending/ breaking forest rules to advance the cause of Industrial-Recreation. What's up with this man and with the entire Washington Office recreation staff?

Scott

PS... I've appended a passage from the January National Forest Recreation Association Newsletter which, I believe, helps answer the question I've posed above. NFRA's newsletter is definitely worth reading from cover to cover (8 pages). While you as a member of the general public can not attend any of the closed-door meetings taking place between the upper echelons of the USFS and their private-sector "partners" you can, at least, get a sense of what they're discussing by reading these industry newsletters.
 

There was a time when the National Park Service was perhaps the best-run land management agency in the USA. That is no longer true. Today politics rule supreme within the Department of Interior and the integrity of those at the helm must be challenged. Today it appears to me that when the leadership of the NPS is not misdirecting the media and the American public, they are speaking out of both sides of their mouths.

Days ago I shared with you an article about a funding scandal that was about to rock the agency. That story described how the NPS was quietly and secretly cutting visitor services and reducing park hours due to a lack in appropriated funding. Today I'm sharing an article written three weeks ago. This one describes how the National Parks Service and their private partners in the tourism industry are attempting to stem the decline in park visitation through efforts to aggressively lure additional paying customers back into the parks.

Clearly something is afoot within the agency and that being the case, I'm about to make a prediction. Perhaps someone would be so kind as to bury this prediction in a time capsule and unearth it 6 months or a years from today. Or better yet, perhaps people will chose to appropriately act upon it. By acting today, perhaps we can alter the future.

  ***** I PREDICT ****

  Budgets will be starved while money is instead put into marketing and promotion of the parks. Three months from now (give or take), the Bush Administration will announce that the National Parks are in decline and must seek creative new funding solutions. Gale Norton and Fran Mainella will announce a new public-private partnership initiative. Legislation to facilitate new private, commercial, development and private participation within park management will be introduced. It will be a foregone conclusion that the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program must be permanently authorized and expanded. The President's legislation will attempt to accomplish that objective as part of their larger privatization package.

Scott

The controversial Recreation Fee Demonstration program is about to take an enormous leap in the WRONG direction and it's going to cost you dearly (see appended article from today's Oregonian).

When introduced in 1996 as a test program, fee-demo was a real "User-Fee". Recreationists were asked to pay to use specific public facilities. They were told that the money they paid stayed right where they'd paid it. Recreationists were told that next time they visited that particular site, they'd see the benefits of the money they'd already paid. Whether any of this was true, is debatable. But it is what the public was told.

Today, that original User-Fee is being replaced with a regressive "User-Tax" in which recreationists pay into a general recreation fund and where there is no longer any direct connection between the "fee" paid and the benefits received. But try to remember how it once was. Less then 5 years ago, USFS literature stated:

 "Of every $1 in the federal budget, only .00018 of a penny goes towards the entire Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness Resources budget for the Forest Service. This mean that a person with an annual income of $40,000 pays less than $.03 per year in taxes to recreate on Forest Service lands, nationwide."

Back then,  THREE CENTS is what you paid in taxes to recreate on Forest Service-managed public lands (YOUR LANDS), nationwide. Today, Oregon and Washington just announced the availability of a brand new public lands pass that will set you back $85.  DON'T BUY IT !!

The promoters of the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program are desperate. Everything they've tried with this unpopular experimental "demonstration" program has failed. The public rejected the Trail Park Pass when introduced in 1997. The public rejected the Northwest Forest Pass which came next. The public is bound to reject this new "supersized" $85 Washington & Oregon Recreation Pass.

So what comes next ---  a $500 United States Passport, good for access to all public lands for one year??? Whatever happened to the days when the public was welcomed upon their public lands and when a walk in the woods was something everyone could afford?

Scott 

Pasted below is a News Release, issued today by the Department of Interior. It announces a new promotional campaign designed to attract more paying customers into America's National Parks. Only thing is, the campaign is not new. It was originally called "Luring International Visitors to America's Great Outdoors" when first put forth by the tourism industry in 1993. And as someone who is intimately familiar with this ongoing effort, I can say that is little more that the tourism industry's effort to use America's Crown Jewels as LURES and to deliberately CREATE and/or exacerbate an overcrowding problem in our parks!!!       Let me explain....

National Park visitation has been generally flat for 25 years. Overnight camping in the National Parks has been in steady decline since 1981 while Park visitation has generally been falling since entrance fees began to rise in 1997 with the passage of the rec-fee-demo program.

