For those of you who are worried about the 'loss' of the RAT fees used to keep a bit of your recreation resources well fed and groomed..  Well, that care comes right out of the hide of caring for other places on the Forest (or other Interior lands) which are just as important as the RAT target parcel.

Case in point: The Mount Evans highway - a road maintained by the State of Colorado, has a RAT toll booth at the bottom and the FS collects a LOT of money from folks using the road even tho technically they cannot charge for the use of the roadway itself. This money has been mostly plowed back into creating a large staff at Mount Evans and building some amenities which are prominently posted 'paid for with your user fees' or similar wording. If you were to look at the area prior to the 'in the dark of night' establishment of the infamous Fee Demo and the even more nefarious 'rider' which created the RAT, you'd see a portion of the Arapaho NF which was open to all comers. At one point the FS administered a special use permit for a lodge at the summit. Now the whole thing is an illegal toll road with the RAT being justified as making it possible to provide a 'better experience' for the visitor via a new trail, interpretive center, and an outsized force of fee enforcement folks in the guise of increased staff keeping the mountain from being overrun.

Of course what they don't tell you is that keeping the mountain from being overrun might entail a politically uncomfortable option like just limiting the sheer number of visitors allowed up the mountain on any one day (think river permits here). Nope, we can't cut off that revenue source by limiting numbers!

And, after the official exercise of choosing what developed and undeveloped (the mythical "dispersed site") recreation sites to keep open with dwindling appropriated funds (think giant sucking noise from fire suppression folks defending private homes), only a pittance of the RAT funding (if any at all) is available for resource management outside the RAT site itself. In no way does the amount of $$ delivered to a unit by the RAT compensate for appropriated funding that has been chopped every year for nearly two decades. So we're at the crossroads where folks who aren't into paying a premium to visit some trophy site on a Forest are left without access to some primitive undeveloped site because all the money is being spent on either the 'income producing site' or, like on the Roosevelt NF where appropriated $$ to the tune of 1+ million dollars were used to reconstruct and enlarge a developed campground which was promptly turned over to a concessionaire to manage (and make a guaranteed profit from).

The RAT is a scam designed to feather the pockets of a few (including the empire building programs of a few Federal units which have 'high amenity value' lands set up with toll booth) at the expense of the vast majority of Forest and Public Lands visitors who are seeing their cherished 'off the track but beaten to hell' places closed or neglected due to being 'non-income producing.' For some units, the RAT is now an addiction. Pray that we can drown the RAT and fight like hell for the return of appropriated funds to take adequate care of the people's heritage. (Like stopping the hoards of OHVs spreading like a biblical plague across the landscape - Remember Chief Bosworth?)

Your mileage may vary. I started my journey in the 1950's when only NPS units could charge strictly limited entrance fees and only well developed campgrounds (like with water and trash pickup) could charge a nominal fee. My parents provided me with exposure to the public estate at very low cost - something that is increasingly out of reach for lower income families like ours. We can either let a few 'profit' from the income they rake off the public resources or we can profit as a nation by encouraging citizens and foreign visitors alike to access these same places without the accountants wringing their hands over the expense. It's our heritage, not that of the libertarian fringe - private enterprise vultures, that has been cared for over the decades by ALL of the people of the US, not just those with a little more room under their card's credit limit.

Kill the RAT!! 

The proverbial fat-lady is standing on the stage, her lungs are filled, her mouth is open and ...
...  I will, if necessary, wait a little longer before sharing what I expect to be the best news I've shared in a very long while.  I wanted, however, to give you this preliminary heads up.

Here is a link to the first,  and still only semi-official,  announcement that Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Mike Crapo (R-ID) are poised to introduce legislation to repeal the unpopular and damaging Recreation Access Tax. 

When the official announcement is made (perhaps as early as this afternoon or Monday), I will invite you to join me in celebrating this wonderful victory and encourage you to work with Wild Wilderness, Western Slope No-Fee Coalition and other organizations in supporting passage of this landmark legislation.

Scott 

Take only photographs, leave only footprints and $5

I’m having a hard time getting past my initial knee-jerk reaction to this proposal to charge me to visit the Garden of the Gods, Bell Smith Springs and Pounds Hollow.

