FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

OFF-ROAD LEADER TESTIFIES ON CAPITOL HILL
THAT RECREATION FEES ARE BEING MISMANAGED

Off-Road Business Association President Tells Resources
Committee Members That Federally Mandated Programs Should
Be Paid for with Federal Funding

WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 6, 2004) – “Fee demonstration money is being spent to whatever degree the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) deems necessary, with no user input or control of expenditures,” Roy Denner, president and CEO of the Off-Road Business Association (ORBA) today testified to the U.S. House of Representatives’ subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands in Washington, D.C.
Denner, also speaking for the American Sand Association, the California Off-Road Vehicle Association and the San Diego Off Road Coalition, was making specific reference to the popular Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA) in southern California and the fact that the BLM recently diverted nearly $1 million in camping fees collected to pay for a species monitoring program that was mandated by the Federal Government.
“Nobody likes to pay fees,” Denner explained to committee members, “but I firmly believe that most recreation enthusiasts in this country have conceded the fact that user fees at recreation sites are a necessary evil. Our major concern now is that the fees collected are used in a manner that benefits the people who pay those fees.”
He explained that the amount of area included within the ISDRA was originally 160,000 acres. With the passage of the 1994 Desert Protection Act, approximately 118,000 acres were designated by Congress to be available for OHV recreation. The remaining acreage was designated as wilderness area. Subsequently, he said, the area for off-highway vehicle recreation was further reduced by one-half as a result of a BLM settlement on a lawsuit filed by three anti-access organizations.
“While the area available for motorized recreation has been drastically reduced, the popularity of this park for OHV recreation has literally exploded,” Denner said. “Off-highway vehicle enthusiasts visit the ISDRA from throughout the country and a recent U.S. government publication lists the dunes park as one of the top 12 recreation sites in the United States.”
Denner told subcommittee members that it takes approximately $4 million per year to operate the ISDRA and that is with bare-bones operation – no improvements. Prior to the initiation of the fee demonstration program on Jan. 1, 1999, the state of California contributed slightly over $1 million annually. More recently, grants for operations and maintenance from the California Off-Highway Vehicle program have stopped completely. The total federal allocation is only $200,000 a year, which is about five percent of the required funding.
“That’s not the end of my story,” Denner told members. “Last year, the BLM completed preparation of a new Recreation Area Management Plan (RAMP) for the ISDRA that calls for many park improvements and a monitoring study to evaluate several species of concern within the park boundaries.” Much to the chagrin of Denner and thousands of other enthusiasts, the BLM has not added one toilet, one camping pad or any amenities to the park; yet, the monitoring effort is underway and is being funded entirely by fee demonstration money.
Denner said that the reduction of dollars available to operate the park coupled with unregulated expenses, such as the monitoring program, will undoubtedly lead to even higher user fees for future years unless Federal appropriations are increased significantly.
“The BLM is requiring visitors – who have not seen a single significant improvement in facilities or recreation opportunities in at least three years – to step up and pay for environmental efforts that may ultimately be used to further reduce off-road opportunities at the ISDRA,” Denner said. “This is sort of like being forced to pay for the materials to build your own gallows!”
In conclusion, Denner said, “I respectfully petition this committee to help correct the problems at the ISDRA and to establish controls to prevent this example of fee demo gone awry from becoming the norm for other recreation areas. Federal mandated programs at recreation areas, such as species monitoring efforts, should be paid for with Federal funding, not user fees.”

Gee I have been beating myself silly wondering why the BLM
Field offices that are under the Demo fee program, do not
wish to apply for OHMVR O&M grants. Could it be that there
not really that hard to get? Heck why do some work for your
money when you can do none? Ask yourself this? if you set
up two tables, one with $10 bills and the other with $20s well
which table will have the longest line?

