More than you ever wanted to know about recreation fees and public land

If you value your public land - BLM, Forest Service, and Wildlife Refuges - you will be shocked by what mega-outdoor business and many in DC want to do to some of your favorite recreation areas. They desire a pay system on public lands in which outdoor activities are run by for-profit corporations and that average people are used to spending money when they visit their own land. In fact because of these fees people will demand more development and amenities. Of course simple hikes are OK, but one can charge much more for RV campgrounds and motorized boating.

Yes, recreation fees are already here, but many are attempting to get this legislation repealed. See more up to the minute info here - Western Slope No Fee Coalition.

1) Public land, public access

Recreation fees are a barrier for many U.S. citizens in experiencing public lands... lands that they own equally with all U.S. citizens. The fixed-income family as well as those unwilling to pay fees are denied access to land that is theirs by birthright. No class of citizens should be denied the harmless, non-consumptive use of land they pay taxes to manage. Being denied access from Nature and all of our national heritage is unfair and unjust. Paying fees for this use is a backwards and regressive tax.

The amount of a given fee should not be debated and is only a debate trap to make smaller fees seem reasonable. Any fee will deny access to someone. Small fees are a foot in the door for those pushing a recreation fee agenda. The only way to keep access equal is to keep public access to public land free -- as it always has been. For those that say $5 is "a good deal" to enjoy public lands -- a good deal is for a car dealership or Walmart, not your public land!

Colorado (among many states and other governmental bodies) passed a resolution against recreation fees that reads, "The fees imposed by the FLREA are a regressive tax that places an undue burden on the people living in rural areas adjacent to or surrounded by large areas of federal land, as well as discriminating against lower-income and working Americans by placing financial obstacles in the way of their enjoyment of publicly owned land."

2) Opposition to recreation fees and the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA)

Opposition to recreation fees does not fall along partisan lines. People from all walks of life oppose recreation fees. State legislatures of states like Idaho and Oregon, with lawmakers from both ends of the spectrum, have come together to unanimously pass no-fee resolutions.It is interesting to note that FLREA was introduced by Rep. Ralph Regula, a Republican from Ohio with no public land in his district. Opposition to recreation fees has been strong throughout the western U.S., where the vast bulk of public land is located.

Some governments that have passed resolutions against recreation fees:

State of Colorado
State of California
State of New Hampshire
State of Idaho (unanimous)
State of Oregon (unanimous minus 1)
State of Montana
State of Alaska
Pima County
Numerous city and county governments

3) FLREA passed Congress with inadequate debate, input, or process

Note that when FLREA became law it was not voted on separately in the House of Representatives and was not introduced in, did not have hearings in, and was not approved by the Senate, but instead was attached to the omnibus spending bill, H.R. 4818, by the 108th Congress, as an appropriation rider. "A law that criminalizes access to public lands by the citizens who own them and pay taxes for their support would never pass muster in an open public debate. Slipping it in as an appropriations rider, by a congressman with no federal public lands in his district, was a despicable abuse of the legislative process." -- The late Robert Funkhouser

4) The American Recreation Coalition, corporate involvement, and privatization

“ARC members have a very strong interest in fees at federal recreation sites and played a key role in the creation of the National Recreation Fee Demonstration Program.” -- Christine Jourdain, board of directors of ARC

The American Recreation Coalition has played a prime role in creating and pushing Fee Demo and FLREA. The coalition is composed mostly of private corporations that make money off public lands recreation. Fees are a foot-in-the-door for privatized facilities such as campgrounds, as well as creating a consumer based recreation experience on public lands. Turning public lands into motorized, developed playgrounds where Americans are used to spending money is the key motivation behind ARC and other corporate involvement.

The Forest Service and other agencies are forced to play into this juggernaut. Outsourcing of management and privately run campgrounds and facilities are already more common then you might think. What we're already seeing:

Public facilities being privatized
Forest recreation being commercialized
Recreation fees increasing
Cheap labor replacing USFS labor
Still more concessionaires being solicited

The agencies themselves are forced to run like a business to have sufficient income for basic operations. Due to funding now coming from “customers”, the Forest Service must treat its land like a product and citizens as consumers. “Marketing” of public lands is increasing as Congressional funding fails to reach local public land managers. Fees are being created at new sites relentlessly, and fee charges are certain to increase.

This is a list of “sustaining members” of ARC:

American Council of Snowmobile Associations
The Coleman Company
Family Motor Coach Association
Good Sam Club
International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association
Kampgrounds of America
National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds
National Forest Recreation Association
National Marine Manufacturers Association
National Park Hospitality Association
PriceWaterhouseCoopers
Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association
Recreation Vehicle Industry Association
ReserveAmerica
SGMA International
The Walt Disney Company

Recreation fees create a private enterprise model on public lands. We are already seeing the Forest Service treating the public as consumers (not citizens) and the land as a product (and not our Natural heritage). Environmentalists should especially be concerned as recreation is seen as the new extractive industry on public lands and public/private partnerships are part of the fee plan. Behind Fee Demo and FLREA are mostly corporations pushing a motorized, playground future for our public lands.

5) Nature as commodity

If nothing else is sacred and protected from commercialization, let wild Nature be. It is a place where we should be able to get away from our hectic world of motors, advertising, and dare I say, paying for everything.

6) User fees promote law-enforcement oriented rangers, not helpful, knowledgeable, friendly rangers

This change I've seen with my own eyes. Officials are now hired to enforce fees and be the enemy of the public, not help facilitate an enjoyable or educational experience. This change can not be overstated and really changes the relationship between managers and the public.

7) User fees promote more development and regulation

Paying users want infrastructure. Managers want customers. It puts our land in self-promoting loop of development and commercialization.
Do you enjoy an undeveloped public lands experience? Do you want the ability to use your land without worrying about breaking one of numerous petty regulations or not having payed the proper fees? If so, you will likely be out of luck in the user-fee future of public lands.

8) Public lands management is relatively cheap

Public lands recreation management funding is a negligible cost to the U.S. Treasury. Just pay for the costs of running public lands. It's certainly worth it!