I feel this is a Good topic that has got the other Demo fee thread
off track. I at this time support no bill and feel it's going to take
much time to go though. Looking ahead will not be wise without
looking back at the problems with the program in place now

Don't hold your breath, Tom... These bills have been around for a while and no one seems to want to take a stand or even voice an opinion.

Basicly it boils down to this...
The ASA and Corva and Orba feel that having a fee at Glamis is a requirement. They refuse to accept the fact that Public lands should be funded by Congress. They fear what would happen if this money wasn't comming in. In short, they believe the BLM's threat that without Demo Fee the dunes would be shut down.
BUT..... The plan that congress has for making the Fee permanant is draconian! It is far reaching... it is expensive... and it sends a huge chunk of our money to other places. It will turn Glamis into a place for the priveledged few! Those without the money will be fined $5000 and possibly be sent to JAIL!
The ASA and CORVA and ORBA cannot, at this time, voice support for this bill because of the political back lash that would occur, so apparantly they've opted to simply voice the opinion that Fee's used for Species Monitoring is bad...

But realisticly, what does that do? I mean, Demo Fee is going out. Sure, you might save a million dollars this year... but what about in two years when one of these two bills is the law of the land? There will be no saving of a million dollars then!

We've all known that money collected was to be spent on species monitoring for at least a year now. This issue has barely been a blip on the screen. Why now, all of a sudden is this such a hot issue?
And why protest the use of our money for species monitoring? That money is used for many dubious things, species monitoring is just one of them. One could argue the strong arm tactics of Law Enforcement which, by all accounts was left with nothing to do on Easter because there were so many of them. Or their use in collecting more money, or their use in closing off the hills on the holidays (an Imperial COUNTY law).
Yes, our money is being wasted right and left. It's never been a cause for concern before... why now?

Tom, don't expect this to turn into a great debate. You will be very hard pressed to get any leader to voice an opinion on this issue. As you've probably seen on the ASA board, the issue has been totally skirted and sidestepped.

Oh well. I thought the time might be right... I've been trying for years and I'll keep trying. Hopefully we'll get our leaders to make a stand right BEFORE one of these two bills is passed.

PastorVor

Ok, Vicki...
How does duners feel about this? Which Bill will duners support?
Or, what about either bill needs to be changed?

PastorVor

Frankie,
I appreciate your comments! :D

I would counter with:
Both of these laws have very open and vocal supporters. There are very large orginizations who support each of them, openly. What makes this community so "special" that it can only operate behind closed doors?

But I would also add that I'm not asking for a definitive stance... only acknowledgement that this issue is much much bigger then how Demo Fee money is spent. There is currently no public debate concerning this issue. All I would like to see is some honest comments and some information and guidence!

Vicki, Section 12 is just one example. There are many other instances which are just as grave. In particular:

I would surmise that the "loud and open" supporters have an entrenched political and environmental support base...all having funding and paid help in place to fight for what they want. I don't want to make excuses for certain people or ORGs, but this is still by and large an all volunteer effort. It would be difficultfor me to run a business or hold a job and devote the rest of my time responding to every request for info or an answer to whatever we see as a problem.

Except for Da Redhead, of course!!

Brian, one more thing...

I share your concerns...in the wrong hands, this is a disaster waiting to happen.

As an asside: I've done plenty of things in the past in order to "stir the pot" so to speak, and I've been critical of the ASA and other orgs in the past... but I've not been over critical on this issue, yet it appears that automated defense mechinisms have been deployed. I hardly got a paragraph out before the attacks started comming and I've yet to hear a single comment concerning either of the two bills.

Whether this is something that a paticular org can discuss openly or not is beside the point. This issue DEMANDS attention and DESERVES open discussion. Whether leaders wish to discuss this openly or not is entirely up to them.

Just to put things in perspective...
If S1107 passes and is made law, all DEMO FEE type money will cease and desist. What are the plans in that event?

If HR 3283 passes and is made law, an entire new burocracy will have to be formed, probably taking a couple of years to do so. The cost of duning will most definantly rise and gates and fences will most likely be installed.
What are the plans in that event?

