|
I've posted below a column from the Idaho Statesman written by their outdoor writer, Pete Zimowsky. Zimo has been reporting upon the recreation fee issue for years and, by and large, he gets it.
Don't you wish the outdoor writer with your local newspaper got it? Try to imagine what would be possible if newspapers all across the country were printing columns similar to the one which appears below.
Perhaps all that is required is for you and others who already get it to contact your newspaper's outdoor writer and help him or her understand why, as the headline of this reads: "The commercialization of public lands has to stop."
As for Zimo's remark "it's not Disneyland", let me remind everyone that while public lands are not yet Disneylands, the intended result of pay-to-play is, and has always been, "The Corporate Takeover of Nature and the Disneyfication of the Wild."
Scott
--- begin quoted --
Zimo: The commercialization of public lands has to stop
Pete Zimowsky - Idaho Statesman
04/13/08
Campers, hikers, hunters, anglers, bird watchers and others are being priced out of the woods.
Recent proposals to increase campground fees in the Boise and Sawtooth
national forests have only fueled the fire. A grass-roots effort has
been mounting against federal recreation fees, and Sens. Mike Crapo,
R-Idaho, and Max Baucus, D-Mont., have introduced the Fee Repeal and
Expanded Access Act of 2007.
The bill would revoke the authority of federal agencies to add or raise
fees established under the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program.
"Recreating on federal public lands has been a cherished birthright of
Americans for generations and, with a few narrow exceptions, a right
enjoyed without charge," said Kitty Benzar, president of the Western
Slope No-Fee Coalition, based in Durango, Colo.
(www.westernslopenofee.org).
"The 1996 Recreational Fee Demonstration Program radically altered that
tradition by requiring payment simply to access public lands for
hiking, camping and many other activities," she said.
Benzar is backing the Senate bill to repeal fees and halt what she calls the commercialization of public lands.
The term commercialization of public lands is the key.
Many thought the rec fee program was going to be good because it took
recreation fees and kept them locally for recreational improvements.
It did improve boat-launch areas and restrooms along the Payette River
near Banks. But the program went bonkers. Because it kept fees local
and out of the Treasury, federal agencies scrambled to come up with
ways to charge for everything they could get away with, including
picnics in the woods.
Federal agencies have got it all wrong now - they're milking the public
in any way possible. The Baucus bill will reverse that and hopefully
turn the tide on out-of-control rec fees.
Let's get something straight: A rec fee is a tax. Politicians like to
say they are cutting your taxes, but then they nail you with higher
user fees. It's a tax in disguise. Raising campground fees and charging
other rec fees isn't the answer to funding recreation sites.
Congress has to make sure recreation budgets for the U.S. Forest
Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
or whatever other agency that handles public lands are fully funded.
Congress has to make sure the money gets down to the district level
where it is needed for campground and recreation-site maintenance and
operation.
Recreation funding doesn't need to go to the Washington bureaucracy. It
doesn't need to go to the regional bureaucracy. It needs to go to the
district.
Federal agencies at the ground level have a legitimate gripe about
funding. In announcing a proposal to raise campground fees last fall,
the Boise National Forest listed some figures.
Revenue from recreation fees and appropriations from Congress amount to
roughly $650,000. Boise National Forest has an operation and
maintenance budget of $760,000 annually. It also is dealing with $1.6
million in maintenance and improvements that are not getting done.
But that's no excuse to price the average camper out of the woods with
higher camping fees, fees to take a walk in the woods, or fees to park
at a trailhead or picnic area.
The concept of public ownership of public lands has been lost. Federal
agencies now refer to the public as customers. The more federal
agencies operate the outdoors like a commodity, the more the public
loses.
It's the same with the privatization of the operation of federal
campgrounds. Private companies close campgrounds as soon as the first
cool breeze hits after Labor Day weekend. They don't want to be
maintaining campgrounds if only a few campers show up. It's not
profitable. Profitable? It's not Disneyland.
There should be some fees. Areas that require significant upkeep, such as developed campgrounds, should have a modest fee.
But let's not price the public out of the outdoors.
|
BLOG 