Hmmm Federal funding, what kind of tax would we need to have
to pay for this? Well where dose over 80% of the OHMVR funds
come from? State fuel tax Right? when we buy gas don't we
also pay Federal fuel tax? or when we haul toys to the Dunes
do we only pay State fuel tax? Forget about AB2666 let's start
working on a hole new OHV fund.

Here is how to BACK UP what Roy said above...

http://www.americansandassociation.org/new...cle&article=169

Do you approve of this spending of your FEE MONEY??? I sure hope not...

Tomjeeps: All government funds come with strings attached. Sometimes the sting isn't too bad or long,,, other times the sting has something bloody on the other end and belongs in the ...

"O" wave the magic wand, make the GREENS go away, forget
it , wont happen. I am against any user fee that is not needed
and even more so when an Agency wants to use the fees just
so it can ovoid doing it's job, how did they get into the mess
with the CBD in the 1st place

I am truly appreciative of all of the hard work each of the various sand organizations are doing to keep our dunes open, and out of the clutches of the evil eco-nazi's. But I have a dumb question. Could this particular stragegy backfire?

Let's say that at some level, the misuse of our fee money were to get stopped. The requirement for species monitoring is going to remain, and I'm going to guess that the blm budget planning process is already in the fy07 cycle (that means any budget requests submitted by the blm won't have a chance of happening until fiscal year 2007). So, for two or three years, there most likely would be no money for this mandated monitoring.

So, in the typical government way of thinking, they just temporarilly close it all down, saying that since they can't monitor, they can't allow use until they receive funding to do so. We are all screwed, and the enviro-nuts do the dance of joy because we cut our own throat.

I don't want any of our money spent to appease the eco-fools either. Am I just being a worry wart?

“This is sort of like being forced to pay for the materials to build your own gallows!”


So perfect...

The BLM is not wanting to apply for O&M funds , at the same time the OHMVR
is getting heat about AB2666 from Glamis users. So the Radar is on us here
Big Time, cutting of the funds they are using to perform just some of what
they need to do is going to paint a Bullseye on Glamis, Arm the Bombs and
open the Bombay doors. Just because I understand the Spot we are in don't
mean I like it.

CBD Something to think about.

Does the RAMP even exist anymore?? When was the last 'revision'?

There was alot to read up there, and I didn't feel like reading, so basically after reading 3 or 4 lines I have these few words of wisdom.

"What the eff* are you talking about?! The Chinaman is not the issue here dude! I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude. Across this line you do not,-- also, Dude, Chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature, uh, Asian-American, Please."
~ Walter Sobchak

I think it would have been nice to see Mr. Denner supporting ...

I have to agree with you on this Brian. This is almost like a last-ditch effort when we actually had a chance to de-rail this runaway train some time ago.

Is it a ballsy move or a paper tiger?

Doesn't matter I guess, but like you... sometimes I sure get tired of shouting into the wind.

Vicki

Im tired.. I wont roll over - but Im tired..

Efficiency, Transparency and Accountability.
Constant pressure Endlessly Applied.

Don't be surprised at anything, especialy about money. Where do you think the green sticker money goes? Sailaway, try to contact Rob Razor, he was VP of government affairs for American Motorcycle Association, and was able to get about $20mil of green sticker money back where it belonged. Might be easier knowing how someone else did it. He is also a great guy, I worked with him on some legal and political issues about 8 years ago (hope he is still there) and knows his way around the ropes.

All this talk about finding more funding, how about some spending
Accountability and a littel Transparency would be nice
$1 million in camping fees collected to pay for a species monitoring program
that was mandated by the Federal Government. Is this a true statment? Is this
really all a Federal mandate or is it at least in part some backroom CBD

What I see here if there is any plot is more of an "eco" protection racket, than
us being forced to pay for the materials to build your own gallows!
Anybody ask why this is going to cost so much
Anybody wondering who is doing the work, and how close are they to the CBD.
Remember when the "MOB" came though town selling Fire insurance, and it
seemed if you didn't buy it your house burned down