Are there any plans to try to fix one or the other bill to better suit the Off-roader? If so then it better happen quickly. Things are rapidly getting to the "all or nothing" point. S1107 is already out of comittee and will be up for vote in the Senate very soon.

This is all I'm saying... I'm not trying to "call anyone out", even though I did take a jab or two... mostly in order to try to get some attention on this subject. It DESERVES attention. It is the single most important issue involving Glamis we have right now.

The status of Demo Fee is irrellevant. It WILL be gone in two years. That is irrefutable.

Brian

So you stirred the pot...so what? Sometimes stirring the pot is exactly what is needed. The problem is that the internet doesn't have a set of "rules" governing fair play and courtesy. There is always someone behind the monitor ready to pounce because it's funny, the thread isn't going in the direction they want it to, or just to see if they can get a response. Look at what happened when someone seemingly dared to question Ed and Keiths integrity. That wasn't the case...someone just asked a question. Didn't matter...defenders and detractors came from all sides and turned it into a soap opera...

Case in point...at this very moment, TomJeeps is ready to choke me to death because I hijacked the thread...!!!

That's the way these forums work. If someone questions your post, it really isn't a question...it's "bashing"...or a "flame war"...or whatever the enternet junkies call it. I call it childish, but I'm an old fart so I get to do that...!!!

Now...what were we talking about...???

What does any of that have to do with discussing this issue? (which is still not receiving any attention)

What good will delisting the PMV do if there are fences around Glamis?
Why can't the two issues be discussed simultaniously?

Why is there zero interest in this issue?
The ONLY comments received so far, besides a couple of people who have said that it looks interesting" are comments about whether it is sutable for debate!!!

I'm not complaining about anyone or anything... I posed a delima... a very serious one. I stated both sides of the issue. I voiced my opinion on the matter and I explained the consequences. I have made my case.
Yet, still there is no comment on the matter at hand.

Does no one see the seriousness here?
Or is everyone just perfectly willing to sell their souls.

What do people think is going to happen? That Demo Fee will exist as it is forever?

Hey, if you believe in fees then great! Explain to me why this bill is going to be good for Glamis. Convince me.
I don't see it, myself.

Or hell, let's just wait until the damn thing passes so we can explain how we had no power to prevent it so we might as well make the best of it!

Greedy, self absorbed, self-centered duners! This thing effects the entire country, kids. Our little sandbox is a blip on the radar to them. This law will send dads to jail because they took their family to see the snow in the mountains! This law will tell low income people all across the country... "The public forests are not for you." This law will be a FEDERAL Green Sticker fiasco!!!
This law will make some groups very powerful.

Brian

The passion of few will determine the lives of so many. whether it be the CBD or ASA, HR# this or HR# that whatever !. The bottom line is : if the people that love the dunes at ISDRA ( outside of the few, here and other groups like ASA, DUNERS, ORBA etc. ) dont get informed about all of the issues, we duners will not stand a chance in reclaiming what is rightfully ours !.
Getting the PMV and other species delisted, (ESA reform HR 2933) would be a monumental start in the right direction. Their are some congressmen ( R. POMBO )actually on our side, or at least the side of science and not BS. Has anyone written their congressman lately ?.

What about the FWS's decision re; the PMV, due out anytime now ?. If the FWS rules against the OHV community what next ?. Will the demo fee really matter ?.

The time is NOW to get involved !, donate to the cause !!, Help pay the incredibly high cost of lawyers and lobbiest and especially help the groups like the ASA and duners that represent us !.

sorry to butt in.

Most all of us are against fees to go to the dunes. That is obvious.

So why aren't ALL of you that are so vocal against the fees championing an effort to get Congress to pay for the dunes cost?

I have yet to see anyone or any group making this a priority.

If I missed it please show me where. I will support such an effort completely.

To answer King Glamis' question...

Phone calls, emails, personal visits, letters.

All that and more is being done. Not just by DUNERS but by some of the other organizations as well. Some have put out press releases about it, others have talked about it on message boards and some have spread the word from camp to camp, in meetings and informational handouts.

There is no magic feather, no secret phrase, no quick fix that will make this right so if anyone is waiting with baited breath for that to happen, you're not going to make it.

