USFS still charging fees despite fed court ruling

[chris]

http://www.adventure-journal.com/2012/08/court-strikes-down-fees-but-forest-service-still-collects

 

And discuss (or rant, as the case may be).

[astrov]

is this still happening in the PNW? I'm looking for a winter project once the good weather goes away ... maybe suing the forest service is it.

[B Deleted_Beck]

You should start by checking the Forest Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004 to see if there are more districts violating the law

[astrov]

You should start by checking the Forest Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004 to see if there are more districts violating the law

 

Well I guess I'm of some utility if it's being violated in the District of Oregon.

[B Deleted_Beck]

You should start by checking the Forest Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004 to see if there are more districts violating the law

 

Well I guess I'm of some utility if it's being violated in the District of Oregon.

 

What happens when a case spans multiple states? Do you seriously need to get licensed in each?

[JasonG]

Thanks for posting that Chris. If my memory serves me, almost none of the TH's I frequent have all six amenities. And I just bought my stinkin' forest pass.......

 

I would feel a lot better if the monies generated went directly to trail work rather than enhanced parking areas and enforcement.

 

Then again, I'm pretty sure my time is worth $30, and I imagine that is what the FS is betting on.

[astrov]

You should start by checking the Forest Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004 to see if there are more districts violating the law

 

Well I guess I'm of some utility if it's being violated in the District of Oregon.

 

What happens when a case spans multiple states? Do you seriously need to get licensed in each?

 

We'd either defend an enforcement action, which would be filed in federal court and heard by a magistrate judge, or bring a declaratory relief action in state or federal court concerning liability for fees on the NW Forest Pass, although if we filed in state (and why would we do that?) the feds would probably remove it to federal court. I could be admitted to neighboring federal court districts without being admitted in those states. the 9th Circuit's appellate ruling should be controlling law in all districts in the 9th circuit, which I believe includes WA, OR, CA, and ID, among others.

 

[Frankazoid]

How about the fee/permit system associated with the enchantments?

From what iv'e read it sounds like I should be able to walk around freely up there without harassment from rangers. Rant: To me, the mountains are a place of complete freedom. Super-pure freedom. I understand fees associated with drive up USFS campgrounds or *trailheads that provide amenities that cost money to keep up. But a fee just for your human body being in the mountains I do not understand. I should have complete freedom to decide spur of the moment that i'd like to walk around the mountains and sleep wherever I so choose without paying somebody for it or acquiring a permit. The mountains should be a place free from politics and normal society etc... A place where you can simply exist, bare bones naked and leave the rest of the world behind. Thats what iv'e always thought of the mountains and that is EXACTLY why they are so special to me. I will never walk around up there with the uncomfortable feeling of a USFS finger up my butt.

[chris]

What I'm curious about is how many trailheads, since this ruling, have been "improved" to include those six amenities, like the sign board and a picnic bench, even if its not necessary. I can think of a few.

 

But the NW Forest Pass has persisted, even after the Fee Demo program supposedly expired.

 

As for me, I spend enough time in North Cascades to justify getting the Inter-Agency Pass. It still annoys me, though, and I thought y'all may be interested.

[Good2Go]

I'd recommend reading the case before believing the author's conclusions. I suspect she's reaching a bit in her assessment of its scope. I couldn't find it online using her references, or through a cursory search of the 9th Circuit's published opinions. Seems fishy to me. Anybody have a link?

[JasonG]

Ask and ye shall receive (there is a link to the ruling in the article): http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/29/local/la-me-forest-fee-20120229

 

I don't think the author in the original link overreached in her conclusions. Although we are under the 9th here in WA, I haven't heard a peep about how the local FS districts are going to comply with this ruling. I don't think I will be buying a forest pass when mine expires next year though.

[mattp]

In my opinion public lands should be open to the public and user fees are generally contrary to that notion but maybe not always so. I can understand and accept an entrance fee to drive to Paradise (especially in the Winter when they spend a ridiculous amount of money keeping the road open) more readily than a fee to park at the end of a logging road that was built with taxpayer money subsidizing a logging operation. I understand and more readily accept the notion of fees to park at a snow park that is specially maintained for snowmobiling or a fee for commercial activity, or ... I could think of a number of other applications.

 

The problem is, though, our taxes are too low and our politics have been hijacked by people who think that the government should not run public lands in the public interest. That's why we have user fees that grow every day and it is also why we have rent-a-cops running campgrounds in Leavenworth instead of public servants with an interest in public recreation. It is not going to get better anytime soon.