My first reaction was “I’m against that!” And I’m still against it. But why? This is money going to maintenance, renovation and improvement of our special places. Isn’t that worth a measly $5? I don’t care. I’m still against it.

I’m not going to pay $5 to sit and watch people climb on the rocks at Garden of the Gods and I’m not going to pay to take a summer dip in Bell Smith Springs, either. I’m sure not going to pay to take a photo of Pounds Hollow Lake and leave, which is all I’ve ever done there.

I could wax on about how my tax dollars already pay for the forest and about the benefits of a place like Garden of the Gods on the souls of young people and about how this land is my land your land and I have a right to go visit it without paying extra.

I could take the argument that if the forest can’t afford to maintain trails or remove the trash, it should just wash its hands of the matter and let everything go back to nature because nature doesn’t care if there is a bathroom or not.

I could make the slippery-slope argument that we are going to be charged more money for more natural places and will come to see nature as a commodity like food at a restaurant that we can reject when we should be thinking of nature as our home.

And somebody could probably make the argument that this is nature for sale to whomever wants to do whatever and — if they are willing to pay the fee — hang gliding may one day be permitted at Garden of the Gods, regardless of risk of injury and manpower spent on retrieving gliders from the tree tops.

But I don’t feel like arguing.

My stance is simple: I shouldn’t have to pay because I’ve never had to pay before. Besides, my being at Garden of the Gods doesn’t cost the Forest Service a penny. I don’t litter, don’t tear up the trail, usually don’t even use of the water tank or set foot in the vault toilet. I’ve never camped at the campground, never used the trashcan and only sat at a picnic table one time. My $5 fee is to help out with upkeep of amenities that I don’t need.

Granted, if I fall or get lost the Forest Service may feel obliged to devote a little manpower to help me, but, if so, I hereby release them from that obligation.

I won’t fall because I don’t get that close to the edge.

I have been lost — numerous times — and in two of those times a search party assembled to come rescue me, couldn’t find me, went home and I made it out on my own.

But from now on if I don’t get back when I said I would, don’t anybody sweat it, just know that I’m lost and I’ll get back when I find the way.

Thanks, anyway, but I don’t need your help.

So Forest Service, I don’t use your amenities, am not messing anything up and you don’t even have to come rescue me if I get in trouble, so may I please go to Garden of the Gods and keep my 5 bucks?

If there is one benefit of the fee it must be that it will keep out those people only looking to make out, drink whiskey, smoke dope and yell. To each his or her own, but these loud, wobbly types ruin any Garden of the Gods trip I take, not because I’m a prude, but because I pay more attention to them than I do the scenery. I expect they will fall, get hurt and I’ll have to go do something about it. It’s distracting.

The fee should keep some of the summer beer-can litter out of Bell Smith Springs, but it could actually bring more with the I-paid-my-five-bucks-so-you-pick-up-my-trash nature-as-commodity mentality.

Maybe I’m out of touch, but a few law enforcement patrols of these areas or a few tickets and court fines left on vehicles after the parks close would probably nip the problem in the bud.

I would imagine one patrol of the Garden of the Gods parking lot on a summer night, an hour after dusk, especially if there is a full moon, would generate enough court fines to cover all the $5 day use fees for that day. Maybe the Forest Service does this, but I’ve been up there after dark and I never got in trouble.

The aspiring law enforcement agent could probably net a few more arrests if he goes out on the bluffs with a flashlight. Did you know it is now illegal to be nude in the forest? The order was signed Nov. 10, 2004.

Unfortunately, the effect of a decision to charge user fees will be that poor folks like won’t go there, anymore.

Five dollars is a lunch, a few miles worth of gasoline, a bottle of wine.

If I want to go hiking there are plenty of other places to go.

I used to go to Crab Orchard National Wildlife refuge several times a year to drive around, look at birds and other wildlife.

I haven’t been back since that park started charging a fee — and don’t see any reason to go again. There are plenty of places to see those things for free.

The horse riders have their own complaints about the fees and have their organizations to voice them. I have my own user group to represent here; the po’ white trash user group too broke or too cheap to pay $5 a trip or a $50 annual fee to go see these places. Unfortunately, these are some of the places that make our area unique enough to call home.