Remember a dead goose can't lay the Golden egg.

http://yumasun.com/artman/publish/articles/story_10872.shtml

Just how much do they get for user fees, reading between the lines on the
Dumont Dunes spread sheet I would say $5 bucks a user is the number
the powers that be have in their heads

Entering Zero for user fees they show a shortfall of $568K divide that
by 112,000 users a year and it works out to $5.07 per user per year.
Now if $5 bucks a user is correct then $5.00 times 1,200,000 users
works out to SIX MILLION BUCKS. Now Denner stated it cost Four Million
per year to run Glamis, now with one Million going to to pay for a
species monitoring program that was mandated by the Federal
Government Thay still have One Million Left over, even if they
don't get one penny from the OHMVR

Now do the math yourself, and out of what was it $90 bucks a year for a pass?
Do you think $5 bucks a year per user is a good ballpark number

Efficiency, Transparency and Accountability.
Constant pressure Endlessly Applied.

Below is a cut and past from the BLM Web site, it sure sounds like
off roaders where a very big part of this Demo fee plan, where they
I asked Neil Hamada for Info on the Demo fee he said you will find
it on the web site. Note where the Web site tells you to go


CALIFONIA - Imperial Sand Dunes
Contact: Neil Hamada (nhamada@blm.gov)
Partnerships: Despite the rough start of the fee demo program at Imperial, it is currently a successful fee demo project, largely due to the partnership with the Imperial Technical Review Team (TRT). In 1999, the California Desert Advisory Council established the TRT to assist the BLM with the implementation of the fee demo program. Eleven individuals–representing Imperial County, Yuma County, State of AZ, CA DAC, San Diego Off Road Coalition, CA OHV Commission, BLM dunes patrol volunteers, CA Off Road Coalition, and a non-affiliated member–comprise the TRT. The TRT advises BLM on funding priorities for fee demo money and represents an important link to the various elements of the user community.
The partnership with the TRT and the American Sand Association led to the “Checker Flag” program, whereby riders display a checkered flag on their vehicles symbolizing, among others, support of Law Enforcement and responsible behavior. During the latter half of 2000, an independent non-profit organization, the American Sand Association was formed. When a settlement agreement associated with the Desert-wide lawsuit forced the closures of certain sections of Imperial, the American Sand Association organized a 300-person volunteer effort to install signs. Although the organization and its members oppose the closures and fees, they believed that getting the notification signs in place was essential to keeping the general area available for OHV recreation. The partnership’s work with BLM to accomplish the signing served as a high point for BLM personnel on the ground.


Collection of Fees: Imperial uses self-pay machines operated under a contract with Universal Parking. These machines are at the forefront of fee collection. By offering 16 self-pay machines, the visitors can use any of the machines in multiple locations. Although not directed in the contract, the vender assists the BLM with fee compliance during peak weekends by putting their own people on the ground. The vender makes regular enhancements to the system and the machines to increase the ease of use, the level of compliance, and the quality of the reports provided to the BLM.
Customer self-serve machines allow customer access to pay stations all hours. There is no need for the BLM funds for fee booth construction or fee collectors, and “collection acceptance regulations” are easily complied with, given one check a month being received and deposited from the contractor. Rangers do have to enforce fee compliance, which does use up ranger time. As fee collection on these sites become a wider accepted practice, less fee compliance monitoring may be needed.
Even though the relationship started off rocky, Universal Parking and BLM have worked to make the automatic pay stations successful. About two years ago the expectations of the two groups were discuss and that years Halloween had high compliance and high revenue. Now the staffing needs, signing, and other resources are shared to make the Imperial Fee Demo Program work.
Managing of Staff: This area functions as well as it does because of the people on the ground. According to the staff, the level of support provided by the field manager far surpasses anything in the past. During peak periods, the field manager even joins his staff on the ground to help with fee compliance and meeting general visitor needs. The commitment that the Dunes Manager, Neil Hamada, brings to the job energizes the rest of the staff. One of the field staff said that the quality and commitment of the entire staff “makes this hell enjoyable.” The level of dedication some of the seasonals bring to bear is also impressive. This year, John Unger developed, presented, and ultimately received approval for an expanded emergency management services program for the upcoming season. Greater EMS has long been a desire of the Imperial users. The TRT advanced the proposal as a priority for the area and $90,000 of fee demo money will be devoted to the program.

