Page 13 - the NOISE May 2014

FLREA doesn’t have a design for how this data should be collected. So, as a scientist, I would say that sampling people randomly is more representative of how the users feel versus people writing in, which may only reflect the level of passion of certain people. I think public opinion is really important and I absolutely do want to hear from people who do and don’t support the fees or the way they are being implemented.
I think it’s really important to have that. But the RecRAC doesn’t require a particular format for public input, so we do our best to provide it. From what I hear, this RecRAC really doesn’t just take the FS word for it. As I understand it, we’ve gone to them with things and they have asked us to come back with more evidence of public input.
So, from my perspective, the fact that we are held accountable by RecRAC demonstrates there is support for the fee program ... We’ll see what we end up with when FLREA gets re-authorized.
I think the random samplings might be great in judging the level of how tourists feel but in the written public comments, you’re likely going to get more of the locals and people in the community expressing their opinions. These are the people who have experience with the area and understand the larger issues involved. There’s a big difference between people who are passing through and think that $5 is no big deal and someone who lives here and who may have limited income where $20 (for an annual pass) might mean the difference between a meal on the table or going for a hike, and it shouldn’t be.
Yes, that is something to consider. And to address some of those socio-economic issues, the RecRAC asked us to provide more fee free days so you will see that. We will be putting out press releases to announce those additional fee free days. So we’ve heard that concern from the RecRAC and are looking for those opportunities for those fee free days.
Many community members have voiced concern over what they believe is “unfair practice” from the Forest Service, especially here in Red Rock Country. They will point to the fact that Warren Meyer — who owns Recreation Resource Management and is notorious for his public tirades against the
Forest Service and has repeatedly referred to public lands as “private parks” — receives his conces- sion to manage public land as a for-profit corporation at a fraction of the value to taxpayers.
For example, rather than professionally-educated Forest Rangers, concessionnaires employ mini- mum wage seasonal employees, many of whom have no background in forestry, the environment, or public service. Further, these same readers will cite that a decade ago, when the Forest Service managed public land without private concessionaires, all Americans had access to public lands re- gardless of socio-economic status, and that any fees that might’ve been collected went right back to the Treasury, instead of one individual’s — or one for-profit corporation’s — bank account.
If revenue is the impetus for recreation fees, why does the USFS give money-making and non- controversial fee sites like campgrounds to private concessionaires to profit from, while the agency continues to collect fees from citizens who just want a place to park while they go for a walk in the woods, an activity that is, by law, one for which a fee cannot be required?
I don’t see the use of concessionaires to run campgrounds as an unfair practice. Conces- sionaires are important partners which provide suitable facilities and services that supplement or complement those provided by the Forest Service and other partners. They help us serve our huge number of visitors and create jobs and economic activity that also facilitates the use, enjoyment, understanding, and appreciation of natural resources in our National Forests.
Private enterprises are one tool Congress has created for the Forest Service to provide public services on public lands. This has been going on for about 100 years on the National Forest Sys- tem. We have ski areas for example that service millions of people each year; lodges, camp stores and campgrounds all providing great recreation opportunities while saving the taxpayers mil- lions of tax dollars. At the same time, we provide the majority of recreation opportunities for free.
Authority for permitting concessionaires is provided under a different law and predates FL- REA, so the Red Rock Ranger District could not simply take these permits away from a conces- sionaire at this point. So the role I see concessionaires playing on the National Forests is that they are one of several tools (others being appropriations, grants, volunteers, and fees) the FS uses to reduce the burden of managing National Forests on taxpayers.
I disagree with the statement that the Red Rock Ranger District collects a fee from citizens who simply park and go for a walk in the woods. There are far more non-fee parts of the Red Rock Ranger District than there are fee sites.
Do you feel that people lose their sense of stewardship when they pay to use the land? It seems many people think it’s more like Disney World and they think, “well, I paid to get in so surely some- one will clean up after me.” What are your thoughts on that?
I remember you said that to me at a public meeting a few weeks ago and I’ve thought about that a lot. I don’t have an answer to it per se, but it’s definitely stuck in my mind. I absolutely agree that national forests — though not something uniquely American — are really a thing we should have a sense of pride about. So many people come from other countries to visit our forests.
And, in my career, I’ve had the opportunity to meet with people who are supervisors from forests and parks from other countries and also visitors here. I personally take a lot of pride as an American in our national forests, especially in their multiple use components. That they are not just national parks but are places where people can recreate but where we also preserve wildlife that maybe our kids wouldn’t otherwise get to see. And where people who never rec- reate here benefit from water quality that comes from national forests. I think there’s a real heritage there and that’s important.
So if there’s a way to share that burden, I think that’s appropriate. And Congress has given us the tools to do that so that’s the role that I see fees playing there. And the other piece of it is volunteers. They make an enormous contribution around here. We can’t discount that.
All of those pieces help us to maintain the landscape. I want my daughter to be able to see this same beauty that she’s seeing now and be able to come back and see it with her kids. I think we carry that burden together with all those different partners so that’s how I see those pieces fitting together.
| Cindy Cole is a veteran Sedonan, writer, hiker, and mother.
cindy@thenoise.us
thenoise.us • the NOISE arts & news •
MAY 2014 • 13