FEES IN THE DUNES
A NECESSARY EVIL?
By:
Roy Denner, President & CEO
Off-Road Business Association

Now that the Recreation Area Management Plan (RAMP) for the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA) has been approved by the US Fish & Wildlife Service, the El Centro BLM office is in the process of finalizing and implementing a Business Plan to address the requirements of the RAMP. The operation of a world-class multi-million dollar recreation area is “Big Business” and the business plan addresses the same concerns as any other Big Business.

A comprehensive study has been done by a qualified contractor to determine the costs associated with operating the ISDRA as a business. Overhead and direct costs to provide the necessary services have been estimated using past operating experience. Some of the requirements of the RAMP are difficult to quantify, in terms of cost, because they are new to the BLM. For example, new camping sites and visitor service facilities could be built. It has been a long time since such facilities have been added at the ISDRA so cost estimates are hard to develop. New environmental monitoring requirements within the adaptive management area are also hard to estimate until more experience in this area has been acquired. Nevertheless, the contractor used all information available to determine the future costs to run the ISDRA Business as accurately as possible with the information available.

The next question addressed by the contractor was: Where will the money to operate the Business come from?

Traditionally, funding to operate the ISDRA has come from three sources: 1) Appropriated funding from the Federal Government, 2) Grants from the State Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Commission, and 3) more recently, user camping fees.

Unfortunately, with the 9/11 disaster, and the war in Iraq, the Federal Government bank account has been seriously drained over the past year or two. Funding for recreation in the ISDRA does not happen to be a top-priority item.

Then, with the current composition of the OHMVR Commission, funds that have traditionally been granted to the El Centro BLM office to support the operation and maintenance of the ISDRA have been virtually eliminated. It has always been considered appropriate that the State OHMVR “Green Sticker” fund help support areas like the ISDRA since so many Californians recreate there. The current Chairman of the Commission has made it clear that, unless the closures in the dunes resulting from the lawsuit were made permanent, he would see to it that the grants to the ISDRA were terminated. Since he has the enthusiastic support of three of the other six Commission members, he is succeeding with his threat. Over one million dollars of funding voted down by the Commission for this year’s operation and maintenance has to be made up somehow!

So the Business Managers of the ISDRA are faced with a dilemma! How can they fund the improvements proposed in the RAMP and the necessary services at the ISDRA when Federal funding is very scarce and the OHMVR Commission is denying operation and maintenance grants to the ISDRA? Unless someone can talk Bill Gates, or Ford Motor Company, or Hewlett Packard into shifting some of the money they give to support environmental preservation to help with the operation of the ISDRA, the only other source of funding available is the user fee program!

Once this “Necessary Evil” is understood and accepted as inevitable, lacking any other options, a method of implementing a necessary sufficient fee program is needed.

Many options were analyzed by the contractor to attempt to determine the most acceptable method of recovering the costs necessary to keep open and operate the ISDRA without future help from the OHMVR Commission grants. None of the options are a perfect solution for every dunes enthusiast! Daily fees, weekly fees, holiday fees, and season passes are all part of the mix. Unfortunately, the BLM had not planned on the loss of support from the “Green Sticker” fund, and a need to increase the user fee program, so not a lot of data is available on actual usage, vehicle counts, numbers of visitors per vehicle, etc. This information is necessary to determine what fee must be charged to individual camping units to generate enough revenue to supplement the necessary funding. So the contractor, with input from the ISDRA Technical Review Team (TRT), used the best data available to come up with a fee program that is necessary but justified by the best analysis possible. Is it perfect? Definitely not! It is clearly defined and trackable so that the results can be monitored and modified for future years and adjustments can be made. As with any business plan, the ISDRA Business Plan needs to be flexible to accommodate future needs and future understanding of the actual operation of the business. If excess funds are generated, the fee can be reduced in future years. Likewise, if a shortage still exists, in order to continue operation, the fees may have to be increased.