If the Forest Service decides to implement the fees, it could begin as early as April 2008. The agency is accepting comments until April 15, 2008.

There have been countless reviews published of Naomi Klein's new book "The Shock Doctrine". Pasted below is one that is both unusual and, in my opinion, worth reading.

The endgame of disaster capitalism is the total privatization of what have throughout American history been state services. Not surprisingly, the ultimate outcome of unbridled disaster capitalism will be the supplanting of government by corporations.

But what it seems that Klein hasn't quite grasped is that disaster capitalism is the mechanism for achieving the consummate agenda of organizations such as the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission, namely the dissolution of nation states which will ultimately be replaced by global corporatocracy. For most progressive intellectuals, the mere mention of these organizations suggests "conspiracy theory" since progressives tend to minimize their role in international and domestic affairs. Moreover, a number of left-liberal poster children are members of one or more of the ruling elite groups mentioned above-an inconvenient truth, so to speak, for true believers tethered to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party in search of salvation from all that they perceive as evil.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to
entertain a thought without accepting it.
                                    -Aristotle

Scott 

It was Wild Wilderness that drew the media's attention to the efforts of the American Recreation Coalition to influence Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and to lobby him to expedite the confirmation of their long-time friend and reliable proponent of industrial wreckreation, Lyle Laverty, to the number three spot within the Department of Interior.

The blogosphere is abuzz with this story and the Daily Kos has gone so far as to publish a piece which has now drawn 180 comments. The piece is titled "Should Harry Reid be deposed as Majority Leader?" More than 90% of readers have voting against Reid. To get a sense of the anger being expressed, read the comments.

Or, more easily, read the appended Editorial which appeared in today's Willamette Weekly. It is titled "Harry Reid - Gutless Weasel".

I'd just add that Reid is suffering a well deserved fate. Stabbing fellow Democrat Wyden in the back and sucking up to the wise-use American Recreation Coalition was definitely the wrong move. Allowing Laverty's confirmation to occur was a complete disaster and for this, and the damage Laverty will do within the DOI,  Harry Reid will forever be accountable.

Scott

The underhanded nature of Lyle Laverty's confirmation has me fuming. Laverty was installed as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks even though Senator Wyden's "HOLD" remained in place. This confirmation should never have happened.

The wise-use lobby know as the American Recreation Coalition collaborated with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to get their man confirmed. They deserve to share the blame for all of the harm Laverty will do in his new position.

As I've warned for many months, Laverty is ARC's dream appointee. His forte is commercialization, privatization and the over-development of parks.

Some may find it of interest that although the media has yet to pick up the story, ARC's President, Derrick Crandall was quick to post his congratulations on ARC's website. His statement is appended.

In recent months I've identified as the two biggest potential threats to the National Park Service 1) Lyle Laverty's confirmation and 2) President Bush's National Park Centennial Initiative.

The first has just happened. The second can, perhaps, still be prevented.

Scott

For many months Wild Wilderness has stood virtually alone in opposing the confirmation as President Bush's nominee for the exceedingly powerful position of Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

One wonders when the day will come when the American public grows tired of playing dog and cat with their grandchildren's birthright.   

 Important info from the following article: 

1) The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA) of 2004 (passed by congress) authorizes fees to be charged by the Forest Service and other agencies.
 
 2) Specifically, FLREA says that fees can no longer be charged "solely for parking, undesignated parking, or picnicking along roads or trailsides."
 
 3) But to get around that little hurdle, the Forest Service simply created its own fee policy for what it calls "special high-impact areas" ... a designation with no basis in law.
 
 4) "The issue is not a $5 fee.  The issue is whether agencies are obligated to follow the law." 

 These truths brought to you by Dick Artley (US Forest Service, Retired)
 

Over the past several decades a growing number of formerly kick-ass activists have transformed themselves into corporate toadies. Some do it for the money, others for love. The really successful ones do it for both.

The appended Op-Ed by Randal O'Toole recently appears in the Christian Science Monitor and is titled "Government plans don't work". It is a wide-ranging screed against government, government planning and governmental regulation. It is a call for running government as if it was a market-oriented business.