National Park concessionaires HATE this situation. They not only want more customers, they want to be able to claim that "Our National Parks are Being Loved to Death". They are working with  the Department of Interior, reconfiguring the parks in ways that will better allow the tourism industry to bus more and more warm bodies directly to ever-expanding gift shops. They are looking for ways to sell ever-increasing numbers of visitors more of everything from hamburgers to memories. And if anyone wants to see an example of how this is being done, please just look at what is happening to Yosemite Valley! No better example is possible.

Our National Parks are being underfunded. Money that is available, is being misspent. The entire National Park paradigm is based upon the Disneyfication Model and that is the wrong model.

The announcement made today the Department of Interior is counterproductive. It is inappropriate and it reflects the very mistaken priorities of Interior Secretary Norton and NPS Director Fran Mainella. Today's announcement is very bad news for America's National Parks.

Scott

What follows is another great fee-demo editorial. Too bad that the newspaper in which this appeared today, the Idaho Mountain Express, is not one that will be read far and wide. Therefor it remains up to us to get this story told in all the places that are either unfamiliar with this issue or are not already reading editorials such as this...

Scott

Quoted from appended LA Times article:

 [Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will raise state park fees to their highest levels ever, making California one of the most expensive places in the country for a family to spend time outdoors in a government-run park.]

Let the following be a warning:

• These dramatically higher fees will keep the public away. -Recent history in California has already shown that!
• Revenues will therefore be less than projected. -You can bank on that!
• The next step will be to commercialize and privatize the parks. -Let there be absolutely no doubt about that!
  

Advocacy groups that support these increased user-fees may be friends of the parks but they are nothing less than Enemies of Democracy. These groups should be denounced as 'elitists' and every effort must be made to keep public lands truly 'public' and accessible to rich and poor alike.

Scott

PS... for the past 7 years opponents of fee-demo have seen this coming. Perhaps this dramatic development in California will hasten the end of the much-detested, national, Recreation Fee Demonstration Program.

In today's Fresno Bee, a National Parks Conservation Association spokesperson said of the highly controversial Yosemite development plan.

"The plan strikes an elegant balance between visitor needs and protecting wildlife and natural habitat in the valley," said Diane Boyd of the national parks conservation association's pacific west regional office.

"ELEGANT BALANCE ??"  To that claim, a great many grassroots activists would say --  HOGWASH!!

Fortunately, this article goes on to quote Greg Adair, cofounder of Friends of Yosemite Valley, who says:

Adair disagreed, calling it the urbanization of a natural wonder which will allow easier access for visitors to concessionaires but limit visitor freedom. "There's upward of 70 archaeological sites destroyed or impaired in the Yosemite Valley under the plan," he said. Adair claims the plan will also bring pricier hotel rooms and less affordable campsites for families traveling on budgets.

Who is right, NPCA or Friends of Yosemite Valley???
Who should you truth ????

Pasted below are two further reference to  "elegant balance"  -- one from Jay Watson of The Wilderness Society and one from Michael Frome, author and long-time national park defender.

Who can you believe??
Which view is correct and which is a misrepresentation???

Scott

When they went to court, on the one side there was The Wilderness Society, National Parks Conservation Association, the National Park Service and a few more organizations. On the other was Friends of Yosemite Valley, Mariposans for Environmentally Responsible Growth plus several dozen grassroots organizations, including Wild Wilderness. This time, the grassroots organizations won. (see appended article)

My thanks and congratulations go out to Joyce Eden, Julia Olson and those who made this courtroom victory possible. Now its up to everyone who cares about Yosemite Valley to ensure that the National Park Service does not further overdevelop the park, as it seems determined to do.

Scott

 PS... You might ask: "What motivated TWS and NPCA to side with the NPS and to actively oppose those who are fighting so hard to protect Yosemite Valley?" In fact, I wish you would ask them!

On October 8th, 2003 seven East-Coast Republican Congressmen lead by Ralph Regula (R-OH) introduced the Bush Administration's long-awaited legislation to permanently authorized the "Recreation Fee Demonstration Program". This is horrible legislation that will affect all Americans and forever change the purposes for which public land recreation is managed.

HR 3283 represents the culmination of a 20 years effort by a powerful element of the recreation industry to commodify, privatize and commercialize outdoor recreation on America's public lands. (Read relevant Congressional Testimony here.)

HR 3283 proposes the creation of an outdoor recreation "Passport" that would be required by all Americans for access to federal lands. The passport would be called by the name given to it a dozen years ago when it was first proposed by the American Recreation Coalition and George Bush Senior --  the "America the Beautiful".