From the individual user standpoint, two important guarantees have been offered by the BLM:
1st) The ISDRA TRT will continue to advise the BLM on the expenditure of the user fees. TRT members will be continually updated on operational needs and costs associated. This will be a step in the direction of making sure that fees are spent on efforts that users desire as much as feasible.
2nd) The BLM has assured the TRT that the funds collected at the ISDRA will ALL be expended within the ISDRA and will not go into some general fund bucket with a hole in the bottom.

As with any complicated plans, it is clear that one can pick apart particular areas of the plan as undesirable, unacceptable, or even incorrect. However, unless the over-all plan is considered and optional approaches are offered, it is not appropriate to pick at particular pieces. Business Plans, just like new house plans, are always a compromise. Maybe you would like a window on that side of the house but, if that’s where the sun shines in all afternoon, it may not be a good idea. All business plans make similar compromises. The important thing is that the plan is not a block of concrete. If certain assumptions and implementation techniques turn out to be less than optimum, they can always be changed. They can always come back and put a window in that side of the house.

Finally, this discussion would not be complete without addressing the subject of “compliance”. Compliance is a figure that describes the number of visitors to the ISDRA that actually pay the fees. Current estimates by the BLM of compliance ranges from 26 to 40%. Compliance figures for the southern dunes are much higher than compliance in the Glamis/northern dunes area. By simply improving the compliance figure, much of the funding shortfall can be made up. No dunes enthusiast actually likes paying fees. All sorts of valid reasons can be cited as to why it is not fair. But, the bottom line is that, when one camping unit avoids paying a fee, all of that unit’s neighbors who are paying a fee will have to make up for that unit’s shortfall! Simply stated, if the costs to run the ISDRA Business are not recovered, the area cannot continue to operate – just like Disneyland, or your favorite ski resort.

Just for the record, the use fees at the ISDRA for the coming year will be $25 per week or $90 for a season pass.

And I have always had so much respect for Roy Denner...

Some issues to contemplate:

QUOTE

Compliance figures for the southern dunes are much higher than compliance in the Glamis/northern dunes area.

The \"guess\" of 41% compliance was based on some very iffy numbers. This statement by Roy can't be much more then anecdotal... I've never seen a study that showed this.

QUOTE

How can they fund the improvements proposed in the RAMP...

Easy answer. DON'T IMPROVE GLAMIS

QUOTE

Once this “Necessary Evil” is understood and accepted as inevitable, lacking any other options, a method of implementing a necessary sufficient fee program is needed.

This \"Evil\" is not necessary. It is only necessary in the eyes of those who wish to turn Glamis into Disneyland.

QUOTE

All sorts of valid reasons can be cited as to why it is not fair. But, the bottom line is that, when one camping unit avoids paying a fee, all of that unit’s neighbors who are paying a fee will have to make up for that unit’s shortfall! Simply stated, if the costs to run the ISDRA Business are not recovered, the area cannot continue to operate – just like Disneyland, or your favorite ski resort.

Disneyland? Ski resort? We're not talking about improved land. We're talking about un-improved land. Hearing this from Roy scares the hell out of me.

QUOTE

The BLM has assured the TRT that the funds collected at the ISDRA will ALL be expended within the ISDRA and will not go into some general fund bucket with a hole in the bottom.

And we can trust the BLM because they have a history of caring for us and our concerns?

I sure hope that this article by Mr. Denner doesn't mark the end of Glamis...

Sad day indeed.

Well I can see both sides to the argument. Funds have been pulled away from the BLM (although I don't see where this has been verified), but if this is the case then obviously the short fall has to be made up. I believe that enforcement of the current $30.00 pass would do that. For arguments sake let's say 40% are in compliance. That means that 60% are not. So, on one busy weekend (Holiday) let's say that there are 150,000 people. And for arguments sake, let's say that 40% have paid leaving 90,000 people who have not paid the fee. 90,000 x a $10.00 (day) pass is $900,000.00 (per day) times the six major holidays or 5.4 million dollars. Maybe I'm missing something here. Now let's do worst case scenario in that only 26% are paying. the 74% who are not paying would generate an additional 1.1 million per day per weekend times six holiday weekends = 6.6 million dollars. Actually the revenue would be even higher because my example is based on 1 day of the 3 days of a holiday weekend.