No one should be relying on the vocal few to resolve this issue.

Everyone needs to take a part. Waiting for someone else to do the work and then jumping on the bandwagon hasn't worked for what, 35 years? Time for a strategy change.

Brian may piss some people off from time to time while force-feeding us this information, but one thing is certain... he's working on the problem.

Vicki

so here i sit TRYING to grasp this? personally i have a VERY full plate BUT the question is with limitited time and low funds how can i help???? Aaron

Aaron, you posted before I added something I should have added this morning...

Jumping on the bandwagon isn't always bad thing. We all have people that we rely on in certain areas because those areas just aren't our areas of expertise and my comment came out much more accusatory than I meant it.

What I was trying to say was, many of us have sat around waiting for someone else to come up with a solution and we just don't have that luxury any more.

Now, we don't always have to be the one to jump up and get it done, but we need to make sure that someone is.

Doug's comment made it clear to me, for instance, that as a leader I am falling down in some areas. He is a member of DUNERS but is obviously not aware that DUNERS is very actively involved in finding a solution to the ISDRA funding problem. I have a very full plate and can honestly say I don't have time to institute a system of communication.

But what I can do is find the people to do that for DUNERS, and that's what I'll do.

You might not be able to take a trip to Sacramento to fight a piece of legislation, but I'll bet you know someone who can... like a leader in the OHV community for instance. So, make sure that person who is heading to Sacramento is aware of how you feel and will carry your words.

Limited time and low funds are a part of the OHV world but there are little things that can be done, like attending an information meeting. Yes, it means you have to be somewhere you don't really want to be. But you will walk away knowing more about your dunes than when you went in and then you can spread the word to your own little community. Why is that important? Because some day you'll be standing in a crowd and someone's going to tell a whopper about the dunes and you will be informed enough to turn to that person and set them straight.

Seem small? It's monumental in the fight for our public lands.

Join an access organization, participate in a cleanup, send an email to your representative, drop in on your congressman (and tell them you want appropriated dollars for Glamis). All of those can be done with limited time and income.

Vicki

Can’t you just feel the temptation; there is so much money in the pot
And if it only cost a little less to manage how much more there would
Be to spend. All these Fee programs have one thing in common, which
Is you only get to keep about $3 out of every $5 you collect.

If you collect Six Million Dollars and you cut the management cost in
Half you would have another $1.2 Million dollars, if you got twenty %
More compliance you would have another $1.2 Million dollars. Boy
What could you do with $2.4 Million dollars, what’s another way to
Do the same? Well charge 40% more and change nothing. Would you
Pay $125 for a pass? Well not as many would so you would only wind
Up with 20% more in reality.

THE PASTOR is right on the mark with this and the writing is on the wall,
HR3283 is what everything points to. I see $5 of usable Fee money per user
As the Target Number, and as far as the bean counters go it looks good on
Paper. It reduces the Management cost by using Volunteers to collect fees,
And increases compliance with heavy fines. Also it appears there is not
Going to be any fee increases, so if HR3283 is waiting in the wings should
It not be tested first before it’s cast in stone?

I can understand the argument that drastic measures may be needed, but must
We set it in cement right out of the box? IF it can’t be changed then can it be
Made temporary till the fuel tax survey is completed? I am not an expert on
Bills however, I think time limits are much simpler than amendments

http://www.freeourforests.org
These guys have been fighting relentlessley to get Demo Fee abolished and they support S 1107. They OPPOSE the other bill.

It has always been my opinion that as long as there is a Fee system in place Congress will not properly fund our public lands. Why should they if they can squeeze it out of the local users?

So, in that regaurd, I see getting the Fees abolished as the first step towards getting proper funding from Congress.
There are many other funding sources, as well.
For instance, the State OHMVRA fund... The Gas tax... The Green Stickers.
With no huge demand on recources for the purpose of collecting money the needs at Glamis are quite affordable. It is the huge burocracy and administration of a needless program that drives the cost skyward!
Imagine the money that went to pay for those paypoint machines being used for improvements, or to pay for a realistic number of LEO's.
Imagine the cost of printing those passes.
Imagine the cost of enforcement and all the paperwork that the BLM must do.
The annual budget at Glamis is around 4mil, as Mr. Denner said. That's CHICKEN FEED. One Mill of that is for species monitoring which should be paid by the Feds. Mr. Denner just testified at Congress for that reason.
That leaves 3 mil... How much of that is required LEO prescense in order to force compliance? How much of that is cost to manage and maintain the Demo Fee program?