Below is the only munbers break down I could find

NEWS
BLM along with the NPS, FWS, and US Forest Service have been cooperators in the "Recreational Fee Demonstration Program" since 1996.
Since the beginning of the fee demo. program, 1996, through 2001 the BLM has collected nearly $24 million.
All four agencies from the beginning through 2001 have collected nearly $750 million. The NPS collected $590 million of this amount.
BLM has 100 projects in the program.
At the present time, the BLM policy is to keep 100% of the revenues at the site of collection to make improvements at that site.
BLM has obligated over $18 million of the amount collected to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog, recreation site improvement and expansion, habitat protection and enhancement, visitor services, interpretation and environmental education, and law enforcement. The program has a termination date of September 30, 2004 with an additional 3 years to 2007 to spend its collections.
All four agencies and both Agriculture and Interior are actively pursuing a permanent fee bill and believe it is in our best interest to move forward.
There is interest by the Authorization Committee and Senator Bingaman, NM, Chairman of Energy and Natural Resources to sponsor a permanent fee bill.
Surveys conducted by BLM over the past 4 years shows over 84% of the respondents, agreed or strongly, agreed that the value of their recreation experience at least equaled the value of the fees paid and 94% report favorably on the overall quality of their recreation experience on BLM public lands.
Several states have implemented best practices observed in the FY01 Recreation Fee Demonstration Evaluations


Efficiency, Transparency and Accountability.
Constant pressure Endlessly Applied.
___

Things are getting better

Demo Fee is temporary. What a colossal waste of time to go to Congress and fail to mention which of the two Demo Fee replacements Duners support.
Currently there are two bills making their way through congress, which would replace Demo Fee. As most of you know Demo Fee was established to "test the waters", so to speak. To see how the public accepts paying for public land use. It was never intended to last as long as it has. Now, it is on the way out. Most likely within the next couple of years it will be replaced with one of two bills.

Tell us more about these bills, what kind of Accountability will they have
and will we know for sure just how much of the money will wind up
getting to the ground? $90 bucks for a parking pass seems step to me.
I would still like a number from the BLM, just how much do they have
to spend on Glamis over the Next Three years?

Here is an opinion piece opposing HR 3283:

Here is ONE SINGLE EXCERPT from the bill which stood out to me:

Here is another Excerpt:

Put some info up about the bill you support, as far as the demo fee
getting replaced just how much of a rush is there needed to do that?
They still can use money from what they have now for the next three
years, from what I see on the BLM Web site, just how much is that?

My self I am not supporting any bills at this time, and as far as I know
there has not been any contact between CORVA and ASA about any
bills. Maybe there sould be?

Here is the entire bill S1107:

Great New Topic Why not cut and splice it and start a new thread.

The "rush" is... Demo Fee is set to expire before Jan, 2006... <--- not sure on that date... MANY Senators have expressed their unwillingness to postpone it yet again.
Also, these two bills are going through congress right now. If one gets held up the other will prevail.

Let's be clear here... I'm not suggesting that S1107 is a be all/end all... there will be signifcant issues after it is passed, most notably, How will the BLM pay for all of those contracts they signed... like the trash dumpsters and the toilet dumping...

But I think most people can read these two bills and see which one has the public in mind and which is about trying to gain more power over public lands.

I find it quite interesting to note that to date, no OHV orginization has gone on record in support or opposition of either of these bills, yet... one of these bills WILL be law within the next couple of years, impacting each and every one of you duners.