FNG

Has anyone, anywhere, ever seen (or heard) of a government agency/bureacracy lowering fees ? It won't happen! NO new services, it's a wilderness, damnit!!!!

Also if our green sticker fees are withheld from ISDRA, why do LEOs enforce on federal land? Is this legal? Perhaps a protest is in order? How about photocopying our green stickers & flooding Spitler's office (with copies to the Governor's office) with demands for our rightful funds.

QUOTE

How about photocopying our green stickers & flooding Spitler's office (with copies to the Governor's office) with demands for our rightful funds.

I like this!

these government agencies are like dealing with crackheads.by giving them money you only make the problem bigger in the long term.until they figure out how to mange it correctly we need to give them tough love.
i'm suprised they arent charging us to use the ocean also.oops i better not give them any ideas.
KEEP BIG BUSINESS OUT OF THE DUNES!

QUOTE

Well I can see both sides to the argument.  Funds have been pulled away from the BLM (although I don't see where this has been verified), but if this is the case then obviously the short fall has to be made up.  I believe that enforcement of the current $30.00 pass would do that.  For arguments sake let's say 40% are in compliance.  That means that 60% are not.  So, on one busy weekend (Holiday) let's say that there are 150,000 people.  And for arguments sake, let's say that 40% have paid leaving 90,000 people who have not paid the fee.  90,000 x a $10.00 (day) pass is $900,000.00  (per day) times the six major holidays or 5.4 million dollars.  Maybe I'm missing something here.  Now let's do worst case scenario in that only 26% are paying.  the 74% who are not paying would generate an additional 1.1 million per day per weekend times six holiday weekends = 6.6 million dollars.  Actually the revenue would be even higher because my example is based on 1 day of the 3 days of a holiday weekend. FNG

One could argue that if everyone had been paying from the beginning we wouldn't be in this stew... but that's just a theory.

Something to keep in mind for sure is that the BLM has set their own expectations too low and the TRT didn't boost them up much by suggesting they base their fees on only 50% compliance.

This means that they could fail and still be okay on their books. That's like saying to your child that you really don't expect them to get more than a "C" anyway so it's up to them if they want to complete their work. Does anyone think this government agency will strive for 60% when 50% is all they need to survive?

Vicki

I'm going to take photos of our 5 green stickered toys (emphasis on the green stickers), then I'm printing copies & sending them with a note of protest to all the OHVRM board members. Could anyone help with posting their addresses here? How about snail & E-mail, please? I think the addresses were posted somewhere before, but I can't seem to find them. A little help? We've got to make our displeasure known. Yelling at the BLM won't get our green sticker $$$$ flowing where it should - to our riding areas, green sticker funds are controlled by Spitler & his gang of eco-friendlies! Drown them in protests, it couldn't hurt.

http://ohv.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=21853

The OHMVR Commission Wants to Hear From You:

The Commission wants to hear the views of the OHV Community and others about what is happening in riding areas. The Commissioners welcome your thoughts on ways to improve OHV recreation, where you feel grant money should be spent, or any problems you may see, along with suggestions for solving them. If you cannot attend a local meeting, please submit your written comments to:

OHMVR Commission
PO Box 942896 - Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
Tel: (916) 324-5801
Fax: (916) 324-0271
E-Mail: ohvinfo@parks.ca.gov
URL: http://www.ohv.parks.ca.gov

this is my reply that i i just sent to the address above, hope that they read it and feel my pain.