The bad news is that HR 3283 was introduced at all. The good news is that there is little chance of this legislation being acted upon in the remaining weeks of the current legislative session. Unfortunately, the possibility remains that Mr. Regula would insert this language into other 'must-pass' legislation as he did in 1996. The treat of HR 3283 must not be ignored.

The curious news is that Mr. Regula should dare introduce legislation that will generate as much negative reaction as HR 3283 or that he would introduce legislation containing as many illegal elements as are contained within HR 3283.

HR 3283, if passed, would...

1) ...make fee-demo permanent for 5 federal agencies.... adding the Bureau of Reclamation to the agencies already covered by fee-demo.

2) ...create three levels of outdoor user fees. In addition to the "Basic Recreation Fee" there'd be new "Expanded Recreation Fee" and "Special Recreation Permit Fee" categories.

3) ...permit the issuance of an "America the Beautiful" Pass/Passport which "will be accepted by one of more Federal land management agencies or by one or more governmental or nongovernmental entities..."

4) ...make it virtually impossible to maintain the direct connection between the fee paid and the service received. These user fees would become a regressive user-tax paid by anyone wishing to visit public lands.

5) ...authorize "volunteers" to collect recreation fees and sell recreation passes. Volunteers would be compensated for their work by being issued a pass "in exchange for significant volunteer services performed." America's minimum wage laws would be thrown out the window as underpaid volunteers are used to replace agency staffers. This section of the legislation, like the related "Take Pride in America" initiative, is a key component in President Bush's federal jobs "outsourcing" program.

6) ...criminalize failure to pay. Currently failure to pay a recreation fee is an infraction, like a parking ticket. HR 3283 would make it a crime publishable by a maximum penalty of $5000 and 6 months in jail (the maximum for a Class B misdemeanor).

7) ...throw out the Constitutions protection of "presumed innocence until proven guilty". The owner of a vehicle illegally parked on public land would become jointly liable. Unless that person could prove that his vehicle was used without his express or implied permission, he would be issued a ticket and charged with a criminal offense. Likewise, persons who fail to properly display a pass (even though one might have been purchased) will be required to prove their innocence within a given time period or be subject to criminal prosecution.

8) ....repeals the section of the Land Water Conservation Act that has for nearly 40 years severely constrained the number and type of recreation fees that could legally be charged upon public lands.

9) ...repeals the Golden Age, Golden Access and Golden Eagle passes. It used to be that if you were 62 years of age you could purchase for $10 a life-time pass good for admittance into all National Parks. If HR 3283 becomes law, the cost could easily jump to $100 per year and increase in price with every passing year.

10) ...authorize a minimum of ONE free day each year when all Americans will be permitted "Basic Access" to their public lands. Even on that day, expanded and special fees will apply.

... and finally, if HR 3283 is passed into law it would make the recreation industry a full partner in the development of this recreation fee program. HR 3283 reads: "The Secretaries may jointly enter into cooperative agreements with governmental and nongovernmental entities for the development and implementation of the National Parks and Federal Recreation Lands Pass Program."

HR 3283 is one of several important things happening with respect to fee-demo. Some are good, some are bad. If you do not want to be forced to purchase and carry a passport next time you visit your public lands, I recommend you contact your Congressman and Senators without delay.

---

HR 3283 can be read on here.

To get an understanding of the linkage between HR 3283 and the special personal relationships that made this legislation (and the recently revived, and not-to-be ignored, "Take Pride in America" initiative) possible, read this http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/papers/1992/92051400.html 1992 speech available on the Bush Library website.

To learn more, click here.

Scott

For years we have heard that 'Our National Parks are being loved to death' and it seems that with each repetition, the National Park Service builds some high-priced facility or hardens some trail or constructs something (whatever-it-may be) --- to 'solve the problem'.

The NPS is wrong and their solutions are killing the parks and driving away visitors... (full statistics available at http://www2.nature.nps.gov/stats)

Why, as the appended article states, is National Park visitation declining? It is NOT because of 9-11. It is NOT because of the sour economy. It is NOT even a short-term problem. And, let's be honest, declining visitation is not necessarily a problem at all, not unless you happen to be in the tourism business.

Declining visitation is the public's way of demonstrating their disapproval of park mismanagement!  Visitors (referred to as "customers" by the NPS) are simply voting with their feet and dollars.

In 1987, National Park historian Michael Frome delivered a speech in Des Moines, Iowa titled: "Protecting the Golden Goose" in which he warned:

 "It grieves me that national park administrators themselves tend to lose sight of their mandate and mission. As I observed on a recent visit to Virgin Islands National Park, the emphasis in management is on serving development and tourism without concern for preservation of the natural ecosystem....The emphasis needs to be on protecting and enhancing the quality and character of each park, and letting dollar values follow. When the desires of business interests for profit are allowed to dominate, the beauty will be lost - inevitably, and without fail."