How much money does Glamis REALLY need?
I contend that the acutal amount is very small and could be paid for in Grants from State and Federal sources with very little problem.

But, there's no power to be gained there.
Demo Fee is about granting power. Even the ASA will tell you that Demo Fee puts the power in the hands of the local users to raise their own money without being beholden to the Government.
In actuality, it will be putting power in the hands of the BLM administrators and the private companies they decide to do business with
Environmentalists don't like Demo Fee because it has the potential of putting that massive amount of power in the hands of big corporations, like Disney.

PastorVor

When you look at the overhead of any Demo Fee program it's a bad

Well, this may be a bit of a stretch... but in this time of young people giving their lives defending our freedom on a daily basis... you bet your ass that I'll risk a piece of desert to defend our freedoms here in the US.

PastorVor

I think it's safe to assume that we agree on one thing, which is
in any case the end game should be NO USER FEEs at all.
I think for right now the main thing is to stop any plan from
getting locked in forever, work on a temp plan which would
allow Glamis to operate, till after the fuel tax survey is completed
and as we are finding out how much OHMVR money there will be,
at the same time come up with a plan for going after Congress
for the needed funding

OHMVRA will never be a long term solution. State money for Federal land will always become a "carrot" to be used against us.
It can (and will) be pulled on a moments notice for no reason whatsoever.
Unless you can get the OHMVRA stacked with OHV'ers and get the greenies off of the comittee.

When I say end Game I don't mean a year or even two, all that Spitler stuff
is just so last year. Yes we all know what he has said and even if it was still
the case, he wont be around forever. I just don't want to see any group of
users locked into a life time of user fees, the OHMVR is changing and the
Money is changing. Why get locked into anything till all that plans out, and
O yes don't forget about Vicki

Yes, I do know what those three items are. The two are a breakdown of the one... but you knew that.

My "method" as you say, is the method of a very large and powerful, nationwide orginization. Not something I dreamed up with no forethought.

The ASA may not be "pro-fee" but it has not joined in the "anti-fee" fight. And many members have said many times that a "reasonable" fee is acceptable.

Up for relevance

http://www.napanews.com/templates/index.cf...0E-BC3B7ED0FB64

Permanent fees proposed for visitors to national parks, forests
Thursday, June 17, 2004

By MALIA RULON
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON -- Fees to hike, swim or camp at national forests or parks could become a permanent part of the summer recreation scene under legislation pending in Congress.

Visitors are charged fees now at some places, including the Grand Canyon in Arizona and Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument in Washington state, through a pilot program started in 1996. Supporters say the money goes to pay for such things as repaving access roads, replacing boat docks and other needed maintenance and improvements.

A bill pending in Congress would make those fees permanent and extend the option to charge for recreation on federal lands that now are free.

Rep. Ralph Regula, the Ohio Republican who created the pilot program, says maintenance, such as clearing debris from trails and updating plumbing systems, is postponed each year due to lack of funding. The maintenance backlog ranges from $13 billion to $16 billion, most of it for National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service needs.

"Most of these park fees are very minimal, and the people who are going there are not people who are from poverty row," Regula said. He said there would be discounts for seniors or school groups.

The pilot program has been renewed each year without opposition, suggesting Congress would authorize a permanent program. It's not clear, however, whether lawmakers would even consider the bill during an election year.

Opposition to the proposal centers on complaints that the program has done nothing to eliminate maintenance backlogs while it essentially transforms vast tracts of land that used to be freely accessible into paid preserves.

"Out West, you just walk up over a hill and you are in federal land. You can fish, hike, hunt. And suddenly, you have to pay a fee for that. I think people are having a hard time understanding that," said Aubrey C. King, director of the National Alliance of Gateway Communities, which represents residents who live near federal lands.