Randal has moved up in the world and left his grassroots background behind. Today he is a successful mouthpiece of the extreme right. And yet one thing about the man never changes. That is his love for user-fees and, especially for recreation user-fees charged by the US Forest Service.

Have a look at the basket of ideology Randal presents. Would you accept the basket as presented? Would you accept any part of it? So why do such a significant number of conservation groups still accept the part of the agenda nearest and dearest to Randal's heart????


Scott

The confirmation of President Bush's nomination of Lyle Laverty to the top recreation/tourism policy-administration slot within the Department of Interior is being blocked by Oregon's Senator Ron Wyden. Pushing for Laverty's confirmation are a plethora of wise-use and pro-motorized organizations such as Americans for Responsible Recreation and the American Recreation Coalition. Here, for example, is a quote from ARRA's September Newsletter.

"Let's hope that come September, Senator Wyden, who has concerns about the Endangered Species Act, will decide to remove Mr. Laverty's name from the endangered nomination list and permit the Senate to proceed with a vote on the Laverty nomination."

In addition to these anti-parks, pro-wreckreation groups, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has, in a big way, gone to bat for the President's top draft choice. Last Thursday, on the Senate Floor Reid said:

"[Laverty's confirmation has] not been cleared on the Republican side, but I am sure that is not standing in the way. I think standing in the way is one of my Senators. We are doing our best."

 Reid's truly remarkable statement appears below. With friends like this...

Scott 

Senator Wayne Allard's (R-CO) office apparently jumped the gun.

On October 5th, Allard's staff reportedly told the Associated Press that Lyle Laverty had been confirmed as the new Assistant Interior Secretary for Fish Wildlife and Parks (see original article below).

Sources now tell me that the AP article was incorrect. Senator Ron Wyden's (D-OR) hold upon the Laverty confirmation remains in place!  However, it now appears that the motorized recreation industry-led effort to push through the nomination of their pal, Lyle Laverty, is gaining traction and that Allard's staff may simply have spoken a little too soon.

As I have been saying, the confirmation of Laverty would be a disaster for the National Park system and for everyone who enjoys low-impact, minimally developed, recreational opportunities on public lands managed by the Department of Interior.

The good news is that Laverty has NOT yet been confirmed. The bad news is that interest groups unfriendly to the environment are aggressively pushing for his confirmation while there does not appear to be an equal and opposite force being by conservation-minded organizations.

I hope that I wasn't merely jumping the gun myself when I recently reported "Laverty Confirmed - Let the Disaster Unfurl".

I hope that the conservation community will join me in using this opportunity to prevent the unfurling of what surely would be a disastrous appointment, if confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

Scott 

On September 11th of this year,  the American Recreation Coalition and several it's member organizations met with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV);  their long-time, and very close friend, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN);  Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne and a number of key Congressmen. They met for the purpose of pressing their agenda — that being the commercialization, privatization and motorization of recreational opportunities upon our nation's public lands and most especially upon America's National Parks. A summary of this important meeting can be read here and several additional position papers can be downloaded from that webpage.

One focus area of that 9/11 meeting was to expedite the confirmation of their good friend, and champion of industrial wreckreation/tourism,  Lyle Laverty to the position of Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. In that position Laverty could be counted upon to do the ARC's bidding and to implement recreation and tourism policy that would further transform National Parks into more perfect imitations of Disneyfied themeparks — complete with an increased variety of motorized attractions and commercially-provided amusement gadgetry.

For the wreckreation industry, however, there was a problem. Laverty's confirmation was being blocked by Senator Ron Wyden, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Wyden had placed a "hold" upon Laverty's confirmation. Amongst other things, Senator Wyden was troubled with a number of ethical issues involving Laverty.

The ARC was did not share Senator Wyden's concerns. In fact, the failure of the Senate to confirm THEIR man was intolerable -- so they took the matter directly with Senate Majority leader Reed and asked for his help.

Pasted below is the position paper on Laverty's confirmation developed by the ARC and dated September 10th. The next day the ARC met with Senator Reed and key officials. Today the Associated Press announced the confirmation of Lyle Laverty to the position of Assistant Secretary.

