| OCR Text |
Show FEE DEMO as a UNIFYING ISSUE? Even in Escalante, Utah, citizens have found something to agree upon. By Erica Walz In this corner of the rural west, it’s hard to imagine any one issue that might galvanize Old and New Westerners, liberals and conservatives, ATV enthusiasts and wearers of hiking boots, alike. After all, individualism, (even if it’s not always rugged), and polarity of opinion is kind of a feature of the populace of rural western towns. While this can lead to discomfort at times, at least a few of us even like it that way-and find that agreeing to disagree is a valuable social skill. Let’s face it, even something as uncomfortable and serious as a war can’t get us all on the same page. You can certainly expect a disagreement over any one of a dozen public lands use issues-even with some of your best pals. But recently, one thing was discovered that gets people both animated and thinking in the same direction, at least in this small southern Utah town. And that is the very idea of related to BLM land management on the Monument,only to be followed by decisions that have almost always seemed to completely ignore local input-local input turned out, for once, to be the deciding factor. At least for the moment. But all of this leads to some questions: Why are people so motivated in opposition to fees? What is the cause of this unity? Why do so many agree that fees on undeveloped public lands are not OK? The answers are probably as varied as the people. There are some obvious reasons, like, who wants to pay for something that’s free now? Or the more studied arguments, that public land user fees represent double taxation, or that the audits show that the economics of fee programs don’t pencil out, or that the money collected doesn’t go where it’s supposed to. implementing user fees in the backcountry on BLM land. It’s hard to remember exactly how it started. A conversation here, a letter there. But at some point early this spring, it became clear that the Bureau of Land Management was working its way toward developing a new user fee program in the Grand StaircaseEscalante National Monument. And about two weeks after that, the citizens of Escalante made it known that they weren't very happy about that at all. Now, just a couple of months after the news “came out,” BLM pretends as if nothing was happening---that a new fee plan was or is not in the works---that this was all a fuss-about-nothing. Never mind that Monument managers dropped clues of their strategy pretty much like boulders in a right-of-way. First, late last year, Monument Manager Dave Hunsaker stated in writing that, “The Monumentis considering expanding its fee program...and...one potential idea that has surfaced is to institute a Monument-wide fee for overnight camping (hiking and car camping).” Later, he stated that the Monument’s staff “is examining opportunities to modify its existing fee structure.” Meanwhile, according to various accounts, Monument staff were in the process of exploring various fee options. The former Assistant Manager for Visitor Services made it known that she hoped to have a fee scheme in place prior to her departure for a new BLM post in Colorado this past April. Too bad, she’s left her Monument job with those particular dreams unfulfilled. (However fortunately, both for her career and the location in Colorado to which she’s relocated, that area is a focal point of anti-fee activity, so she’ll be much better off without a fee program attached to her resume.) But perhaps the most telling evidence of a looming new fee plan was that the newly-formed Monument Advisory Committee (MAC), a citizens body assembled to provide public process (even if no members of the public know about their meetings)and recommendations about Monument management, was specifically considering fees. The MAC has in fact been charged with three specific areas for advisement: science, grazing and...Fee Demo. Fee Demo is the relatively new public lands recreational fee programpassed by Congress as a temporary program in 1996-that allows federal land management agencies to charge user fees for non-amenitied sites and activities. A Fee Demo subcommittee to the MAC was established. It’s hard to imagine why this advisory body would be in place if something was not brewing. Monument Manager Hunsaker had advised, that the Fee Demo subcommittee In this corner of the rural West, it's hard to imagine any one issue that might galvanize Old and New Westerners...alike. But recently, one thing was discovered that gets people animated and thinking in the same direction...and that is the very idea of implementing user fees in the backcountry recommendations would carry considerable weight in any new decision on fees. To this end, they were to meet on a Friday this past April and post their first set of recommendations to the full Committee the following Monday. Here’s what happened at that meeting: Absolutely nothing. Come that Monday, there was no discussion of any new fee proposal, at all. Mind you, no big “fee plan” roll out had been expected---it was too early in the process for that. But what happened instead of even any discussion about fees was that recreation fees, now even as a concept, seemed to exist in negative space, a vacuum. Here’s one that’s more to the point, locally. The Monument is spending over $9 Why exactly would this be? How is it that a standing fee advisory committee to the million on new visitors centers and has already swelled the ranks of its management staff, Monument looks like it has not very much to do? while both permanent and seasonal rangers, the ones who actually check up on what's Here’s how: going on out on the “resource,” are practically an endangered species. And now the BLM An anti-fee petition was circulated in Escalante and about a quarter of the town ‘wants to nickel-and-dime the public, maybe for five bucks a night or who knows how signed it. Signers included everyone from our cowboys to our enviro types, people old and much, to camp in the backcountry? Under the claim that they have no money for proper young, multi-generational locals and move-ins. Added to that, the town of Escalante passed - management? As even some federal land management employees (those who are opposed a Resolution in opposition to new Monument fees and to Fee Demo in general-joining 28 to this kind of fee program) have complained, this turns public land managers other state, county and local jurisdictions around the west (and one in New Hampshire) that predominantly into money-grubbers..And in the case of the GSENM, backcountry have done the same thing. The city council had the Resolution drafted even before it was recreation fees are certainly another step towards the National Park-ification of this resource brought to the floor for discussion, and it passed unanimously. Following this---word is area-which is exactly the way that management of the GSENM was not supposed to go. from the best available sources---that this was enough to bring word from on-high at the While all of this is important, there’s another reason to oppose fees that I think Department of Interior that no new fees were to be proposed in the GSENM. Not this year stands above the others, and I wouldn’t be surprised if at least some of my neighbors agree anyway. (Pssst...not in an election year.) with me: There’s a little addendum to this part of the story. Actually, the Fee Demo Public lands are an American value. The freedom to go out onto public land is a privilege subcommittee, after most likely being advised that they should notsuggest any new fees-and of being an American. We are even willing to share this privilege with people from other certainly not for anything in the backcountry-had decided that it might be OK to raise fees parts of the world. Public lands belong to the American people---they are not owned by the at the two GSENM campgrounds, and planned to bring that recommendation to the full land management agencies, they are not owned by Congress, and they are nota commodity committee. But between Friday and Monday, even that proposal was strafed-from above. to be sold back to us as if they were. Congress and the agencies don’t have a right to decide, (Another example of public process at its best.) at their own convenience or in the face of their mismanagement, to charge us for In the end, the momentous fee decision of the day was to post signs in the undeveloped recreation on lands that we own. campground bathrooms announcing the good news that fees collected at those sites (under Shouldn’t our government be taking a leading role in protecting this value? But, the beneficent Fee Demo program) are returned to support the management and when they won’t, whether it’s because they refuse to or are too shortsighted to protect this maintenance of that sight. At least mostly. Well, they’re supposed to. I guess the committee value, it’s good to know that the American people will. will have some work to do, after all, hammering out that language. So the gist of this is that finally, after years scoping meetings and listening sessions A on BLM lands. ES PAGE]8 = |