I've been saying this for years...
What have your leaders been saying?

PastorVor

Hmmmm Demo fee topic getting lost I still want to see
some Accountability, for the program that is in place now
Before I move on to what is going to replace it.

Going to listen to Roy Denner tonight

There is/has never been true accountability for this program and there won't be for any new program.
Even if we were to get solid numbers, they will still be "fudged". Many expenditures cannot be adaquatly quantified.
For example: How do you list money spent for LEO's to force compliance? You know, the ones who are sitting at the "gate" or the ones driving around through camp, checking on passes?
Are they "Law enforcement" or are they "collections"?

It would be nice to insist on full accountability before anything new is done... but the new program is comming, with or without accountability.
There is no comprehensive study to show our lawmakers how Demo Fee worked or didn't. The Forest service outright LIED to congress on how they spent THEIR Demo Fee money.

The only way to prevent the misuse of Fee money is to not give it to them. Otherwise, to think that Fee money would be used wisely is to believe in fairy godmothers.

Hell, just the burocracy alone would demand millions and millions of dollars.

PastorVor

It would be nice for us all to get on the same page on somthing, for a change.

it beats the heck out of nothing but negative input


Roy Denner on KOGO AM 600 tonight at 7PM to 7:30PM

I couldn't agree with you more, Tom... but I've been warning people about the evils of Demo Fee for the past 4 years. I've been ignored, denigrated, beat up and basicly disrespected for that entire time...

Now, it's about to happen. The time has come. It's time to put up or shut up... (the leadership, that is... )
If ORBA supports the House bill then they had better claim that support... the same with Corva and the ASA... The time of ... "We'll decide what to do when the time is right." is upon us now...

I'm saying that if you support Fees at Glamis then you support the House bill I've shown you. If the ASA and CORVA and ORBA are going to support Fees at Glamis I think it is fair that the duners understand just what that Fee system will entail.

If you oppose Fees then you support S1107 which will remove fees from BLM land.

I too, am interested in what Mr. Denner will have to say tonite.

PastorVor

Roy said the info I wanted is at the end of this broken link
Let's just hope it comes back to life soon,we can all see what's there.

http://www.glamisonline.org/TRT/FeeDemoProject.asp

Found out about a link that works, not the one Roy told the world about

http://www.ca.blm.gov/elcentro/ImperialSan...es/Funding.html

Don't get me wrong on this, I would like to know if there is
enough money for Glamis to operate for the next two or
three years. Don't give up on the OHMVR things are changing.

Remember the Fuel tax money is I hope on the way, and maybe
the OHMVR is not doing anything for Glamis now, that could change.
I just don't see public bashing of the OHMVR working in favor of it,
and THE PASTOR seems to want me to not hammer on the BLM and
the DEMO fees past, ok if we can apply this to the OHMVR then we
just maybe could be getting somewhere.


Also started A new thread as to what Bill we all should
support if any

Added post so everyone can see the correct link I found on the
BLM site, Check out the Numbers do you think it all adds up

http://www.ca.blm.gov/elcentro/ImperialSan...es/Funding.html

This is the same info on the TRT site.
http://www.isdratrt.org/

Roy Denner said three years I only see one, he could have just been
mistaken about the time table, the info at the end of the broken ASA link
may going back three years who knows whatever. They still should fix it.

This works out to about $3 bucks a user per year, don't seem to me at least
much of a return on what the users are paying

It's the oldest trick in the book....we are no longer a capitalist economy, where market demand drives the price. Instead it is now Imperialsim, of sorts; where ya gotta pay if ya want to play.

Accountability has always been an issue with the BLM and the state of California. Just remember how the 'Demo Fee' got started..several quiet, not well publicized meetings. It wasn't "Will you pay if we put a fee?" that was asked, instead it was "What do you consider an appropiate fee?"

Now who raised it?

Again, why don't non-duners pay for the other side?


The merry-go-around goes on and on and on

Up for relevance