To learn more about the harm that can now be expected, click here and here.

Scott 

Following is an important column that appeared in the Seattle Times on October 4, 2007 about entrance fee increases in National Parks. We have been sounding the alarm about these ever since we learned that 95% of NPS units that charge entrance fees will increase them, some by doubling or even tripling, between 2006 and 2009. At 19 NPS units, entrance fees will increase more than once during that period. Beginning in 2011 the NPS plans to increase entrance fees every 3 years based on the Consumer Price Index.

This approach to managing National Parks on a for-profit business model is very worrisome to many Americans, and to many members of Congress as well. The NPS has been getting significant resistance in some areas, enough that they have put planned increases on hold in a few Parks.

These increases are not being announced at the national level, only locally by each individual Park, Monument, or Historic Site. Comment periods are very short and often not very well publicized. Please check with the NPS units near you, or the ones you enjoy visiting, and find out what their plans are. A spreadsheet showing all planned increases through 2009 is available from the WSNFC on request. Then comment to the NPS and send copies of your comments to your elected officials in the U.S. House and Senate and ask them to intervene. Opposition from local governments and Chambers of Commerce has also been proving to be effective in stopping (temporarily) some planned increases.

Your efforts can help keep OUR National Parks, Monuments, and Historic Sites accessible to all Americans!

Kitty Benzar, President WSNFC
WESTERN SLOPE NO-FEE COALITION
P.O. Box 135 Durango CO 81302
www.WesternSlopeNoFee.org

Yesterday the PR giant GolinHarris announced the creation of a new public relations campaign called "Green". To read their announcements you might believe that this is a pro-environmental effort. It is a fraud and it involves the US Forest Service by way of their intimate partnership with the National Forest Foundation (NFF).

I have, for good reasons, long been a critic of the NFF. NFF's founding President is Derrick Crandall -- founding President of the wise-use, anti-environmental American Recreation Coalition.

I have written scathing critiques about NFF for more than a decade. Dozens of those critiques can be read on the Wild Wilderness website.  Here's a link to a good overview written by one of Wild Wilderness' board members .

Unfortunately in spite of our best efforts, the influence of the National Forest Foundation has grown during this period. NFF's funding of conservation groups  has all but guaranteed that few in this community will speak poorly of them.  Some will even come to NFF's defense and will chastise me for attacking their funder(s). Those who defend the NFF are wrong to do so and they do harm to our shared goals.

Pasted below are links to, and snippets from, yesterday's news release. Below those are links to, and snippets from, three articles that expose the true nature of GolinHarris and its PR campaigns. Many more such articles can be found online.

In 1995, Joel Bleifuss wrote a most important article that was published in PR Watch and titled "Covering the Earth with Green PR."  It began with these words:

"As the 25th anniversary of Earth Day dawns, the public relations industry is quietly advising its corporate clients to keep from gloating."

Bleifuss went on the discuss, amongst other things,  the DOW corporation and how it was using PR to hide its many sins. DOW, along with NFF,  is one of the founding clients GolinHarris' "Green". Here's what Bleifuss had to say:

Dow Chemical's environmental PR campaign began in 1984 with the goal of making "Dow a more highly regarded company among the people who can influence its future." Dow's reputation was still suffering from its manufacture of napalm bombs and Agent Orange defoliants that devastated much of Vietnam...

"Many people use [Dow] as an example of doing the right thing. There is hardly a discussion of pollution control and prevention among American industries that fails to highlight Dow and the strides it has made," writes Jenni Laidman in the Bay City Times of Saginaw, MI. Laidman notes that Dow garners all this praise even though the company "is still a leading polluter in the state and the nation. . . . fish caught downstream from Midland [Dow's home base in Michigan] remain inedible, according to state fish advisories."

Why do we in the conservation community permit the wool to be pulled over our heads?

How can any of us support organizations that work to destroy the planet and steal our democracy?

Who will join me in denouncing this newest PR GREEN-SCAM?