I am but one of many displeased with the 300% increase of fees at the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area. From day one, I and all my friends have complied with this demo fee, and happily payed to play, so to speak. From my understanding, and those of many of my colleagues, the OHMVR fee, or "green sticker fee" has been taken away from the ISDRA. My understanding was that this sticker fee, was to go to funding for the upkeep and personnel at federal parks nad recreation areas. Are the ISDRA dunes not of this nature? Should they be withdrawn from funding, yet still allowed to enforce the sticker. From where I stand, you don't pay for what you don't want/use.
I love the desert the way it is. I like the amount of restrooms supplied, the amount of enforcement, the way it is to spend the weekend in the desert, the way it is. Those who are not happy with the standard of operations now, are those that have no respect for the land. They are obviously not prepared for what they have undertaken. I go camping prepared; with food, water, shelter, and a means of personal hygeine. I require nothing more than the land that was provided by mother nature.
I hope that more surveys and reviews go into the ISDRA and what the people really want. I don't remember hearing anything regarding my opinion of how the situation stood. I would have said that yes, there was a time for more enforcement, but no longer. The riff-raff has been rooted out, and by closing comp at night, many of the undesirables have gone elsewhere.
Please, if there is any question as to the vote of the people and how they stand please feel free to survey my colleagues and myself at www.glamisdunes.com .This website is dedicated to preserving the wildlife and keeping the peace of the Glamis dunes of the ISDRA. We the people love the dunes, respect the dunes, and work hard so that we can continue to use the dunes. Please, keep big business out of the ISDRA.

Andrew Smith
Santee, CA 92071

It is apparent that the gov. doesnt have the money to deal with the ISDRA. So now it is up to the " duner crowd " to flip the bill !!!. Get over it !, its not the end of the world !. Pay your fees , have a good time, and stop your whinning !!!!!!!!!

[quote]It is apparent that the gov. doesnt have the money to deal with the ISDRA. So now it is up to the " duner crowd " to flip the bill !!!. Get over it !, its not the end of the world !. Pay your fees , have a good time, and stop your whinning !!!!!!!!![/quote]

It's whining buddy. Now if I don't have the money to pay my green sticker fees, that means I don't have to? If you and I and all the other people that pay registration fees to green sticker our toys do so knowing that all that money is supposed to go to not only keep open and upkeep current riding areas but create new ones yet we have to pay extra to use Glamis and watch as several local OHV areas are closed, that should piss us off.

It sounds like your just a sheeple. Someone who doesn't care that he is getting ripped off as long as the thin veil of misunderstanding isn't ripped off. Will you ever wake up to see that someone is taking your money and using it for other things and making you pay a second time for what you should have only paid once for?

It's like paying your taxes like a good citizen for building and maintaining the 91 freeway only to have the gov. lease part of what you've paid for to the fast trak people so they can charge you again in the event that you don't like sitting in a parkinglot for two hours a night.

[quote]
If you and I and all the other people that pay registration fees to green sticker our toys do so knowing that all that money is supposed to go to not only keep open and upkeep current riding areas but create new ones yet we have to pay extra to use Glamis and watch as several local OHV areas are closed, that should piss us off.
[/quote]

Many of the riding areas closed were not real OPEN areas, but "tolerated" areas, many of them on private lands. As our population increases. OHV impacts to the landscape and wildlife are heavier and more noticeable.

30 years ago the desert was open to all OHV use and nobody said a thing, because there were only a handful of riders and nobody cared or noticed the impacts (except Howard Wilshire).

It behooves the OHV community to work through their orgs to address impacts to air quality, wildlife, human "quality of life issues" such as noise, pollution, impacts to scenery and increased levels of vandalism and illegal shooting and dumping associated with OHV use. ASA, BRC, CORVA, ORBA should each have an officer dedicated to evaluating environmental impacts and work with Green groups to monitor and control these impacts.

We've got to work together if we want peace... Otherwise it's just a continuum--Repub gets in office--trash the environment, Demo gets in--lock everything up.

Or maybe you LIKE bickering, talking trash, going to endless meetings and still not getting a straight answer or tangible results from BLM.

Bluesky is an Internet Troll.

http://www.intwg.com/trolls.htm

This is his hobby. He has no real interest in what you think and certainly has no real interest in working together.

[quote]The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.[quote]

Please don't feed the troll.

