Page 8 - the NOISE June 2013

We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to
use it with love and respect.
~ Aldo Leopold
The Arizona Resource Advisory Com- mittee (RAC) met on April 30 and May 1 to hear a United States Forest Service
(USFS) presentation regarding the Mt. Lemmon Settlement Agreement. The case of Adams v. USFS was decided in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Febru- ary 2012. The settlement agreement was reached on January 10, 2013.
The Mt. Lemmon case serves as a prec- edent for USFS recreation fee programs like the Red Rock Pass in Sedona, Ariz. It is the first federal court decision affirming the fee law provisions as written in federal statute — that the USFS is not allowed to charge entry fees or fees to users who do not use a site’s provided amenities. How- ever, forests around the country continue to view the decision as affecting only the Mt. Lemmon area which is located in the Coronado National Forest near Tucson, Ariz.
On April 30, the Recreation Subcommit- tee of the RAC, known as the RecRAC, met for a working group session. There are 15 members on the RAC, all of whom serve on the Recreation Subcommittee. RAC members hail from all over Arizona and represent a vast array of interests from rec- reation to ranching to native heritage and everything in between. Working groups are informal meetings where the subcom- mittee members can ask questions of the presenters and make decisions about ex- actly what will be brought before the full RAC, which met the following day.
Representatives of the USFS in atten- dance included Francisco Valenzuela, Director of Recreation, Heritage, and Wil- derness for the Southwest Region; Stan Helin, District Ranger of the Santa Cata- lina Ranger District in Coronado National Forest (where Mt. Lemmon is located); and Connie Lane, Forest Recreation, Lands & Special Uses Program Manager for the Coronado National Forest. In addition, Gaye Adams, a Mt. Lemmon area resident, and Kitty Benzar of the Western Slope No Fee Coalition – plaintiffs in Adams v. USFS – were present.
The significance of this meeting should not be lost. Usually, the RecRAC meets because a forest district brings forth a proposal to add, change, or eliminate a recreation fee. The RecRAC reviews the proposal and then presents its findings to the full RAC. Then the RAC decides whether to approve or disapprove the for- est’s proposal. In most cases and in most RACs around the country, approval is more or less a rubber stamp. The Arizona RAC is the only one in the country, to date, that has resisted giving blanket approval to fee requests.
But the Mt. Lemmon Settlement Agree- ment is the result of a court decision. It was not initiated by the USFS but by the plaintiffs in the case. The USFS was forced into the agreement when it lost its case on appeal. Included in the settlement is a pro- vision that the RAC be consulted. It states
“...upon completion of review by the Ari- zona Resource Advisory Council (“Arizona Recreation RAC”), the Forest Service will issue a Mount Lemmon REA [Recreation Enhancement Act] Implementation Plan.”
Mr. Valenzuela was first to speak to the working group. He admitted that it has been his job in the past to bring some very
controversial issues before the RAC and that he expected to continue that trend in the future. He noted the recent changes to the Red Rock Pass program and chang- es that will soon be proposed by the Tonto National Forest. He stated “I’ve come today to be of service to the forest and also to make sure that we speak to you as straightforward, honestly, and transpar- ently as possible and that we obey all laws and regulations as we move forward...to implement the kinds of changes that are needed to follow the intent of the law.”
“We’re going to present the settlement agreement to you,” he continued, “hope- fully, we will get a recommendation from you to move forward with the agreed upon items — or not to. There may be as- pects that you don’t want. It’s very impor- tant that we hear from you, whether or not you support this. Hearing your truthful recommendation is what’s really impor- tant. We may be able to respond in the future to those recommendations. We’re here for the long term and what we have in common in this room is a deep concern about outdoor recreation, giving people access to our public lands, and the health of the land. We care about the land, the people, and recreation.”
Mr. Valenzuela went on to express his deep concerns about declining use of fed- eral lands by the American public, particu- larly children. “We’re getting less use per capita on our national lands for recreation. Kids are not going outdoors anymore. There was a national study that showed that kids are now spending 55 hours a week in front of screens enjoying digital media.
“How much time do they spend out- doors playing, hiking, doing whatever
they want? It’s now down to half an hour. So it’s a really serious crisis going on in this country with kids. They are not as healthy as they used to be. Getting them outdoors is something we really want to do. So how do we do that? I think that America is look- ing for leadership on this. And we are look- ing for your advice and counsel on how we can improve this situation. That’s the big- ger and longer term message.”
The study Mr. Valenzuela referenced ap- pears to be from an article published on The Daily Green, a website subsidiary of Good Housekeeping entitled “Kids Spend Nearly 55 Hours a Week Watching TV, Tex- ting, Playing Video Games ...” and based on 2010 statistics provided by the Neilsen Company, a market research firm that fo- cuses on television and other media use.
Other studies published in recent years have also found that children spend about half as much time outdoors as they used to just a few years ago.
While it can be argued there are a myriad of societal, cultural, and economic aspects that contribute to this alarming statistic, perhaps amongst them is the increasing costs of recreating on public lands.
Catalina District Ranger Stan Helin pro- ceeded to present the settlement agree- ment provisions to the working group. “It is humbling for me to be before you be- cause of a settlement agreement. That means that we did not take advantage of you maybe 5, 6, 8 years ago when we could have ... I wish we were bringing a proposal but this is a settlement agree- ment.”
The Mt. Lemmon case has resulted in the removal of an entry fee station at the base of Mt. Lemmon. In addition, the over- all area where fees can be required has been reduced and confined only to sites
8 • JUNE 2013 • the NOISE arts & news • thenoise.us
NEWSfeaTure