Full Version: Fees Are Putting People Out Of Business
| QUOTE |
| http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/06-21 -2004/0002197267&EDATE= Forest Service Policies Threaten Rural Travel Businesses Attempting to Recover From Recession KNOXVILLE, Tenn., June 21 /PRNewswire/ -- Some seasonal businesses operating in the rural West are under increasing pressure from the Forest Service to pay higher fees or reduce their use of national forests to levels that will force them out of business. In South Dakota, for example the Forest Service is trying to charge a fee equal to $25 dollars per person per day for hiking. In other areas guest ranches are being forced to reduce their use with little or no valid justification. "Many of these businesses are just recovering from the steep recession that occurred in the wake of 9/11 and the Iraq war," said David Brown, Executive Director of America Outdoors, the nation's leading association of outfitters and guides. "These businesses have faced higher insurance and fuel costs, among other challenges, and managed to survive. While we understand and appreciate the agency's authority to collect fees and manage use, theForest Service approach in some areas is cold-hearted. When an outfitter charges $100 a day for a guided hike and the Forest Service wants a $25 fee, the business cannot survive." Brown said his group has been trying to work with the Forest Service on fee legislation that is pending before Congress. He said the problems that are evolving with fees in the West are causing his organization to reconsider their position on the legislation, H.R. 3283, which applies to the general public as well as those who use outfitters. "We are concerned that the legislation will recreate the conditions that led to the Boston Tea Party. Providing federal agencies with unfettered authority to levy fees on the public in over 30 per cent of the country is not a good idea. They need oversight and accountability or families will be forced off public lands by unreasonable fees," said Brown. America Outdoors is the nation's leading association of outfitters and guides whose members provide recreation services, such as whitewater rafting, hiking, cycling, and horseback riding in 43 states and 50 foreign countries. For more information contact David Brown 865-558-3595 or go to http://www.adventurevacation.com SOURCE America Outdoors Web Site: http://www.adventurevacation.com |
This is interesting. I was just watching a show about the Boston Tea Party and thinking the same thing about Glamis. If trends continue as they are, we will end up with a governmental agency with the ability to tax us as they see fit with the result being (if I know duners like I know duners) an all out rejection of Governmental control and an even worse antagonistic situation between the BLM and duners.
Is a "sand tea" party on the horizon?
PastorVor
I see it coming too...although 'Sand Tea' Party sounds too east county...
I've heard rumors over the last 3 seasons to this effect ...
from multiple camps .... we will see ....
from multiple camps .... we will see ....
It's been done in smaller areas. An OHV site in another state, small but popular, nearly had demo fees put into place but the users of the area stood up against them. It took a couple of years, from what I understand, but there are no fees at that OHV site still.
Of course, a smaller area is a little different. The Imperial Dunes has no real way to be "gated" and fencing is so costly it would probably be close to what it takes to just keep it open!
The arguments to eliminate fees are valid and supportable and plentiful.
But even the "experts" in this fight hesitate when asked "should we fight to eliminate fees at the ISDRA?" because ours is such a unique situation.
Thankfully, The Pastor is able to look beyond the ISDRA and fight for the bigger picture. Few people can or will actually do that.
Vicki
Of course, a smaller area is a little different. The Imperial Dunes has no real way to be "gated" and fencing is so costly it would probably be close to what it takes to just keep it open!
The arguments to eliminate fees are valid and supportable and plentiful.
But even the "experts" in this fight hesitate when asked "should we fight to eliminate fees at the ISDRA?" because ours is such a unique situation.
Thankfully, The Pastor is able to look beyond the ISDRA and fight for the bigger picture. Few people can or will actually do that.
Vicki
| QUOTE |
| They need oversight and accountability or families will be forced off public lands by unreasonable fees," said Brown. |
We don't need oversight we need government funding of public lands as it should be.
| QUOTE (KingGlamis @ Jun 26 2004, 08:22 AM) |
| We don't need oversight we need government funding of public lands as it should be. |
AMEN Brother .. preach it ....
Now this is how debate should happen! 
I luv you guys too!
PastorVor
I luv you guys too!
PastorVor
Just got this via email:
| QUOTE |
| Everybody Loses The House Resource Committee staff is working on legislation that would make permanent Rep. Ralph Regula's (R-OH) 1996 "Fee Demo" bill. HR 3283, "America the Beautiful," would require Americans to purchase an $85 pass before they can access any part of public lands that they already support with tax dollars. All public lands would be affected including Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, all Forest Service lands and lakes and U. S Fish and Wildlife managed national refuge areas. Additional fees would be required for campgrounds and boat launches and special recreation permit fees for motorized recreation and for group activities. HR 3283 would scrap the Golden Age Pass that allows senior citizens lifetime access to the national parks for a one-time fee of $10. If one is caught on federal land without a pass he could end up in jail for six months and be fined $5,000. There is more than one way to keep the public lands free from human invasion. Rep. Scott McInnis (R-CO) has introduced legislation to "fully fund" the federal government's Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program that is supposed to ease the financial burden incurred by local governments when the feds take land off tax rolls. The federal government currently reimburses states less than $1 per acre for lost revenue. Rep. McInnis is missing the point, however. It is not up to taxpayers to support the government's land grab program. The federal government has already demonstrated it cannot take care of the land it controls, hence the public lands fee bill, and it certainly has no business acquiring more to the detriment of local governments. Bill Aims to Increase Feds' Property Taxes |
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.