The Park Service and Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management have collected about $1 billion through the pilot program, paying for trail maintenance, replacing fire rings with grills, installing new picnic tables and updating exhibits.

Visitation has remained constant in the last decade at about 360 million people to recreation areas maintained by the Park Service, Fish and Wildlife and Bureau of Land Management, according to a 2003 report from the those agencies.

The fees could be $5 a day or $35 a year, depending on whether visitors pay per car as they enter the land or buy an annual pass. Visitors could not be charged to enter the park and again to participate in activities there.

Reports from the Government Accounting Office, which is Congress' investigative arm, say it's not clear whether the fee program has helped agencies catch up on their maintenance needs.

But Tom Thompson, deputy chief of the national forest system, told lawmakers at a recent hearing that the money has been crucial in allowing the agency to make repairs, improve facilities and safety, and provide educational services.

Thompson said officers at Ohio's Wayne National Forest used money collected last year to remove fallen trees along 92 miles of trails after an ice storm. Forest spokesman Gary Miller said the project cost $176,000 of the $232,000 raised in fees.

"That ice storm put down thousands of acres of trees. There were piles of debris taller than your head," Miller said. "We couldn't have opened the trails in time for summer recreation without those funds."

Still, some outdoor enthusiasts bristle over the notion that they might have to pay twice for services -- once in fees, and also in taxes.

"It's anti-American," said Robert Funkhouser, director of the Norwood, Colo.-based Western Slope No-fee Coalition. "We own the land. We pay our taxes each year to maintain it."

Tom Cowher, who enjoys taking his two stepsons on off-road motorcycles down trails at the Wayne National Forest, said the program is good in theory but some kinks need to be fixed.

"The improvements haven't kept pace with the increased usage," Cowher said. "We haven't seen additional trail miles, which was one of the goals."

He also wants to make sure fee revenue can be treated as local matching funds when applying for federal grants. And he opposes the fact that off-road vehicle owners, who already must pay a separate fee to obtain a license to use their vehicles in Ohio, are charged usage fees at the forest while hikers are not.

Other park users agreed that some changes should be made to the program before it becomes permanent.

Roy Denner, president of the Off-Road Business Association based in Santee, Calif., said he's worried that officers at the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area would use the fees for conservation programs and not maintenance or improvements that benefit visitors.

"It really makes sense for the people who pay the fees to have some say in how the fees are spent," he said.

Others worry that the fees will eventually replace -- instead of supplement -- federal funding. Regula, who used to oversee funding for national lands, says the program is not designed to usurp regular appropriations.

Operating costs for the lands average about $1.2 billion a year for each agency. The agencies' annual budgets range from $1.3 billion for the Fish and Wildlife Service to $4.5 billion for the Forest Service.

Under Regula's bill, 80 percent of the money from fees would have to be used at the park where it is collected. The pilot program also keeps the money at the collection point, and some users are starting to take notice, according to state tourism directors.

"From what we've seen and the comments that have come back, we're enthusiastic that the fees are providing a better experience for the visitors," said Carl Wilgus, director of tourism for the state of Idaho.

Idaho is one of 13 members of the Western States Tourism Policy Council, which supports the fee program. On the other hand, legislatures in California, Colorado, New Hampshire and Oregon and dozens of city councils in those states and Arizona and Utah have passed resolutions opposing the program.

Ken Kastorff, who runs rafting trips down the Nantahala River in North Carolina, said folks should just accept the fees and move on.

"Anybody that thinks that you pay your taxes and you don't ever have to pay any more into the system for something like this, those days are gone," he said. "The money has got to come from somewhere."

Some emails are sent out solely for informational purposes and are not always issues I support or reflect my beliefs.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

That article goes a long way towards pointing out some of the things I've been trying to say.
This is a nationwide concern, not just Glamis, much like the ESA issue is nationwide.
There are MANY people who oppose it, it is not simply accepted by the public. MANY local governments have actually passed resolutions opposing it.
As you can see by the numbers listed above, our little 2 or 3 million dollar budget is chicken feed.