Scott

The American Recreation Coalition is champing at the bit, desperate to put their man, Lyle Laverty, into the #3 slot within the Department of Interior. If confirmed, Laverty will be the best friend the motorized / commercial recreation community could hope for.
 
Pasted immediately below is a memo issued days ago by the ARC's President. It was send to the ARC's wise-use members and it provided them with an Action item. I encourage the conservation community to take the OPPOSITE action and to ensure that the President's appointment is not confirmed.
 
Below that is a recent article from the Rocky Mountain News. From 2001 until 2007, Laverty was the Director of Colorado's state park system. This article from his home state explains how lousy a job he did in that position. It should also make it clear why President Bush and the ARC want this man installed within the Department of Interior.

And if anyone has any doubts about where Laverty stands on motorized recreation in particular, please see this article on the BlueRibbon Coalition's website. The image above is that of Lavery (left) receiving an award from BRC President Jack Welch

Scott

Yesterday in Tucson Federal Court, Christine Wallace was found guilty of failing to purchase a US Forest Service recreation pass for $5. This is a criminal misdemeanor offense and as a consequence of this verdict, Mrs. Wallace will have a criminal record unless her case is appealed and the current conviction is overturned.

The crux of the Wallace defense has to do with whether the Forest Service had the authority to charge a recreation fee to someone who had parked on the side of a road and gone for a walk. The Forest Service claimed, and the judge, agreed that such authority was granted in the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA) by virtue of the fact that Wallace was within what the Forest Service is calling a "High Impact Recreation Area" (HIRA).

HIRA is a fiction. The concept does not appear within the law. It was invented by the Forest Service in their effort to circumvent the clearly stated prohibition FLREA placed upon charging merely to walk in the woods or picnic along a road, etc.  Wallace is innocent and, I suggest, it is the Forest Service that is guilty of incorrectly and illegally, ticketing her parked vehicle.

Two summers ago the USFS ticketed MY parked vehicle when I was similarly parked on the side of a road in Oregon. Unlike in the Wallace case, when I told the US Attorney that I looked forward to fighting that ticket because it had been incorrectly and illegally issued, the government declined to prosecute me and my case did not go to trial.

I was innocent and was spared the frustrations, anguish and expenses that Mrs. Wallace has already endured, and will continue to endure during the appeal process that awaits her. Mrs. Wallace is innocent and yet she has been convicted. Where is the justice in this?

Pasted below is an article about yesterday's proceedings. Perhaps more interesting than the article are the associated comments which can be read on-line. Of the 70 comments already posted NOT ONE deals with the matter of Wallace's guilt or innocence.

Wallace is innocent and that is what matters. The court should have found her not-guilty and it failed to do so.

Scott 

The trial of United States vs. Christine Wallace will be in Tucson on Tuesday September 4 before U.S. District Judge John Roll. Chris is charged by the Coronado National Forest with hiking on Mt Lemmon without paying their $5 access/use fee. 

The Government's Position: The Forest Service says that by declaring Mt Lemmon a High Impact Recreation Area (HIRA) they can charge anyone who does anything within the HIRA, including activities specifically prohibited by law from fees such as parking, accessing undeveloped backcountry, and primitive camping. They have charged Chris with a federal crime for parking her car at a location that has no amenities and going on a hike.

The Defendant's Position: Chris says that the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act prohibits fees for parking and hiking into undeveloped backcountry, whether the parking and hiking occur within a HIRA or not. You can read about the case here.
 
Background: Chris filed a Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that the fee she didn't pay is not authorized in the law. U.S. Magistrate Judge Charles Pyle granted her motion and dismissed the charges. In an extremely well researched and well written decision, he said that the fee prohibitions in the FLREA apply within HIRAs. You can read about the decision here.

The Forest Service appealed Judge Pyle's decision. Since Mt Lemmon's fee program is very similar to other fee programs (Mt Evans, American Fork Canyon, Mirror Lake Highway, Sandia Byway, etc) they knew that to let it stand would kill some of their biggest cash cows. Their appeal was granted by U.S. District Judge John Roll. Judge Roll reinstated the charges and sent the case to trial. You can read more about the appeal here.
 
