This issue of the Fee-Free
Press is devoted to
information gleaned during
my recent trip to Washington
DC.
The Federal Lands Recreation
Enhancement Act is due to
sunset in 2014, and various
interest groups and federal
agencies are beginning to
think about what happens
"Beyond FLREA."
On this trip I was able to
convey the message that
recreation fees are
still controversial
and
still widely opposed.
After eight years of Fee
Demo and seven of FLREA, we
are still here
and we are not going to rest
until public access to
public lands has been
restored.
-Kitty
FOREST SERVICE REVIEW OF "HIRAs"
COMPLETED
Washington Office Recommends Massive
Downsize; Will The Forests Comply?
The U.S. Forest Service has taken heat
from Congress, the courts, and the
public for years over their use of
"High
Impact Recreation Areas"
or HIRAs, to escape the limitations on
their fee authority set by Congress in
the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement
Act. Within each of the
96 HIRAs around
the country, a Standard Amenity Fee is
required for all uses, even those that
occur far from any "amenities" or that
are specifically exempt from fees by
law. The agency's justification has been
that if each of the six required
amenities is present somewhere -
anywhere - within the HIRA then everyone
who visits the "area" can be charged,
whether they use them or not, and
regardless of how big the "area" is.
The HIRA idea was knocked on its keister
by the
US v
Smith case in Sedona,
where a backpacker successfully
challenged the Coconino National
Forest's authority to charge him a fee
to park in a remote area and hike into
undeveloped backcountry. As a result,
the Coconino scaled back the Red Rocks
Pass HIRA from 160,000 acres to 11,000.
The Forest Service also undertook an
agency-wide review of the other 95
HIRAs.
That review is now complete and the
results are in: massive downscaling is
in order. If the changes approved by the
Washington Office are implemented, there
will be a significant reduction in the
size and number of HIRAs.
But that's a big if. The
changes have been presented to the
Regions by the Washington Office as
little more than suggestions, which are
now supposed to undergo review by the
public and citizen advisory committees.
The Forests seem to have a great deal of
leeway in interpreting the scope of
their fee authority, and they control
the advisory committees. They have also
become quite addicted to the revenue
from their HIRAs, so if it's left up to
them there is a possibility that we will
see little real change on the ground.
For example, many Forests claim that if
they provide sufficient amenities at a
trailhead or other backcountry access
point, they can charge a fee there. But
their
fee
authority is subject to
specific prohibitions on charging
fees solely for parking, for traveling
through federal land without using
facilities and services, for general
access, or for camping in dispersed
undeveloped areas. These prohibitions
trump the "amenity" authority - or
should!
It's important to note that the
new Washington Office recommendations
apply only to HIRAs. These large fee
areas are an important factor in many
areas -
California,
Oregon,
Washington,
Arizona,
Utah,
New
Mexico,
Colorado,
and
New
Hampshire - but in other
states there are no HIRAs. That does not
mean that there are no fee sites in
those states with the same problems as
the ones inside HIRAs, but this review
did not address those. Any place where
the Forest Service is charging a fee for
things that the law prohibits is a
problem and should be fixed.
We must keep up the pressure, and insist
that all recreation fee sites comply
with the requirements and the
restrictions of the law!
You can check out what's recommended for
your region on our website's HIRA
section. General background information
is
HERE
and the agency documents are
HERE.
What you can do
Contact the Forests in your area
that have HIRAs. (See
List) Ask
them to start implementing these
proposed changes soon and in a
meaningful way. There is no excuse
for delay in getting in compliance
with the law!
Provide the recommended changes to
your local news media so they can
spread the word. If you have contact
information for a local outlet, send
it to us and we will get the details
to them.
This review and the Washington Office
recommendations may result in some real
improvement on the ground - or they may
result in only superficial, cosmetic
changes. We will be watching carefully
how this plays out.
A VISIT BEHIND "ENEMY LINES"
Fee Demo and its successor, the Federal
Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, were
the proud "accomplishments" of a
lobbying organization called the
American
Recreation Coalition and
its CEO, Derrick Crandall. ARC
represents commercial recreation
interests and equipment manufacturers.
