More bad fee demo news

[jon]

On Monday Novermber 5, President Bush signed the InteriorAppropriations Bill which included provisions to extend and expand therecreation fee demonstration program. The highly controversial feedemonstration program is now authorized until September 2004 and thepervious limitation of 100 sites per agency has been removed. Inaddition, the recreation budget and Capital Improvement portions ofthe US Forest Service have been increased by a total of $40,000,000. Ihave no doubt that this money will be spent on highly visible projectsand that the USFS will do its best to mislead the public into thinkingthat these improvements were made possible by fee-demo dollars.

Amongst the bad news, there is some good news!!

In removing the cap on the number of recreation sites where fees canbe collected, the USFS is now free to introduce this program intoparts of the country that had yet seen these user fees. AND becausewhen fees are introduced, angry users write letters to theircongressional delegation.We can thus be assured that many morecongressmen will be hearing from their constituency on the fee issue.

There is, unfortunately, more bad news.

The agencies sense victory and are aggressively preparing forPresident Bush's anticipated new and improved fee program scheduled tobe introduced in the Spring of 2002. The bad news is that we almostcertainly do not have until September 2004 in which to kill thefee-demo program because a new program will be substituted forfee-demo within the next 12 months. In fact, the bad news is thatpermanent fee legislation is on a fast track and that we must becomesignificantly more active in our effort to end this program andprevent Bush's replacement program from going anywhere.

The sum of the bad news is simply this --- AS THINGS STAND,opposition to fee demo will probably not reach critical proportionsuntil after recreation users fees are permanently authorized.

The sum of the good news is this --- the AMERICAN PUBLICWILL NEVER ACCEPT permanent recreation user fees and willeventually overturn any such program and will restore free accessto public lands in the years to come.

The amount of pain and suffering that must be experienced between nowand then will depend upon how aggressively the proponents of thesefees push their agenda and upon how actively and effectively theopponents of user fees work to thwart them.

It's up to us. It's up to you. I appreciate your help.

Scott

---begin quoted---

http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2001/11/01nov06-FS2002Budget.htmNews ReleaseUSDA Forest ServiceWashington, D.C.Contact: Heidi Valetkevitch, (202) 205-1134FOREST SERVICE RECEIVES $4.1 BILLION BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002

WASHINGTON, Nov. 6, 2001--President Bush yesterday signed the Department ofInterior and Related Agencies Appropriation Act for fiscal 2002, whichincludes the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service's budget of $4.1billion. The Forest Service received increases for research and developmentas well as recreation, heritage and wilderness programs.

"Restoring forest and rangeland health, making lands accessible to therecreating public and protecting lives and communities from wildfire are ourtop priorities," said Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth. "Forest Serviceemployees will spend these dollars wisely and efficiently in maintaining andrestoring the health, diversity and productivity of America's nationalforests and grasslands."

The Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act passedCongress by votes of 380-28 in the U.S. House and 95-3 in the U.S. SenateOct. 17. While the Forest Service is now an agency under USDA, it was onceunder DOI. When the agency was moved from DOI to USDA in 1905, its fundingmechanism remained attached to DOI.

The largest increase of almost $25 million went to the Forest Service'scapital improvement and maintenance program to decrease its maintenancebacklog. Monies will be used to improve the agency's infrastructure,including the construction and restoration of buildings and the maintenanceof roads.

The measure also increases funding for Forest Service recreation, heritageand wilderness programs by more than $15 million; forest and range researchby more than $12 million; forest products by $11 million; and vegetation andwater management by almost $9 million.

The bill fully funds the President's request for implementation of theNational Fire Plan while adding more than $50 million for rehabilitation andrestoration of burned lands, plus additional $200 million to pay forunanticipated fire suppression costs.

###

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Scott SilverWild Wilderness248 NW Wilmington Ave.Bend, OR 97701

phone: 541-385-5261e-mail: ssilver@wildwilderness.orgInternet: http://www.wildwilderness.org

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[mattp]

Today, I attended a "potluck" with forest service officials and trails people where there was a discussion of the fee demo program. Forest service people included employees from the Portland regional office and from the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest management in Mountlake Terrace, as well as district office employees from North Bend, Darrington, and Glacier. Several people from the Washington Trails Association and the Mountaineers were there, and there were a few unaffiliated people like myself, who had been invited simply because we have involved ourselves in these matters.

The Forest Service people presented a discussion of how their shrinking budgets are impacting their ability to maintain trails, and they talked about what they do with the money they collect through the fee demo program. I'm not sure I believe their accounting, and they didn't change my mind on the topic (I'm against having to pay fees just to walk on public lands - especially when we are subsidizing mining, logging and grazing, and I am prepared to believe that there may be some truth to the Disney conspiracy theory promoted by people like Scott Silver of "Wild Wilderness") but they made one very good point: many people are very vocal about opposing fee demo but they don't support the funding of recreational use of public lands through some other mechanism and they expect the trails to just take care of themselves.

Yes, the Forest Service has presided over an atrocious destruction of the lands under their care. And yes, they have been largely unsupportive of my own recreational use of these same lands over the years. However, the trails require maintenance and I believe that the Forest Service people I saw today are genuinely trying to figure out how they are going to pay for it.

The next time I write my Congressman to say I oppose fee demo, I will add that I support the maintenance of trails and back-country access and that I believe my tax money should be used to pay for this. I would support a general audit of the Forest Service budget and I remain skeptical about their priorities, but it is important to me that our access to the recreational opportunities on our public lands not be curtailed.