|
 Every so often, a member of the general public (i.e., a citizen and taxpayer) obtains access to an extraordinary document. Here is a link to one such extraordinary document in Word Format. (and here is a link to the document in PDF format)
In the next day or two, I will be sharing another even more extraordinary document from the Bureau of Land Management ... but let's, for the moment, focus upon this document from the US Forest Service. It is titled -
"Notes from the National Communications / Legislative Affairs Conference on the 110th Congress-January 2007."
"Notes" provides a clear view, revealing how the men and women we pay to manage our public lands speak about us citizens being our backs. "Notes" lets us see how they conspired to screw us using the very tax dollars and user-fees we have provided. "Notes" is a damning document. May Jim Bedwell, Joel Holtrop and the other forest service personnel whose arrogance is exposed in "Notes", feel the heat of our anger.
"Notes" is a 37 page document. Many would benefit from reading it though few are likely to do so. For those who'd be content to read what NewWest writer Bill Schneider had to say about just one of the many revelations contained within Notes, his article appears below.
For those who would prefer the full-meal-deal, "Notes" will make a satisfying read.
Scott
REC FEES USED TO CLOSE CAMPGROUNDS, LIMIT ACCESS
Now We Know Where the RAT Goes
By Bill Schneider, 2-10-07
I’ve written extensively about RAT, the Recreation Access Tax, created
by the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, and how agencies,
particularly the Forest Service (FS) have been recently aggressive in
charging new fees and increasing existing fees. While reading some of
these articles, you may have wondered where all this money goes. I, for
one, assumed it goes to enhance recreational facilities on our national
forests, but no. It’s going to limit recreational facilities on our
national forests.
In a high-level meeting among FS bosses held in January, John
Pasquantino, lead OMB budget analyst for the FS, said he has made $93
million in recreation fee revenue available to the forests to implement
the much-maligned Recreation Site Facility Master Planning (RSFMP)
process. That $93 million is basically all the recreation fees
collected in all national forests for two whole years.
How’s that for irony? We pay fees at toll booths to enter our national
forests and feed “Iron Rangers” to park at trailheads and the FS uses
our money to close, privatize, or “demonstrate” (i.e. start charging
fees) campgrounds, trailhead parking lots, and picnic areas.
Why is the FS using recreation fees to close campgrounds? According to
Pasquantino, “it’s logical, transparent, and makes sense.”
I don’t know about you, but for me, his logic is too complex to understand.
Does spending fee money on RFSMP really fit with the spirit of the law
the FS uses to charge fees, the Federal Lands Enhancement Act? The key
word, of course, being “enhancement.”
As a disclaimer, this information comes to us from the notes of Sherry
Wagner, who works as Director of Communications and Government
Relations for the FS’s eastern region. Her notes may not be exact
quotes from people at the meeting, but knowing government at this
level, I have to say her notes must closely capture the spirit and
essence of the meeting. Otherwise, she wouldn’t have circulated them.
Fortunately, she did. Otherwise, we might not know where RAT revenue
goes. A copy of her notes ended up in the hands of Robert Funkhouser of
the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition. His response? “It’s like having to
buy the rope they use to hang you.”
The FS may argue that the purpose of the RSFMP process is not to limit
recreation access and facilities, but they must have a hard time saying
this with a straight face because that’s the result of the plans so
far.
Interestingly, at the same meeting, Jim Bedwell, Director of Recreation
and Heritage Resources for the FS admitted that RSFMP “has been framed
around there’s not enough money, so what can we shut down.” Even if
those weren’t his exact words, we get the picture, Jim.
Launched in secrecy back in 2002, RSFMP has only recently been
revealed, and not by the FS, I might add. And is anybody surprised that
a secret process intended to close or limit access to thousands of
recreational facilities would be controversial? As soon as word seeped
out, the FS held a high level meeting and decided to “pause” the
process while a public involvement process solicited comments from
national forest users. This means, of course, as it always does, that
after 90 percent of the comments oppose the intent and result of RSFMP,
the FS will do it anyway. (Witness the recent revelation that the FS is
still going ahead with plans to sell off large chunks of the national
forests after 99 percent of comments opposed it.)
Keep in mind that over the past ten years, the FS’s recreation budget
has increased 22 percent, but national forests are still starved for
money to manage and maintain recreational facilities. Fee income is
supposed to replace budget shortfalls, but instead it’s going to a
pricey planning process that will probably be shelved soon and become
nothing more than another example of government waste.
I suppose the federal government does not consider $93 million a
significant sum when the Defense Department just misplaced $12 billion
in cash on its way to Iraq, but I’m going out on a limb and predict
that to the folks who built up that $93 million by forking $5 or $10
every time they tried to go out on their own land for a little outdoor
fun, it seems significant.
|
BLOG 
