"Bill Would End USFS User Fees"
Repritned by permission from the Mt. Shasta Herald

Dated Wednesday, March 3, 1999, excerpt from the Mt. Shasta Herald

By David Manley

Two California Congresswomen have reintroduced legislation to terminate the U.S. Forest Service's Recreation Fee Demonstration Program. Lois Capps, a Santa Barbara Democrat, said: "It is a double tax. We already support the Forest Service through our taxes, and I don't see why people should have to pay a fee in addition what they already pay." Capps was joined in sponsoring the Forest Tax Relief Act by Mary Bono, a Republican from Palm Springs.

Co-sponsored by Representatives Cook (R-UT), Emerson (R-MO), and de Fazio (D-OR), the bill was introduced last week in the new session of Congress. Introduced specifically to terminate the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program as implemented by the Forest Service, the bill targets visitor user fees, which have provoked resistance at some of the 67 sites on national forest lands where they are now required, a spokesperson for Capps said.

The fee program was originally authorized through a rider attached to the Fall 1996 Interior Appropriations Act and was extended for a further two years, until September, 2000, through a second rider in last Fall's Interior Appropriations Act. Last year's Forest Tax Relief Act was defeated in part because its broad sweep included the elimination of fees in national parks as well as national forests.

This year's bill focuses only on national forest lands. Faced with dramatically reduced funding, the Forest Service in 1996 asked to be able to charge fees in order to preserve and maintain national forests. Slightly more than 80 percent of the fees were supposed to be returned to the areas where they were collected for forest improvements and maintenance. While this has been the case in some forests - including the Shasta-Trinity in Siskiyou County - Forest Service statistics reveal that other forests have used a higher percentage of the collected fees than intended for administrative purposes.

Many interested observers also see the fees as being applied indiscriminately, without regard to affordability or accessibility. Said Capps: "The Los Padres National Forest is in my district and people can enter it from a variety of places. Many of these areas are not clearly marked so they can be subjected to paying fees without knowing it." California has recently seen a number of fee protesters, who, when cited, have refused to pay fines. So far none of them have been convicted in court.

A Mount Shasta man who climbed Mt. Shasta without paying a $15 "summit fee" had his case dismissed by the Forest Service on the Friday before he was scheduled to appear in court. The California/Nevada Regional Wilderness Committee of the Sierra Club wrote to the climber, Larry Auxter, thanking him for his "brave campaign against recreational fees."

"The more we learned about this 'demonstration fee' program the more outrageous it became," wrote Vicky Hoover, who chairs a Sierra Club committee. "In the first place, we are finding that most of the fees collected are being used mainly to administer the program - not to provide additional services. And these fees are leading to further reductions in public funding."

The Mt. Shasta Ranger District defends the fees charged by the Shasta-Trinity National Forests for recreational activities on and around Mt. Shasta. Year-round patrols by mountaineering rangers and a growing list of avalanche awareness classes are among the new projects in place at the District, said outdoor recreation planner Brenda Tracy. She says hikers will also find it easier to pack out human waste, district facilities will be better maintained, and the Mt. Shasta website will be more informative.

"Many people who object to the program don't understand that, because of it, the district is able to keep the vast majority of the fees it collects instead of returning them to the Treasury Department," Tracy said. "Of course, we have those who remain opposed to it because they say it is double taxation. But the fact is, without this program we would not have the funding to provide many services our visitors expect and want us to provide."

Whether the planned services are needed or desired depends on whether the Forest Service's or the Sierra Club's point of view is accepted. In her letter to Auxter, Hoover expressed the belief that "anti-environmental leaders in Congress were pressured by the recreation 'industry' - representatives of the corporations manufacturing motorized sport 'toys' like jeeps, motorcycles, snowmobiles, etc. They deliberately worked for a reduction in recreation funding so that they could come in and 'help' out the Forest Service by helping them implement fee programs.

"Thus, they could accustom the public to having to 'pay to play' so that over time greater fees could be charged."

Shasta-Trinity officials deny there is a sinister plot involved in the fee program, at least on the local level. And they said the majority of people who visit the Mt. Shasta area don't object to the fees. Their surveys, they say, indicate users especially appreciate the improved accommodations at camp sites and trailheads. Tracy said $140,000 was generated by the Shasta-Trinity fee program in 1997.

"Another $201,000 is expected in 1998 and estimates for 1999 are for another $200,000 - though the actual figure could be higher," Tracy said. Last year, the U.S. General Accounting office said 1997 fee collections nationwide amounted to $179 million.

Climber's Home ~ Virtual Tour ~ Summit Log ~ Overview ~ Local Info. ~ News & Stories ~ Events

© 1997-2008 Mt. Shasta Climber's Guide. All Rights Reserved.