Vicki

[quote]

Many of the riding areas closed were not real OPEN areas, but "tolerated" areas, many of them on private lands. As our population increases. OHV impacts to the landscape and wildlife are heavier and more noticeable.

[/quote]

Many of the riding areas were REAL areas. Whitewater, Pismo, Dumont, and Glamis have all been affected by closures in the recent past, Whitewater entirely. When is the last time a new OHV area has been opened up in the area? When is the last time an existing area has been enlarged to handle the increase in OHV owners? When was the last time green sticker fees were lowered or demo fees reduced?

I can answer all those questions in a short little answer. Too long.

What would you do Bluesky if you were in my situation?

[quote]It is apparent that the gov. doesnt have the money to deal with the ISDRA. So now it is up to the " duner crowd " to flip the bill !!!. Get over it !, its not the end of the world !. Pay your fees , have a good time, and stop your whinning !!!!!!!!![/quote]

i don't see the point in paying once to play, but twice wasn't all that bad. all in all it worked out to $80 every 2 years to go to the desert ($21every 2 years green sticker, $30 every year for demo fee). now it costs $90 just for the demo fee for one year.

where is your intelligence? why are you just being taken, and you seem to think that it is OK? if you like to pay more and just be ripped off, hey pay mine and i'll stop whining. it is the people like you, that lets people like them take advantage of us.

so for me to shut up, open your freakin eyes!!

[quote]Many of the riding areas were REAL areas. Whitewater[/quote]

As you can read in the linked article, Whitewater was a "user created" "tolerated" OHV area.





The informally established
“free-play” areas include a total of 3,624 acres of public lands at Windy Point, Indio Hills,
Iron Door, and Drop 31.

http://www.ca.blm.gov/news/pdfs/psscra/CDC...4Recreation.pdf

[quote]One could argue that if everyone had been paying from the beginning we wouldn't be in this stew... but that's just a theory.

Something to keep in mind for sure is that the BLM has set their own expectations too low and the TRT didn't boost them up much by suggesting they base their fees on only 50% compliance.

This means that they could fail and still be okay on their books. That's like saying to your child that you really don't expect them to get more than a "C" anyway so it's up to them if they want to complete their work. Does anyone think this government agency will strive for 60% when 50% is all they need to survive?

Vicki[/quote]

IMHO this is the real kicker for me! I don't like the fee increase but I will of course pay it until we can bring some kind of change to lower or eliminate (not too big of a chance of that!) the fee.

What really burns me is that they are only shooting for 50% compliance! If I have to pay then it is only fair that everyone else pays. Of course 100% compliance is way out of reach but that also means that the new "demo" fee is 50% too high.

If the new fee had been set at $45. and compliance was set to be 100% and they failed in their enforcement efforts and only reached 90% compliance then they know they will have to do their job better in order to reach the amount of money to cover their budget.

BTW....anyone else have a job where they only need to perform at 50%?

Greg, I don't think the BLM is "shooting for" 50% compliance. I think they are being realistic and and are expecting 50% compliance.

The only real way to boost compliance is to boost LEO presence. To do that, you would either need to bring in more LEOs, costing more money, or divert current LEOs from their duties of patrolling for infractions. Diverting the LEO manpower could result in an increase of violations and cause us problems with the "lawlessness" arguement from PEER.

The only way to ensure a majority compliance would be for the BLM to have controlled access points for the ISDRA and have entry gates. This is not only an expensive proposition, it is also unpopular with most of dune users.

Therefore, I think the BLM is being "hopeful" with their 50% compliance estimate.

We can all help by encouraging everyone we know to buy a pass.

[quote]
We can all help by encouraging everyone we know to buy a pass.
[/quote]

Everyone WE know buys a pass!!! You probably get 99.9% compliance from the members here on the board. It's not the ones WE do know, it's the ones we don't know who are not complying. Who do you think are the 50% compliancers? You mention LEO's patrolling for infractions...wouldn't that include checking passes?? Color me stupid on that one, but seems logical.