They see public lands mainly through the
prism of providing business
opportunities for their member
organizations. Crandall is a Washington
insider who has long had influence in
high places. It was he who got Fee Demo
and FLREA enacted as riders on massive
must-pass appropriations bills, without
debate in the House and without even
being introduced in the Senate.
The problem (for Crandall) is that the
controversy over recreation fees and the
commercialization and privatization of
federal public lands that began under
Fee Demo has not gone away. Now FLREA is
nearing its sunset date of 2014, and
Congress must either let it expire or
act to renew or replace it.
So this year the theme of the ARC's
annual conference, Partners Outdoors,
was "Beyond FLREA." Normally this
invitation-only conference is a lovefest
between the federal land management
agencies and their corporate and
non-profit "partners." The general
public need not apply.
But this year, with the possible end of
FLREA looming large, the ARC invited me
to participate in their conference,
representing the anti-fee point of view,
and I was pleased to accept. I made a
brief
statement, and
participated in work sessions and
discussions both formal and informal on
the topic of recreations fees.
The message I brought to this unlikely
audience was that the whole fee-based
approach to public lands recreation has
been a mistake and a failure. Fees have:
Alienated the very people who would
normally be the biggest supporters
of public lands;
Driven a wedge between the agencies
and the people they are supposed
to serve, turning allies into
adversaries;
Given private corporations and big
non-profits undue influence over
management policy;
Taken public lands out of the realm
of being special and made them just
another marketplace choice - a cash
transaction - competing with theme
parks and video games for your
dollars.
How very sad. At a time when people need
access to nature more than ever - for
physical, spiritual, and economic
reasons - fees are making it harder to
enjoy outdoor recreation.
I don't know whether I changed any
hearts or minds at the ARC conference,
but they received my message cordially
and many people commented that it took
courage to come to their group with my
message.
But of course it wasn't my
message, it was yours. I
was honored to have the chance to speak
for you, on behalf of your
access to your land. You can read
my statement
HERE.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Following the ARC conference described
in the article above, I made three days
of legislative visits on Capitol Hill. I
met with staffers from the Colorado,
Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Wyoming, Ohio,
and California delegations, in the House
and Senate. These included both
Democrats and Republicans, because our
issue has always been non-partisan. I
also met with both majority and minority
staffers for the congressional
subcommittees that oversee the Forest
Service and BLM.
The feedback I got was very consistent.
It is unlikely, although not
impossible, that Congress will take up
the fee issue this session. The gridlock
in Washington, for which each party
blames the other, is probably going to
continue until the fall elections decide
where the power will lie in the next
Congress. Depending on the outcome of
those elections, some things may get
accomplished in the lame duck session.
We will certainly be watching for
opportunities to make that happen and
will keep you informed.
Our supporters who sponsored Fee Repeal
legislation in the last two sessions of
Congress (Senators Baucus and Tester of
Montana and Idaho Senators Crapo and
Risch) remain committed, but they are
stymied from being able to move almost
any legislation by the current political
climate.
The most likely scenario is that
legislation to repeal, renew, or replace
FLREA will appear sometime in the first
half of 2013. The agencies and pro-fee
organizations like the American
Recreation Coalition will certainly be
using their influence to try and shape
legislation to their liking. But we will
be at the table too, reminding Congress
that these are public lands that should
be managed for the benefit and enjoyment
of the people, not as business
opportunities for either corporations or
federal agencies.
I received assurance everyplace I went
that regardless of what comes after
FLREA, there will be an open,
transparent process including
congressional hearings, public debate,
and a recorded vote in both the House
and Senate.
No more appropriations riders, no more
backroom deals. They promised.
I'm counting on you to hold your federal
elected officials to that promise, and
will keep you informed of every
opportunity to do that.
The Western Slope No-Fee Coalition is a
broad-based organization consisting of
diverse interests including hiking,
biking, boating, equestrian and
motorized enthusiasts, community groups,
local and state elected officials,
conservatives and liberals, Republicans
and Democrats, and just plain citizens.
Our goals are:
To eliminate recreation fees for
general access to public lands
managed by the Forest Service
and Bureau of Land Management
To eliminate backcountry fees
and interpretive program fees in
National Parks, once an Entrance
Fee has been paid
To require more accountability
within the land management
agencies
To encourage Congress to
adequately fund our public lands