Next: After several date changes, the trial is now set for September 4 before Judge Roll. The Government is sending a big-gun out of town prosecutor. If Chris is found guilty the case will be  appealed to the 9th Circuit.
 
How to Help: Chris's attorney is serving pro bono but there are out-of-pocket expenses for her travel costs, as well as for filing fees, copying, mailing, etc. Donations can be made by credit card through the AZ No Fee website. You can mail checks to Chris Wallace Legal Defense Fund, 912A N. 4th Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85705.
 
Kitty Benzar, President
WESTERN SLOPE NO FEE COALITION

This message is intended for the relatively small group of people who will both find it of interest and who will not require a lengthy explanation to appreciate the meaning of what this says.

The signatories you see below are representative of those who backed the Paul Hoffman National Parks policy rewrite. They are largely concessionaires and key special interest groups. They are in no way representative of the American public and they are certainly not "friends" of the national park system. They are those interests with the greatest desire and/or need to transform the way in which, and the purpose for which, our National Parks are managed.  The messaging they have used is pure fluff. It is, however, calculated to be effective and has already been exceedingly well received with the media and with the National Park Service, the Department of Interior and, presumably, with the Bush Administration. This non-threatening language may very well accomplish a large portion of what the Hoffman rewrite failed to accomplish. It has certainly changed the nature of the public debate ... even though the interests of the players has not altered one tiny bit.
 
Scott 

Appended is an article from today's Salt Lake Tribune published under the headline "Marketing Western beauty." It begins:

   [Western counties that rely on timber, coal mining and oil and gas drilling at the expense of natural beauty are trading short-term gain for an economy that could rely on hunting, fishing, tourism and attracting affluent residents from other parts of the country.]

 ... and it ends with this thought:

   [So, although selling beauty is a better long-term prospect than drilling for riches, rural residents could end up working in "the king's land," Knold said. Park City is a good example of where successful tourism morphed a played-out mining town into something far different but not unreservedly better.]

The article is about a new Sierra Club report titled "The New Economy of the West: From Clearcutting to Camping."

I'd like to further introduce this article with two contiguous paragraphs I wrote for publication several years ago -- and a decade old warning from High Country News:

   [The conservation interests of both Kerr and Foreman are rather narrowly focused upon the protection of trees from loggers and the protection of Western grasslands from cows. To them, recreation and tourism are seen as alternative uses for public lands, uses that can be promoted to advantage. They judge pay-to-play recreation and tourism to be less environmentally harmful that logging or  grazing.  They  appreciate that lands used for logging and grazing are, because of their degraded state, less valued for recreation and tourism. Thus, by using market based arguments, Kerr, Foreman and others believe that it is environmentally beneficial to encourage the replacement of harmful logging and grazing, with less harmful recreation. Allowing land managers to commodify recreational pursuits and to charge for access and use, provides incentives that would lead those mangers from offering below-cost logging and subsidized grazing, to offering recreation and tourism instead.

   During the Clinton/Gore years there was a general move away from logging, mining, drilling, grazing and other resource extraction uses of public lands. These trends were so deeply engrained in the common lore of the times that the authoritative newspaper of Western land uses, High Country News, produces a special edition on April 27, 1998 titled "The Old West is Going Under". Publisher Ed Marston began his front page article with these words "Think of this as a deathwatch issue, in which we hover around the bed of the extractive West, some of us administering CPR, some of us trying to yank the creature off life support so it can die a quicker death, and some of us worrying over what will come next." In the next few paragraphs, Marston introduces articles that appear later in the journal in which the presumed demise of logging, grazing and drilling are each, in turn, discussed. Marstons' ends with these words; "The final article … is about the recreation industry that is moving quickly to take over the forests, mountains and deserts that the loggers, ranchers and oil and gas guys are vacating. Indications are that this new extractive industry, which carries with it user fees and increased motorized activities, isn't going to be a huge improvement over the natural resource industries." At the time, it would have been appropriate to say that it appears that the pragmatic conservationists had indeed prevailed and that pay-to-play recreation and tourism would become the dominant new revenue-generating uses of America's public lands. ]

The article referenced above was given the headline, "The latest 1,000-pound gorilla". The warning it offered is as valid today as when it was published.

Scott