Good point, many folks do purchase permits. I'm wondering how they could or would enforce the permit issue with "2nd vehicles" towed out off-road rigs etc.....they sure the heck will use the PC to get in and jack up the masses with this little gem! But prove its "NOT" a towed off-road vehicle? If they plan on enforcement, how can they "target" certain vehicles and not all vehicles? The gates are easy, but off-road? In the sand? Or better yet at camp? How many of our camps has ALL vehicles with passes? Maybe All are tow rigs sure, but all the other vehicles? Just wondering? :? I know they are working on this, BS, thats the answer we always get, and then it slides right up are collective a$$'s with no lube or reach around! >:<

I guess the best method is for the BLM to ensure maximum compliance is for the BLM to control access to the dunes by building fences and then the dunes could only accessed through the gates. This would ensure compliance and "towed in" street legal offroad vehicles wouldn't be a problem as long as they stayed behind the fences.

If enough people don't buy a pass, or find ingenious ways around buying a pass, this is what we will get, FENCES AND GATES. We must police ourselves and encourage compliance. This will keep future fees down and keep fences and gates from being erected.

It is up to us!

As for LEOs patroling for infractions, I expect to see them checking for passes more, but they can't ignore the more important problems areas. If there are more dangerous violations happening, pass enforcement should be second to that. The BLM will not have enough LEOs to do it all...

You know, everyone is missing the fact that Demo Fee is just that... DEMO...
The original law was worded in such a way and had instructions included that would help congress decide whether or not this (Demo Fee) was good or bad. Originally, a large part of making that decision was compliance rates. There are even LEGAL methods for expressing your displeasure with Demo Fee... (not paying and then sending your NON to your congressman saying that you vote AGAINST Demo Fee)...
A person who did not pay Demo Fee up to this point is simply casting their vote AGAINST!
Some would argue that a 40% compliance rate was a catagorical rejection of Demo Fee by the public.

I, for one, applaud those who stood up against the Government on this issue. The BLM needs to find their money elsewhere.

QUOTE

As for LEOs patroling for infractions, I expect to see them checking for passes more, but they can't ignore the more important problems areas. If there are more dangerous violations happening, pass enforcement should be second to that. The BLM will not have enough LEOs to do it all...

Tim, didn't you read the business plan? The BLM has clearly said that they will not ask LEO's to enforce the passes because they don't want to offend the LEO's by making them feel like "meter maids" (Exact words from the BP!)

But they also say that non-LEO Rangers can't issue citations for no pass.

So in otherwords....there's no way to get cited for not having a pass. They won't ask the LEO's to do it and the non LEO's can't.

Their "workaround" which is highly dubious is to have the non-leo's issue notices of non conformance encouraging people to stop at the ranger station and pay before leaving. The iffy bit is that if you don't pay somehow that NON issues by a non-LEO will magically turn into a full on citation in a few days! Funny, they need a LEO to issue it on the spot but apparently just waiting a few days makes it OK to just rubber stamp it without a LEO witnessing the claimed infraction.

In other words the BLM is setting themselves up for failure as usual. This leaves so many openings for a decent lawyer to get someone out of paying a fee it's laughable. All because the BLM dosen't want to ask the LEO's to enforce the existing law!

QUOTE

Greg, I don't think the BLM is \"shooting for\" 50% compliance. I think they are being realistic and and are expecting 50% compliance.

Of course the previous compliance rate was below the 50% level, so they expect more people to comply with the higher fee! Hmmm!

Its funny that you and your buddy's are already trying to figure out how to bypass the system and not pay the fee's !!. Dont you understand , your not the sollution - you are the problem !!!!!!!. Just pay the fee's and let's see what happens. I can wait one more year!!, CAN YOU ?

Jason, your probably right. If the BLM does not properly enforce pass compliance and we can't get voluntary compliance of 50% or more, I guess we will see the fees go up next year and the few of us law abiding folks will be paying for the majority of the non paying lawbreakers.

WE WILL ONLY BE PUNISHING OURSELVES by non payment!

It will result in bigger fees next year and eventually fences and gates.