 

As to the question of permits? We have a few small areas where you can't just show up and head out such as Mt. Rainier, Leavenworth, and Cascade Pass. And Mt. Saint Helens is kind of a goofy. But there is a reason these restrictions are in place in these areas even if you don't think they are properly executed. And I am one who does not think they are properly managed but I don't know how they can limit entry without at least to some degree inconveniencing visitors.

 

Policing? I think we enjoy remarkable freedom to go damn near wherever we want, whenever we want. The people I meet in the ranger stations or even on patrol are increasingly friendly to climbing and climbers (there are some, of course, and some with considerable clout, who don't fit this pattern). They maintain trails and roads so you can get where you want on a weekend and they help coordinate the rescue if you get in trouble. They support an incredibly broad range of activity from dirt bikes to hunting to climbing.

 

I'm glad there are some rules and, yes, some policemen. I wouldn't want to see motorcycle riders heading over the pass to Ingalls Lake, woodcutters cutting firewood at the Stuart Lake trailhead, or large crowds of people denuding fragile meadows in the upper Enchantment Lakes area. I'm glad they allow hunting in the National Forest but not in a National Park. As much as it pisses me off, I'm willing to tolerate a ranger at Cascade Pass tell me to stay on the trail.

 

If you don't like the way things are run you should volunteer or look for other ways to interact with the rangers so you can express your concerns, get involved in user groups, look for ways to pressure your Congressional representatives to vote for funding, or whatever else you think may help.

[TimmyC]

Short version: I like to pay fees. Longer version follows.

 

If you drive up out of Roslyn and Ronald toward Salmon La Sac, there's a huge rock in the middle of the river right before bridge #2 (Cooper Lake). The camping areas around there have been developed to a certain extent, i.e. parking has been cut out and graveled, kybos are in place most of the year. There is no fee collected for camping there and no pass needs to be displayed. THESE SITES GET TRASHED every weekend from Memorial Day to Labor Day. The Forest Service has workers -- many of them volunteers -- out there every week during the peak dates, cleaning up trash, picking up toilet paper, dismantling many, many new fire rings that are built and used during burn bans, etc. Every week. They are out there hauling out huge bags of trash every week.

 

The NFS gets no money for this. They do it as part of their tax-funded charter. It's their land, so they take care of it, with minimal staff and many kind volunteers and nowhere near enough money. I don't wanna be the guy who says "well, for the price of one [bomber/tank/day of operations in Kandahar], we could..." but that's not productive, since that's not a change I or we can affect. But I CAN pay my fees. I buy my annual National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass, and I buy my state lands pass (i.e. the new yellow one), and I volunteer, and my friends and I always hike with a spare trash bag. And as a voting citizen who doesn't make enough money to own his own politicians, that's really all I can do.

 

I don't have kids, but my taxes pay for schools (which, to be clear, I don't mind at all; I like education, and we should spend more money on it). Flip side? I ride a bike, so I don't pay gas taxes that fix the roads. Does it balance out? Dunno. My taxes also go toward killing people I've never met on the other side of the planet, which I'm supposed to feel good about cuz, y'know, freedom or something, but I don't. If I could choose where my taxes went, it would all go to the NPS and NFS. But I can't. My taxes buy books and bullets, for the most part (and way more bullets than books), with only a few pennies here or there for the woods. So I pay fees instead.

 

I agree that being out in the woods should be about freedom. Paying fees doesn't make me less free, though; it simply means I'm helping, in a very small way, to pay for the maintenance of the woods in which I like to feel free. Humans, Americans especially, are really bad at taking care of nature. On a national/institutional level, the point could be argued. On a personal level, the level at which you find toilet paper and cigarette butts and Doritos bags mere feet from a pullout or parking area, where humans couldn't even be bothered to take their trash the extra few feet to their cars, and subsequent humans couldn't be bothered to pick it up because [it's gross/not theirs/someone gets paid to pick it up], it simply cannot be argued.

 

I could go on about how if you buy an annual NP/Fed Lands pass, it actually saves you money, but some folks don't like fees no matter how you couch the argument. So.

 

 

[Edited to tone down some language; it's too early in the day for me to be shouting at the computer.]

Edited September 5, 2012 by TimmyC

[tvashtarkatena]

More fee collection systems = more overhead = less of your money actually going towards what you really need out there.

 

The FS has come up with some GREAT new sign kiosks, though. Very helpful. When I go out, I'm always happy to see more signage.

 

It should come out of federal taxes. Way more efficient.

 

Anyone who thinks that fees stop white trash from making their mark should visit a State Park camp ground some time. The best way to to deal with that crowd is to provide enough free meth and access to clear cuts.

Edited September 5, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[tvashtarkatena]

Grover Norquist don't surf.