OCR Text |
Show THE ZEPHYRDECEMBER 1995 PAGE 4 from $16,600 to It called for an increase in the salary of its director, Craig Bigler, of the Sand out $28,400 and it proposes the creation of a "showpiece" campground WORLD NEWS ROUND UP The ROUNDUP is compiled by Jim Stiles except where noted. 3 The Sand Flats Project...It Keeps Growing. And Growing. And... When a proposal to charge bikers and campers to use the Slick Rock Trail on the Sand Flats was first introduced as a way of generating revenues for the county and as a way of making recreationists pay for their own impacts, the idea seemed like a sound one. County residents, weary of increased taxes to fund dramatic increases in law enforcement and search & rescue, saw the project as one way to avoid further tax increases. They also wanted to stop and even reverse some of the environmental damage being caused by recreationists. An issue paper by the Canyon Country Partnership on March 22, 1994 pointed out the problem: "Every year visitors seem to come earlier and stay longer. While this activity has increased business opportunities within the four county region, it has also resulted in additional demands for visitor facilities, law enforcement, search and rescue, and sanitation services." So in the fall of 1994, a collaborative effort by Grand County, the BLM, and the recently created AmeriCorps was put in place. A toll booth was installed, a reasonable fee system was initiated, and a team of AmeriCorps employees, under the supervision of Craig Bigler, set out to get a handle on growing environmental impacts on the Sand Flats and to generate some revenue. The results were encouraging. Through the efforts of the AmeriCorps workers, tracks from both bikes and campsites were better designated and defined, cars and trucks were removed and the area restored, and a series of informational signs were installed to encourage more responsible use of the land. As for the fees, few complained, and the amount of money taken in exceeded all expectations. Originally, proponents of the plan expected $40,000 in revenues during the first year of operation. Instead, from October 1994 to October 1995, more than SI 00,000 was collected, creating a $25,000 budget surplus. That should have been good news for Grand County residents and taxpayers, right? Not really. Including contributions from the BLM, AmeriCorps, the Utah trail fund, and private donations, the Sand Flats Project budget exceeded $376,000; yet, the amount set aside for search & rescue amounted to a paltry $3000. And this is what the proposed Fiscal 1996 budget looks like: off-ro- ad non-motoriz- ed SCENARIO I FY96 PROPOSED SAND FLATS EXPENDITURES Flats, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars. for his efforts. He submitted the Bigler claimed that he is severely underpaid the salary increase. following information to the county to justify for the Canyon Country Partnership and "In FY95 1 was paid to work 1040 hours 2931 documented I 832 hours for Grand County. Total: 1872 hours. In fact worked hours. In other words, I donated 1059 hours to the Community Sand Flats Program. to expire. All of my time will be My employment with the Partnership is about is pay equivalent to a beginning school All 1 am devoted to Grand asking County. teacher." In justifying the pay increase, Bigler referred to the standard Grand County out that no employee benefit package. But County Councilman Peter Haney pointed so dramatically in county employee could ever expect to see salarybenefits increase a is a single year. Bigler countered that he not county employee, that, in fact, he is doing contract work for Grand County. But, if that is the case, said Haney, shouldn't Bigler have to compete for that contract with other individuals who think they can do the job as well and at a lower cost? Haney claims that five persons have contacted him in the last week, they can do just that. And critics argue that if Bigler donated saying hours of his time, the solution is not a pay increase well above what he agreed to work for in the first place; instead he should learn to budget his time better. But the Council voted with Bigler, giving him the 60 pavbenefit increase. Only Haney and Pene opposed it. As for the continued "improvements" to the Sand Flats area...here we go again. Granted, the Sand Flats were on their way to obliteration. Impacts caused by recreationists were beginning to make me, at least, take a second look at all of those cows I used to curse. And efforts by the AmeriCorps workers to stabilize the area and maybe even restore some of it has been commendable. But, even with the restrictions and controls that have boon placed on the Sand Flats, it hasn't been regulated to death. Vet. The fee is more than reasonable and the campground infrastructure is minimal. Health problems have been greatly reduced by the installation of vault toilets, but otherwise, they have avoided the National Park Campground Look, with its paved parking spurs, and picnic tables, and "comfort 1059 stations." But perhaps not for long. The long-ranplan is to "harden" the campsites (one g of those bureaucratic terms) at a fairly cost, paid for by the County and the BLM. In addition, Grand County recently applied for a 550,000 grant from the Utah Tourist Destination Development Program (UTDDP). In the application, written by Bigler, it calls for dramatic improvements, beginning with what it calls Cluster A, an area adjacent to the Sand Flats road near the Slick Rock Trailhcad. In part the application says, "Camp Cluster A will be developed as a 'showpiece,' because it is the first and most visible to visitors entering the Sand Flats. A showpiece will serve to indicate that the Sand Flats is a place to be treated with care and respect." This is the cost breakdown for Ouster A: ge mind-bogglin- CLUSTER A COST ESTIMATION 6" gravel surface...$l 5,200 tables S297 E A... $7,1 28 21 fire grills $58.50 Ea...$l,228 site identification signs $100 Ea.,52,100 Assorted signs...$200 24 Plastisol 21 5 steel culverts...$850 TOTAL $26,706 MWl ItlVLULZLU. Costs of gravel delivery' and emplacement concrete to set the tables and fire grills and revegetation: LABOR. ..$50,000 That's $76,706 for 21 campsites, or $3652 per site, and, for the life of me, I can't see how installing 24 Plastisol tables, or 21 site identification signs (at $100 APIECE!) will indicate to anyone that this "is a place to be treated with care and respect." According to the grant application, Cluster C will be similarly developed to meet the diversity of camping opportunities. The other clusters will remain But for how long? Further in the application, it says, "By facilitating campground development during 1996, it will allow fee increases in 1997 (emphasis added), resulting in annual fee collections of $200,000, all of which stays in the community." But how will that money be used within the community? The FY96 budget calls for search & rescue expenditures of $10,000 out of a total budget of $306,923. It even amounts to less than 10 of projected fee collections. And what about law enforcement? Sheriff Nyland is once again asking for a significant increase in his budget, the money most likely will come out of taxpayers' pockets. semi-primitive.- .." More and more, it appears we are watching the birth of a new bureaucracy, with its major goal to generate revenues for a large and budget, with a great percentage of its revenues going to administrative costs and to capital improvements. It s another one of those programs. You create a big infrastructure; then you scream that you need more funding to administer it. And it's all being done without the public support, really, that it claims to have. Grand County citizens want to see a &md Rats project that not only pays for itself, but also helps to defray other tourist-cause- d impacts and costs. ever-growi- not able to commit at this time. At least $40,000, perhaps as much as $100,000 will be made available from BLM for capital BLM Is Improvements. ng could evcn directly impact some businesses in the Moab area. If the m JhU and the County move to create a "showpiece campground on the Sand Flats, what will that do to locally owned private campgrounds? The Sand Hats arc closer to the center of town than several of the private campgrounds; should the County and BLM compete with them for tourist dollars? Take a look at the BLM operated Big Bend Campground. The same arguments being used now to develop the Sand Rats were used to construct that "showpiece" along the Colorado River. Now, that d and trji,crs thdn by wa7mZv iintended Trc hl bikercampm it in place. -- T0rhTS |