VOR: Your right. But since there is no money "elsewhere" for the ISDRA, there are fees as mandated by the Clinton era administration. Its the law until its changed.

The ISDRA needs proper funding for the visitation from Washington DC. Any Demo fees are supposed to be for extra amentities, not neccessary basic services. But until WE as duners stand up and hold our elected officials responsible and get better funding for the ISDRA, what do we do? What does the BLM do?

They simply can't say, "well it's New years and we have spent all our money for the year, everybody go home". The BLM has to have a realistic presence in the ISDRA or they would have to close the ISDRA. The BLM simply can't leave the ISDRA unattended due to lack of funds. The liability concerns alone make that a real problem, plus the anti-access crowd complaining that there is no monitoring of critical habitat and the "lawlessness".

So its a "catch-22". What is the SHORT TERM remedy? Voluntary compliance and pay the fees.

The LONG TERM remedy is for ALL of us to become more politically active and demand proper funding from Washignton DC. We all pay taxes and we need to make sure our taxes are properly funding the ISDRA. BUT, we have to get vocal and it will take time to accomplish this.

I just thought of a solution. :twisted: I'll change the withholdings on my taxes from single and zero to 9 for a week or so. That ought to get me enough extra cash to pay for the season pass.

Swark: I'm tired of waiting. Every year since I started going to Glamis in 97, it's been downhill for us. I don't see any changes coming other than bad ones. If you have the hope that things will change for the better, good for you. I hope your right and I'm wrong. Stats don't show that though.

[quote]You know, everyone is missing the fact that Demo Fee is just that... DEMO...
The original law was worded in such a way and had instructions included that would help congress decide whether or not this (Demo Fee) was good or bad. [/quote]

watch for your favorite Republican, Richard Pombo, to introduce legislation in the next few days making fee demo permanent.

Get off the Repulicrat vs Democan thing. They are just two different faces of the same problem.

The only difference I see between the two parties is the Republicans use lube but no kiss while the democrats give a kiss but don't use lube.

Wow, tickets in the mail, with no officer witnessing the violation. :shock:

Who shows up to fight the ticket? With what evidence and at what cost to the FED's? :?

People dont get me wrong, I dont like the situation anymore than you, but now I can atleast justify my donations to the fight for open dunes. This PMV thing is a giant step in the right direction !!!!. Thanks to all who donate their time in the fight !!!. See ya at the SSSS !!!

QUOTE

This PMV thing is a giant step in the right direction

No, it's a giant step in the CORRECT direction. Yeah, finally ONE FRIGGIN THING WENT OUR WAY. In the grand scheme of things... THIS ONE THING IS NOTHING!
The result is that we now have BLM using NAZI tactics raiding our camps, harrassing our children, closing our gatherning areas, impounding our vehicles and in general, using the "CHILLING EFFECT" to cause less people to go to Glamis.

Those who give up their rights for a little safety/security deserve neither.

I remember a couple years ago when people were exiting off off Grays Well Rd. that some LEO's were checking to see if people bought a pass on the way in. If not, they made them buy one on the way out.

And what about people from AZ who don't use the "Brown" Sticker? I call it brown cause I smell something foul coming from it.

People from Arizona don't have to buy a sticker for Ca IF their OHV is properly registered in Az.

That is the law according to interstate compacts all the states have signed to recognize each others registrations and license requirements.

QUOTE

People from Arizona don't have to buy a sticker for Ca IF their OHV is properly registered in Az.  :D   That is the law according to interstate compacts all the states have signed to recognize each others registrations and license requirements.

Does this mean I should mount the license plate on my 2-stoke or carry the registration with me?

Per Az law, your assigned off road plate must be securely fastened in a visible location on the rear of your OHV. You should also carry the registration, or a copy, with your OHV.

The BLM knows this in the ISDRA. If you don't have your AZ registration, then you must buy a $20 yearly non-resident green sticker from Ca. I think we all know where that money is NOT going to.

Heck, AZ registration fee is a $12 one time fee. Why pay $20 a year to Ca so they can use that money against OHVs?