Is there anything equivocal in the words "inevitably and without fail"?? Let's not let the NPS shift the blame. They are a big part of the problem and they must accept responsibility for their actions.

Scott

The Army Corps has long been thought of as "the low hanging fruit" by the motorized recreation industry.

So when the American Recreation Coalition, American Trials, George Bush and the Army Corps of Engineers team up to bring the public an exciting new program, you just know the environment is about to get picked clean.

Scott 

Few activists closely watch-dog the US Fish and Wildlife Service and fewer still are following their (mis)adventures into the Wonderful World of Industrial Tourism. That's a shame. The USFWS needs careful watchdogging, especially since they got sucked into the world of public-private-partnerships and recreation user fees.

Pasted below is a recent article which describes one of the USFWS's most glaring misadventures into this realm.

For those who find this article of interest, you are certain to find the USFWS's recent dealings with Kym Murphy  (Walt Disney VP and American Recreation Coalition board member) of extreme interest. The place to learn more is HERE where you can read a month-old USFWS news release titled: "National Bison Range and Walt Disney Executive Announce upcoming National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial during Annual Roundup."

Scott

Quoted from appended article:

Casual visitors from valley cities often opt to go to other lakes and parks, where they don't have to pay such a large fee, said Dan Carter of Oakhurst, executive director of the Yosemite Sierra Visitors Bureau.

Support for the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program for lands managed by the USFS, BLM and FWS never was high. Today it has fallen to all time lows. Support for this program on lands managed by the National Park Service, however, has been and remains high. It's time for that to change.

The appended article shows what's happened at Yosemite where when entrance fees  were suddenly quadrupled, attendance took a dive and has been diving ever since.

If there is one person who will suggest that this increase in fees has not adversely impacted persons of limited income to a greater extent than it has impacted wealthy visitors, let that person speak his peace. Solving the "crowding" problem by pricing working people out of the market isn't a solution and what is happening in Yosemite NP is an unmitigated disaster. Yosemite is being turned into a playground for the rich. More to the point, the very purposes for which National Parks exist are being quickly forgotten.

So I'd like to remind folks that recreation user fees are as inequitable when charged at National Parks as when charged at National Forest. Furthermore, the incentives created by allowing the fees to remain where they are collected will do every bit as much harm to the National Parks as they will do to other public lands.

It's time to carry the anti-fee-demo campaign to the National Parks and to prevent America's Crown Jewels from becoming sacrificial offerings to the Gods of Industrial Tourism.

Scott 

Pasted below is an article from the SF Chronicle. The author strongly suggests that the decrease in National Park attendance observed during the past several years correlates to increased user fees. To make the comparison even more convincing, she contrasts NP attendance with California State Park visitation for the same time period ... a period in the State Parks characterized by a 50% reduction in entrance fees and a 30% INCREASE in visitation.

In light of these data, it is curious that not one of the four agencies currently collecting fees under the fee-demo program have ever publicly so much as contemplated the possibility that these new, and/or higher user fees, are responsible for reduced visitation.  Its' odd. It's almost as if these land managers were deliberately trying to hide something from the American People or from Congress!!

Scott

"NPS Founders Day is the day the National Parks were authorized by congress.  Now all National Park sites celebrate this day by offering FREE entrance fee admission." http://lewisandclarktrail.com/eventsstate/oregon.htm

What you just read had been National Park Service Policy until today.

"Entrance Fee Waiver on Founders Day - There will be NO waiver of fees on August 25th, Founder's Day. Fees were waived on the weekend of June 22nd and 23rd in support of President Bush's "Healthier U.S." initiative. This was done in lieu of the annual fee free day in August. [Jane Anderson, RAD/WASO] "

What you just read appears on this morning's National Parks Report.

I do hope you've already enjoyed your one free day at the National Parks this year --- because they'll be no more free days until next year.

And to think the NPS says they are providing adequate access for low income and under-represented persons who are now excluded from their public lands because of the higher fees charged since the introduction of the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program!!!

Scott

PS... President Bush's "HealthierUS" Initiative was first announced to the American People during the American Recreation Coalition's Great Outdoors Week in June.  You have ARC to thank for creating fee-demo and making public lands and recreation upon those lands unaffordable to many Americans. You have ARC to thank for the free access day President Bush bequeathed upon you in June. And now you have ARC to thank for the cancellation of Founders Day as a free-access day this weekend.